Vaccine Efficacy Statistics as Information Hazard
There follows a guest post by the German blogger who calls himself eugyppius. This piece, about the soaring case rate in Germany in spite of the same percentage of the population being vaccinated as in the U.K.’s, originally appeared on his Substack account. You can subscribe to that here.
Germany and the United Kingdom have essentially identical rates of vaccination. In both countries, about 67% percent of everyone is vaccinated.
In fact, here in Germany our vaccination rates are likely understated, so we may even be slightly ahead of the British.
Despite all of this vaccination, German mortality is more or less identical to that seen last year. On November 16th 2020, we had around two deaths per million, and right on schedule we are back at two deaths per million now. The United Kingdom is also at two deaths per million right now, but this is just a third of the mortality they had last year, and the curve is totally different:
Why are deaths down in the United Kingdom, but not in Germany?
Well, there is the dry tinder theory, and the United Kingdom surely has much higher levels of natural immunity than we do here on the continent. All that makes a big difference. But there’s probably another reason too. While Germany has vaccinated 85.7% of everyone aged 60 and over, the United Kingdom has vaccinated these cohorts well in excess of 90%:
That might seem a small difference, but it reflects a vaccination campaign more carefully targeted at those most likely to die of Corona infection. One or two hundred thousand vaccinations in these groups can make a serious difference, for we have seen that the vaccines do reduce the risk of severe outcome. The effect fades, but even seven or eight months after vaccination, a vaccinated 80 year-old is the equivalent of an unvaccinated 70 year-old, as far as SARS-2 is concerned.
That’s far less than the vaccinators pretend, but even lacklustre reductions in risk can matter enormously, where that risk is substantial.
Now a familiar but important point:
We know from studies on influenza vaccination, that those most at-risk of dying from the flu are strikingly less likely to receive flu shots. This creates an illusion of high efficacy against severe outcome. There appear to be many reasons for this. Some of the unvaccinated are simply terminally ill patients in palliative care, but a crucial subset will be people who are for whatever reason hard to reach, because they are outliers and as such live at the edges of society. Some of them will be shut-ins, or immigrants who don’t speak German, or mentally ill, or eccentrics who refuse medical treatment in general, or whatever.
The worse you are at offering vaccines to these people, the more likely you will be to enter a bizarre hall of mirrors – a funhouse where overall Corona mortality never really declines, but your efficacy statistics show that the vaccines are fantastic at saving lives.
I suggest that this is what is happening now, and why places like Germany and Austria have been seized by such a frenzy for universal vaccination. Our vaccinators, besotted with the broken efficacy statistics that are to some unknown degree an artefact of failures like these, are manically sticking needles in all and sundry. None of this will do anything to bring deaths down, but as they vaccinate more healthy low-risk people, their efficacy statistics will only improve, which will in turn drive their mania and religious certainty to new heights.
What would very likely have made a difference, would have been finding and offering vaccines to that tiny 0.5% of the unvaccinated who are most likely to die, while the weather was still good and there was little risk of first-dose infection enhancement. We should not deceive ourselves: Many of these people are beyond the help of vaccines and will succumb to Corona anyway, while most of the rest will die soon of other causes, even if the vaccines save them for now. But this is the only place where there are gains to be made. Vaccinating millions of young people will do nothing, aside from causing short-term case spikes and deaths in some subset of them.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
You talk about something based on ‘Covid tests’. Since such things do not exist, everything you and the Germans say is meaningless nonsense!
One of his lesser quality posts, I am afraid. But BTL there, many of the issues are addressed, incl. by him.
E.g. no efficiency against Delta, all cause mortality/side effects, Midozalam etc..
I wouldn’t dismiss Eugyppius so quickly. He’s got a better grip on what is happening than anyone else I have read online.
Article after pointless article (this jab scam was rumbled months ago, btw, you know while LDS was sleeping on the job and surreptitiously supporting the vaxx roll out), but nothing yet about the implosion of this wholly corrupt, wholly incompetent Tory government using a fake fill-yer-boots scamdemic to syphon off £bns to crony corporate chums. The same Tories who claim to hate Socialism but love to use its Big State apparatus to plunder taxpayers’ money; with £37bn alone frittered away on the useless ‘Test and Trace’ project, headed by the inept but miraculously connected Dido Harding. Add to that sum the numerous PPE fiddles, useless PCR etc, claims for damages following experimental treatment adverse reactions. For the astronomical wastage to date we could have perhaps had a mission to Mars while still housing the current UK homeless (with a half decent aircraft carrier that works out of the change left over); or maybe the White Elephant High Speed train line could have (notionally at least) ended up in the North East where it was originally supposed to go (it was cancelled last week) or re-nationalise the crony-corporate risk free utility companies who freely distribute false profits but never attend to the leaks? Who… Read more »
Be careful what you wish for. At present, I absolutely prefer a wholly incompetent Tory government to an even partially competent Labour one ……
Actually, we have a totally incompetent, and utterly corrupt, Labour government MASKerading in borrowed clothes!
Wrong way round – there is a right wing, essentially Tory-backing, spoof ‘opposition’ pretending to be ‘Labour’. Have a look at the record, not the rhetoric.
No wonder we’re up shit creek as a nation with this level of political awareness!
As Holmes would frequently say when faced with muddle headed solutions, “That just won’t do..”. You can no longer hide behind this excuse (or endless variations on it), which has been the catch all defence for most Tory supporters to try and excuse this, the most casually corrupt, anti-libertarian, totalitarian government in modern UK history. Behind that screen of de-facto support, BoJo and chums are bending to the WEF’s will and in doing so destroying our health, our liberties, our economy and our futures. I hate this party system, I hate fptp, and could never vote Labour BUT the key difference is if Labour (in any guise) were in power (as opposed to being de-facto coalition partners) they would simply not have been allowed to get away with this extent of mess or cronyism, not least by the Tories (ironically) and the currently soporific MSM. Presently there is no effective opposition at all to any of this whether irresponsible overspending or experimental jabbery or the certain deaths of hundreds of vaxxed kids to further lockdown threats to sleaze to the curtailing of inalienable freedoms. The problem is SO big most voters cannot begin to comprehend it, so simply, dutifully, comply… Read more »
Doesn’t matter, red or blue, Pepsi or Coke, no difference. They’re all going the same way. Choice is just a veneer.
Be careful…and perhaps take heed of your own advice.
The main two parties are simply different sides of the same counterfeit coin.
Bringing party politics into the Covid scamdemic is a regular ploy of paid trolls who are trying to distract attention away from more important matters. Is that what you are doing?
An analysis of non-covid deaths by vaccine status in the UK also suggests that they selectively left unvaccinated those in the vulnerable groups most likely to die anyway.
https://bartram.substack.com/p/on-the-impact-of-the-vaccines-on
Thanks for highlighting this analysis. I remember being taken aback when I first saw the figures for all-cause death being so much higher among the unvaccinated. It took a while before it suddenly occurred to me that this was the flu-shot phenomenon all over again – that the people who queue up to be vaccinated are the ones who by and large are in such good health the virus is no danger to them anyway.
If you analyse the data from the ONS Deaths involving covid-19 by vaccination status then it does appear some of the unvaccinated are simply terminally ill patients in palliative care. And it doesn’t take too many to disproportionately inhabit the unvaccinated category for the effect to be seen.
This chart from that data shows that after the vaccination programme gained pace covid labelled deaths in the unvaccinated began to fall in the 60-69 age group but there was a big rise in non-covid deaths happening at the same time.
It’s been suggested by Professor Fenton that the non-covid peak could be due to a lag of death date relative to vaccination number data, but while that”s a good suggestion it can’t remotely come close to removing that peak from this data in my view. The death data is by date of occurrence and the vaccination number data can’t be out of sink by that much.
Yes amanuensis link to bartram is similarly DEVASTATING to the ClotShots.
Bill Gates favourite “Lying with Statistics” has been fully utilised by the jab “blob”
Thanks. That’s very close to an analysis I posted up some days ago.
Hi Freecumbria — could you pop up a link to the analysis again? Cheers, Amanuensis.
From 7th Nov: Here is a chart I produced from the data in the recent ONS publication Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 24 September 2021 It compares the mortality over time of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations (per 100,000 in each category) in relation to deaths with a) a positive test for SARS-C0V-2 i.e covid (labelled) deaths and b) non covid deaths. Looking at the unvaccinated only: It shows in the age 60-69 age group the rate per 100,000 of covid labelled deaths started reducing from the end of January (the dotted green line) before the vaccination gained pace, but while this fall was happening non-covid deaths more than doubled up to April (the green dashed peak in the chart). Covid down non-covid up, very weird. Part of the explanation is that the proportions of unvaccinated are substantially understated and this in turn if corrected for may reduce the size of the green dashed peak, the understatent becomes more relevant as the unvaccinated group becomes smaller. But even correction of a very substantial unvaccinated population understatement is not going to remove the peak completely, just lower it. As an aside this understatement… Read more »
Another example of this healthy user bias can be seen in relation to the selection that is going on as to who has the second inoculation in this same age 60-69 age group.
From the attached chart you can see a sudden and extreme increase in the all cause death rate in the single vaccinated around May/June.
As second inoculations are happening at a super fast rate in May/June there is a very sudden and sharp jump in the single jabbed death rate (the blue line)
What I suggest is happening is that there is a sub-group of people too ill to get the second inoculation who very rapidly get left behind as major occupants of the single jabbed group causing the death rate to shoot up. These are people who have become ill temporally after the first inoculation.
a lot ( majority?) of so-called covid patients in hospitals got a positive test whilst in hospital. So really sick old people showing any symptoms that be construed as covid get tested. Quite a lot catch covid in hospital and then test positive. They are too ill to be jabbed, they die, they inflate the on-jabbed numbers of covid deaths. As you postulate this also can happen between jabs, especially in the slightly younger age groups.
A combination of dodgy PCR tests, rampant infections in hospitals and very ill people can easily explain this supposed situation of vaccine efficacy re deaths.
Unless these possibilities are excluded by meaningful analysis they cannot be excluded. Hennighan is the ideal man to do this, but I fear he has been told not to do it, otherwise he would have done it by now.
Yes — infections in hospitals and care-homes will have targeted the most frail, and the most very frail weren’t vaccinated (as the side effects would have finished them off).
Yes.AS I’ve already posted, the confounders and the real proportionality make much possible – not least of which may be crap data.
The 4 age group charts.
The 10-59 age group is confounded by age because of the wide age band
And here’s a more recent chart for the 10-59 age group that I haven’t posted before, where I’ve attempted to remove the confounding factor of age by estimating an age banded age standardised mortality. Quite tricky to do so comes with the caveat that it assumes I’ve not made a mistake. But it looks OK. It effectively shows the average pattern over time for the age 10-59 age group weighted by number of deaths but with no age confounding. The dotted green line is roughly what the chart would look like if we used the UKHSA unvaccinated proportion (created by assuming there are some missing unvaccinated that bring the unvaccinated up to the UKHSA figure). It results in currently roughly matched all cause mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated. It also appears to show that despite a rise of covid labelled death in the unvaccinated since week 23 there has been no corresponding rise in all cause mortality in the unvaccinated. You can see that because the dotted green line meanders around the solid red line (if we assume UKHSA have the right proportion unvaccinated). Or if we go off ONS proportions the green solid lines and red solid lines run… Read more »
That’s very interesting. I tried analysing the 10-59 data but gave up as it is too messy.
You’d think that any statistician worth their salt wouldn’t have mixed up risk of death data from those <30 with those >50 as their risks are just so very different — I have suspicions that these data are indicating increased death rates in the younger (<50) vaccinated, but of course that’s just supposition.
It’s hard to say to be honest. It would be much better to have data for say the 50-59 and 40-49 age groups.
Mortality is running at around 10% more than we would expect across the population as a whole but some of that must be due to the lack of access to healthcare that affects both vaccinated and unvaccinated alike. So trying to pick up a remaining say 5% difference in mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated because of a vaccine effect is very difficult from this sort of data. And then once the initial selection of the very sick has wound out, which of the two groups would likely be the most healthy and how would we account for that?
I do think comparing all cause mortality is the only decent metric, but it’s just not that easy to do.
The ONS dataset is a very interesting one though. Assuming we get another one in the New Year that might show up a few extra things.
The second of the two possibilities in your last para. The 28 days from positive PCR test strikes again!
There is a possible bias also in this ONS dataset because they include cases without a positive test but where covid is put on the death certificate. Might there be a greater tendency to avoid putting covid on the certificate if the person was vaccinated and a tendency to put covid if the person was unvaccinated? For what’s it’s worth their definition is Deaths involving COVID-19 For this analysis we define a death as involving COVID-19 if either of the ICD-10 codes U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) or U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified) is mentioned on the death certificate. In contrast to the definition used in the weekly deaths release, deaths where the ICD-10 code U09.9 (post-COVID condition, where the acute COVID-19 had ended before the condition immediately causing death occurred) is mentioned on the death certificate and neither of the other two COVID-19 codes are mentioned are not included. This is because they are likely to be the result of an infection caught a long time previously, and therefore not linked to the vaccination status of the person at date of death. Deaths involving U10.9 (multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19) where U07.1 or U07.2 are mentioned are also excluded. This is a rare complication affecting children, and there are no such deaths in our dataset for the data… Read more »
Mmmm. Pick the bones out of that!
I agree with this — you see the effect better in the all cause data than in the covid data. If you look at the non-covid deaths (ie subtract one from the other) you also see the same effect. IMO this is significant — there’s surely no way that the covid vaccine can influence non-covid deaths in people that don’t take it…
Yes exactly. This is the non covid chart
https://probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2021/11/is-vaccine-efficacy-statistical-illusion.html?m=1
Interesting work, Freecumbria.
Trouble is – there are so many confounders and inaccuracies in the data – as always.
The over-riding fact of the graph, however is the smallness of the real differences in terms of the population. This flaw in the normal presentation of data is crucial with ‘Covid’ figures, disguising real world facts with proportionality – see also ARR.
The more they vax the worse it gets.
Yes, it will be interesting to see whether the effects of boosters can be seen in the future data (assuming data isn’t phased out).
While we don’t know long term affects, if we had stopped at two doses then the potential net harm from the vaccines may have been limited.
But boosters seem to make no sense as they excacerbate the issues of original antigenic sin and the health issues of spike protein in the body.
With boosters we are building a bigger and bigger sandcastle to protect us from the incoming tide. But we can’t accept that a sandcastle isn’t a suitable form of protection.
… and just a minute ago, someone contacted my wife to say they were too ill to go for their usual walk after receiving a booster.
Now this isn’t precise science, but the number of instances of what will be non-recorded, relatively ‘mild’ adverse events suggests immune systems screaming ‘Don’t do this!’
Don’t forget that you are still counted as unvaccinated fir 21 days after the jab.
They break it down into unvaccinated, within 21 days of the first jab. more than 21 days after the first jab and after the second jab in that ONS dataset.
I’ve combined within 21 days of first jab, after 21 days of first jab and second jabbed into a single vaccinated category.
They’ve also clarified that
Age and vaccination status are defined on the date of death where a death has occurred, and on the last day of the week if not
So if we take what they say at face value, which I think I’m inclined to do here, I don’t think that’s the case specifically here,
I think he was referring to this
https://probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2021/11/is-vaccine-efficacy-statistical-illusion.html
Is vaccine efficacy a statistical illusion (of selective delay)?
I think that’s about how a lag in reporting deaths with no lag in the corresponding population causes an overstatement of mortality in the unvaccinated up to the point that vaccination is happening at it’s fastest rate (because you are over-estimating the numerator over a period of time by more and more) and then declines after that until vaccination is complete.
That’s different to suggesting that the vaccinated are counted as unvaccinated for 21 days after the jab which I don’t think is the case.
I think that there are multiple contributory factors that have resulted in an illusion that the vaccines are continuing to provide meaningful protection against hospitalisation and death.
MPs voted by proxy while at Euro 2020 match
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mps-voted-by-proxy-while-at-euro-2020-match-khn9sgsn6
Steve in Cambridge
2 HOURS AGO
Priceless. In order to “maintain social distancing in the Commons” they head off to the crush of tens of thousands of fans in Wembley on a freebie!
Spew bugle blopper van trangle pop. Makes as much sense as anything else.
Interesting report in UK column today, Austrian Police & army refusing to enforce the unvaccinated lockdown.
UK Column News – 17th November 2021 @1:20.12.
Reference:https://infodujour.fr/politique/54068-lautriche-se-souleve-contre-la-dictature-sanitaire
That’s how this has to go. If TPTB cannot get the police and army to do their dirty work they could have problems.
Fingers crossed.
Or, to be more accurate, the house arrest of the unvaxxed. The new legislation goes well beyond previous lockdowns, by not only introducing de-facto state apartheid, but giving the police powers to arrest anyone who remains unvaxxed if they leave their home. This despite the fact the unvaxxed are less vulnerable to the virus, and less likely to shed the virus (plus the unvaxxed do not shed spike proteins, as they are not producing vaxx induced spike proteins).
Quite apart from the fact the lockdowns don’t work, which TY repeatedly insists that sceptics have failed to prove. Well, try this….
https://brownstone.org/articles/lockdowns-fail-they-do-not-control-the-virus/
Michael Gove and Matt Hancock among ten Tories who helped PPE firms win £1.6bn in Covid contracts
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ten-tories-helped-ppe-firms-win-1-6bn-in-government-contracts-j2nghhsv3
Hopeful
14 HOURS AGO
“At the height of the pandemic there was a desperate need” to give money to our friends quickly in case we ran out. So we set up the fast track lane.
Vish Patel
12 HOURS AGO
Through the torrent of negative evidence each day, It’s difficult not to come to the conclusion that an alarmingly large proportion of these Tories are simply very selfish, self-serving money grabbers that have little interest in bettering the lives of ordinary folk.
Big Brother
15 HOURS AGO
Barefaced banana republic corruption and yet no one in government or the opposition seems to be overly concerned. The police should be investigating this.
Yet last Sunday hitchens was saying the UK wasn’t corrupt because once upon a time in his long distant childhood he lived in one, the USSR. We live in The USK now.
Slightly off-topic, but there’s a very entertaining German twitter account (Argo Nerd) which exposes the absurdity of the current situation by the simple expedient of juxtaposing quotes from the media/politicians/Government with completely contradictory statements from the same sources – sometimes only days, hours or even minutes apart.
For example, the SZ on ‘Corona in Bayern’ – ‘Many Covid victims fully vaccinated’ forming a pleasing symmetry with ‘Many Covid victims unvaccinated’…
2 deaths per million… Does one need to read any further? What f***ing pandemic!?
While the MSM condemns the use of ivermectin, the most populated state in India just declared they are officially COVID free after promoting widespread use of the safe, proven medicine. In addition to this, Ivermectin attaches to covid spikes and prevents them from binding to ACE2. Get your Ivermectin today while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
Pfizer told the world 15 people who received the vaccine in its trial had died as of mid-March. Turns out the real number then was 21, compared to only 17 deaths in people who hadn’t been vaccinated.
Pfizer said publicly in July it had found 15 deaths among vaccine recipients by mid-March. But it told the FDA there were 21 – at the same data cutoff end date, March 13.
21.
Not 15.
The placebo figure in the trial was also wrong. Pfizer had 17 deaths among placebo recipients, not 14. Nine extra deaths overall, six among vaccine recipients.
Could the discrepancy result from some odd data lag? Maybe, but the FDA briefing book also contains the number of Covid cases that Pfizer found in vaccine recipients in the trial. Those figures are EXACTLY the same as those Pfizer posted publicly in July.
Yet the death counts were different.
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
I think Americans are waking up …
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/worldwide-search-trend-died-suddenly-spikes-record-highs
Are Brits.?
The figures are being fiddled.
In England between Jan and Sep 2021, deaths reported as caused by influenza or pneumonia were running at ABOUT HALF of the five-year average (10373, as against 20011).
Source: ONS, monthly mortality statistics, Sep 2021 edition, figure 11a.
Which of the following sounds most likely as an explanation.?
1) When a person dies from influenza or pneumonia who has tested positive for SARSCoV2, they are taken out of the influenza or pneumonia stats and reported instead as dying “with Covid”.
2) A miraculous but completely untrumpeted new method of treatment is being used that saves the lives of half of the patients would otherwise have died of influenza and pneumonia.
3) Something else.
The only other possibility is that the lockdowns and social distancing prevented much of the usual flu transmission, but how you could prove that as opposed to simple miscatogorisation I have no idea
Yes, that would be an explanation. I would like to know how many of the patients reported as having died with Covid were diagnosed with pneumonia (properly it should be all of them), how many were tested for the flu viruses, and how many tested positive for flu.
There really wasn’t much influenza around last spring.
Of course, people eventually die of something — I imagine covid was just a little better at taking those at end of life than influenza.
I predict that this winter may well be very different.
This sounds like grasping at straws to me. I think it is more likely that opening up fully at the end of July and having practically no restrictions (in England at least) means that we have had our exit wave and are entering winter with high levels of natural immunity, boosted by whatever minuscule protection the vaccines offer.
it appears that the more they vaccinate the worse it beomes
You should not be just concerned about mortality, but about hospital utilization. Those unlucky young who occupy a respirator are known to remain hospitalized the longest (they just refuse to kick the bucket as soon as the old). 40% of hospitalized patients in Germany are reported to be under 60 year old… just in case you believe it hits only your eccentric grandma who lives high up in the Alps.
So good luck finding only those “most at risk” and vaccinating just them (and how do you want to do it, anyway, force them?)
Vaccinating kids is plainly nonsense, but there is a gray area of not-extremely-old adults who think they are invulnerable, but they really aren’t. And it is exactly this group that the “mass vaccination” should be trying to reach.
And what about their comorbidities? Most have multiple comorbidities. The IFR for people in their 40s is 99.918%, and for those in their 50s it’s 99.73%, which is the same as flu. These people do not need “mass vaccination”, especially when it’s inducing so many heart attacks and brain haemorrhages.
The most at risk categories have been known clearly from the very beginning. People over 70, immunocompromised people and obese people.
And yes, let’s talk about “boosters” i.e., the third dose identical to the first two you just had. Dose 3 is being shown to last only 3 months, compared to the first Dose 1/2 lasting six months. It is also much more harmful, with data showing it’s driving many more victims to hospital than the first two doses. Bhakdi claimed each dose will create more harms, and so far he is right.
So, not only is a third dose of the gene therapy more harmful than even the first two, but their efficacy is a shocking 12 weeks. So, does a fourth dose last 6 weeks? A fifth last 3 weeks? And each time more lethal.
I’m taking regular boosters of this vaccine (vitamin D)
https://twitter.com/gerdosi/status/1460726158610382850
Lots of good stuff from Gabor by the way on affinity maturation and original antigenic sin and the nonsense of the boosters.
Be careful. Your body uses a lot of magnesium to process vitamin D supplements, and a lot of people are deficient in magnesium anyway. With Mg being vital for your heart, a vitamin D “vaccine” could be as dangerous for your heart as these Covid vaccines.
The 400 IU of vitamin D they add to a can of evaporated milk is fine (there’s plenty of magnesium in the milk for one thing). But people seem to be taking 5,000 IU-plus supplements per day, and falsely comparing that to the 5,000 IU generated by exposure to the sun for a few minutes in June. The difference is that vitamin D generated by sun exposure doesn’t deplete your magnesium levels.
(I’ve got a feeling i’m going to get flamed for this post.)
Is the answer to take both vitamin D and Magnesium supplements at the same time? As well as vitamin C, zinc, turmeric, iron.
The magnesium in supplement form can apparently give you the runs, as well as interacting with antibiotics and some other drugs. The line between what is a supplement and what is a medication can get blurry sometimes.
I’m just not a fan of supplements. Nutrition is complicated. It’s about chemical reactions between various substances. It’s not just a matter of pouring x grammes/day of a mineral into your body and expecting it to lie their inert, yet somehow do its thing at the same time.
For vitamin D, plan A is to get enough sun in the summer to have enough stored for the winter (while getting the other benefits of sunshine). Plan B is to eat sardines or mackerel or salmon one or two times a week, and get all the other benefits of fatty fish. While for magnesium – pumpkin seeds, nuts, dairy, all sorts of food where you get the other benefits of those foods.
But that’s just my opinion. Others are available!
You aren’t going to get flamed by me, I’m often more interested in people who disagree with me as long as they can put forward some sort of informed reasoning and are prepared to engage in open minded debate, which I suspect you are. I take magnesium in the form of magnesium citrate powder also. It doesn’t give me the runs. Does magnesium supplementation interfere with antibiotics and drugs or is it the other way round? In some ways that’s the control mechanism with many forms of magnesium; if you get the runs then it may be that you are taking too much magnesium or taking the wrong sort. Magnesium oxide isn’t easily absorbed and is the wrong sort. But vitamin D (2000- 4000IU only in Winter) and magnesium throughout the year are the only two supplements. I eat real food including lots of oily fish. But I agree that you are best getting your minerals from you diet. And you can’t sort out a poor diet with supplements. But at this latitude we aren’t getting the sun throughout the year that we would get if we lived at the equator. So getting vitamin D in Winter from the sun… Read more »
I think like a lot of aspects of nutrition and supplementation, scientific papers are thin on the ground, because isolating the specific chemistry going on in the body is too difficult. So you end up with the usual thing of resorting to statistics and trying to separate correlation from causation. This paper apparently tried to review work on this issue, and arrived at the conclusion: Screening for chronic magnesium deficiency is difficult because a normal serum level may still be associated with moderate to severe deficiency. To date, there is no simple and accurate laboratory test to determine the total body magnesium status in humans. Mg is essential in the metabolism of vitamin D, and taking large doses of vitamin D can induce severe depletion of Mg. Adequate magnesium supplementation should be considered as an important aspect of vitamin D therapy. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28471760/#:~:text=Mg%20is%20essential%20in%20the,aspect%20of%20vitamin%20D%20therapy. Which isn’t much use. That’s why I’ve always tended to the view that if you feel you may be deficient in any area, then don’t try to sort it by artificially inflating the levels in your body by supplements, because you can’t really do so accurately or even be sure that you really are deficient – it all… Read more »
You’re – right. It is rare that there is any free lunch with any treatment, and answers tend to be complex.
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/31/100-percent-of-covid-19-vaccine-deaths-caused-by-just-5-percent-of-the-batches-produced/
I’ve shared this before but please scan read it again.
When I heard that just 5% of vaccine lots were associated within not 5% of deaths, but closer to 100%, I knew immediately what it meant.
This pattern has been confirmed now to be happening with two separate covid19 vaccines.
It means that someone or something is deliberately poisoning some of the vaccine vials, killing their recipients
There’s no other explanation. It can not occur naturally or randomly.
Please pause to think about it.
Hold the line, and warn others to reject the booster. It’ll only lead inevitably to the 4th & 5th injection.
Best wishes
Mike
Dr Mike Yeadon
I’ve just spent a little over an hour, watching a superb presentation by Dr David Martin. I don’t know exactly what his background is but he has deep knowledge of patents, among a range of other skills. I believe he’s also a kind of spooks’ spook, in that he’s been, for many years, an advisor to the covert services in the USA. I do think he’s genuine & on our side, the side which recognises that there is an ongoing criminal conspiracy, originating YEARS prior to the reported emergence of a novel coronavirus in China. The perpetrators clearly planned every step necessary for the establishment of today’s status quo. It’s essential you become aware of the roles of Anthony Fauci, Dr Ralph Baric, Bill Gates, plus others, in creating a chimeric modified coronavirus, the relevant patents & the propaganda. On a separate but completely connected series of transactions, including Christian Drosten in Berlin (design of the PCR test), Jeremy Farrar at Wellcome Trust (who, with good friends Gates & Fauci, control almost TWO THIRDS of the global, annual spend on biomedical research), Neil Ferguson (deliberately fraudulent, fear-inducing modelling of pandemics) & yet others. This entire episode is a FRAUD, designed… Read more »
https://www.corona-ausschuss.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FauciDossierWordFileText.pdf
Dear all: If f I’d not heard it myself, I’d have struggled to accept the extent of the evil that is Dr Anthony Fauci’s misrule at the helm of the National Institute for Allergy & Infectious Diseases. Robert F Kennedy Jr is a lawyer & the chair of the non-profit, Children’s Health Defense. Kennedy asserts that, though Fauci ought to be indicted & after due process, jailed for his crimes against orphaned children (who he deceived into taking part in hazardous clinical trials), he (Fauci) is going to have to step down over revelations that he experimented upon living animals of all kinds. I think it’s true also in U.K., that the public can choose to not see the evil in Fauci’s actions which have injured & killed humans, including children, but they won’t tolerate cruelty to conscious animals. RFK Jr says that, whilst a Congressional enquiry into Fauci’s criminal activity will shock everyone, it’ll be the disclosures of Fauci’s role in setting up colonies of experimental animals that will finish him. Transgenic mice, trapped dogs infested with biting insects, misuse of non-human privates. We’re at or approaching a tipping point, in my view. I won’t be alone in questioning… Read more »
This all makes sense.
I always felt the whole vaccine trial results were not meaningful.
Do not have lots of time to spend analyzing the Covid data but am always distrustful of tiny percentages and small numerators with large denominators.
It does not need very much distortion or error to totally invalidate the findings. Instinctively, my sense is that the vaccines are having very little impact.
Future history will see them as the equivalent of people in the Middle Ages wearing shrouds to ward off evil spirits.
We really are part of a very stupid era in civilization.
My own view is that the true cause of the illness known as Covid is not understood. The viral diagnosis reflects an inherent bias towards Germ Theory. No one has specifically shown that the virus is a cause of anything. It may even be an outcome of DNA disintegration.
Modern western medicine is utterly useless. Even worse, just like the priests of the Middle Ages, it believes in its own omnipotence and fails to question itself. That is not good.
Former Pfizer VP: 0.84% ‘Clear evidence of fraud’ in Pfizer study claiming 95% efficacy posted by Mordechai Sones September 30, 2021 10:58 am America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Chief Science Officer Dr. Michael Yeadon yesterday said there is “clear evidence of fraud” in the Pfizer study that purports to claim 95% efficacy in their COVID-19 “vaccine”. Yeadon was commenting on an article appearing in The Lancet and critiquing a documentary that scrutinized a Pfizer efficacy study, calling the distinction raised therein between relative risk reduction and absolute risk reduction “accurate”. The Lancet article, entitled COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness—the elephant (not) in the room, says that although attention has focused on vaccine efficacy and comparing the reduction of the number of symptomatic cases, “fully understanding the efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines is less straightforward than it might seem. Depending on how the effect size is expressed, a quite different picture might emerge.” The article continues: “Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech, 94% for the… Read more »
Covid is not ever going away, it is just going to get stronger and more effective in killing you and like the latest variant R.30, it overpowers vaccines easy, it is not a matter of how, but when, it, or something similar, decides to kill YOU. “Endemic” is a polite way of washing hands of the situation and passing the buck to you, the job has been done, everyone is vaccinated (not me) – now we have to find out why? What it means to have a Covid jab – never been used in humans before, never been tested in lab animals, not known what the outcome will be, not responsible for whatever it does, your health and financial issues your problem, once in can’t take out, might kill you sooner or later, possibly give you life threatening injuries which will kill you eventually and it lasts for 2-6 months and then you have to have booster shots, for as long as it lets you live and it took a couple of hours to design on a home computer AND you are ordered to take it, bullied, threatened and isolated by your government if you don’t. Now you have a… Read more »
This guy should make every science journalist totally and utterly ashamed. He has done more investigative journalism that the rest of them put together. His reporting is pivotal to bringing down this madness and part of the post evaluation process. If he lived nearer, I’d buy him a drink. Maybe 2.
He addresses some of the criticism of this piece in his latest one: “I suspect that I buried the lede in my last piece, so I want to address some of the push-back. First of all, on the vaccines and whether they work or not: The basic picture that emerges from all of the research to date, and that experience with coronavirus vaccines in animals more or less confirms, is this: The vaccines provide partial protection against infection for a few months. Surprisingly, this protection eventually fades into negative territory. Thereafter, they are still effective against severe outcomes, but here too their protection wanes, and it wanes fastest of all in the most vulnerable groups. We can only hope that here, at least, the decay stops at zero. Against all of that must be weighed an array of negative effects, the most obvious being that they increase transmission and that they injure and even kill a nontrivial number of people. While it seems the vaccines can reduce official Corona death numbers, their introduction has coincided with slightly elevated all-cause mortality almost everywhere. The numbers might swing in their favour over the winter, but in the longer term, it is hard… Read more »
” … it reflects a vaccination campaign more carefully targeted at those most likely to die of Corona infection”
Remember – that is the cohort also more likely to die following a jab.