COVID-19: More Shots, for You or Your Kids?/ AAPS

From Jane orient, MD Executive Director of the AAPS:

I hope you are well and looking forward to a joyous time with family.

Big Bird is advertising shots for tots, and many are facing unemployment just after Christmas because of shot mandates. So why wait?

The main reason for getting the shot is to lower your risk of dying, since it does not reliably prevent catching or transmitting COVID. The statistics are confusing—did a person die with or of COVID? But we can tell whether a person died. Are more people dying than usual?

Here are death rates in person aged 10–59 by vaccination status from the UK’s Office for National Statistics (ONS). The all-cause death rate for vaccinated persons (orange line) is twice that for unvaccinated persons (blue line).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland

Travel restrictions are being implemented again because of the Omicron variant. This appears to cause mild disease. There will probably be endless variants, which are likely to escape the narrowly targeted immunity of current shots. Natural immunity appears to be broader, stronger, and more durable. Austria, with its draconian mandate for universal vaccination, has decreed that “full vaccination” status expires in just 7 months.               

Meanwhile, reports of severe adverse vaccine reactions accumulate. Reports of associated deaths to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) now exceed 19,000. Causality has not been determined. In any event, the vaccine push has not been accompanied by a fall in the all-cause mortality rate (see graph below). Death rates are spiking upward in all age groups—except the one which has had and continues to have below-average mortality: ages 0–14. What will happen when children start getting jabbed en masse?

Further information:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
7 months ago

Dr. Nass,
This was a message on Good Morning America yesterday.
Basically, it is Dr. Jen Ashton telling pregnant mothers to get covid vaccines and that mothers who experince natural covid infection during pregnancy face many risks to the fetus and baby. But, those pregnant woman who received the vaccine, they are at much lower risk of everything.

Is this to be believed????? Can you do an article on this please.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVgXNSuo-PI

Customers Yachts
Customers Yachts
7 months ago

This is a classic example of Simpson's Paradox. Nassim Talem has a short video on why those graphs are useless. The categories are simply too broad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRfBhy5vGI

Anonymous
Anonymous
7 months ago

~0.2% estimate of ~100,000 from ~70,000 adding in likelihood of documentation data of~50,000 Medicare deaths with 14 days of jab not counted as vaccinated deaths with vaccinated counts after 14 days.

Plus only 20% in data for 80% under 14 days likely not counted as vaccinated if died within 14 days of jab before counting as vaccinated.

Note lag of officially linked deaths delays and tendency for deliberately doctoring counts in favor of want CDC wants make believe math to shoe in numerous experts data and parr’s pointed out repeatedly many times.

Million injuries reports with data documentation significantly under reported as requires further examination to check injury boxes even for serious side effects many will merely give painful effects time to go away?
Often side effects including serious side effects without warning or pain while serious damage grows continues too?

Easily arrive at 2 million Covid experimental emergency use only unlicensed jabs for ~1% side effect in data likely much higher from standard estimates without serious side effect profile in most side effects of any jab everto date?

Additionally, ~.02% deaths from jabs counting those dead within 14 days of jab for higher deaths for most demographics at survival upto age 64 from Covid 99.92 at age 64 up to 99.99% at age 44 and even higher percentage for the remaining in 0 to 44 demographics over 99.99% survival and higher.

Only slightly higher in age over 85 ages 98.25%survive with somewhere in ages 70 to 80 equals 99.2% tied with jabs with low count death figures from the official 20,000 deaths with actual vaccine percentage likely actual vaccine death rates 4x or 5x easily then reported even higher death rates from the low estimate too at 5x higher then officially reported merely adding 20% of people in 50,000 Medicare death before 14 days passed after jab from jabs in reasonable estimates from data documentation deliberately doctored undoubtedly to artificially make experimental jabs seem safer then actually reality in not counting dead within 14 days of jab.

Reasonable if dead before 14 days pass after jab that jab maybe linked for experimental er jab have to thus conclude and suspect jab linked to death when dying in short uncounted short 14 day interval after jab!

Further info easily verifiably for higher jab death rates then reported probably over 5x official numbers when looking at 50,000 Medicare deaths under 14 days dead after jab in 20% count of deaths in under 14 days unknow data for 80% not in Medicare counts dead after jab before 14 days to count as vaccinated?

Meryl Nass, M.D.
Meryl Nass, M.D.
7 months ago

I have seen no good data on this outside of VAERS.

Basically, ask yourself: why are so many women bleeding heavily after they get the shot? Because the shots cause bleeding and clotting (yes, both). In the uterus.

Then remember the lipid nanoparticle in rodents tended to concentrate in the ovaries.

Why would any intelligent pregnant woman take a shot that is known to damage the uterus and ovaries?

There are lots of anecdotal reports of late pregnancy losses in vaccinated women.

If you won't take a tylenol during pregnancy, why in heavens' name would you take a covid shot?

BTW, the flu and DPT shots that CDC and Ob-Gyns recommend were never proven safe in pregnancy, and are not approved for pregnancy. Read the labels the way I did.

Pregnant women are being fooled which is cruel and perhaps evil.

Anonymous
Anonymous
7 months ago

Why would a pregnant women or any lady take a shot known to damage the uterus and ovaries. Because like so many areas of unacceptable corruption in medicine she doesn’t know along with deliberately with held Ivermectin

Certainly the volunteers for military that received anthrax vaccines would not of taken if knew how sickness would follow many after as chronic patients. Many other corruption of medicine examples physicians better position to see! Antidotes withheld silence to about approved
for years yet nothing not a word if ever on tv or radio while viagra ads on tv and radio often.

Degree from Cal Poly SLO Bachelor of Science grad with post graduate special projects and studies too. Mentioning since corruption in health seeing in Covid from those with advanced science degrees divided field of experts with corruption forcing bulk to tow the line with incentives to look the other way is how serious corruption in health falling into trying to move forward with minority of scientists while bulk seeing minority in divisions risking speaking up on the big unfathomable size of corruption state in?

The corruption and planning to rollout this bizarre abnormal anything but ordinary, “new normal”, at levels never would of thought with concerning something more then raiding treasuries is up as got plenty completed in major way, continues ongoing in bizarre bewildering ways like can’t wait for horror book would think reading instead of living day to day, waiting for book to end, luckily never happen in real life, yet here it is? As to indications something else significant of risks idk what if any ideas pls lmk?

Wonder how is Forbes noting obvious issue with lack of efficacy with noted efficacy exaggerated seemingly dangerous compared to cheap safe ivermectin too Molnupiravir?
Harming Those Who Receive It: The Dangers Of Molnupiravir (Part 2)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2021/11/02/harming-those-who-receive-it-the-dangers-of-molnupiravir-part-2/

40 Second Scottish Dance Clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK2NG85aXbE

Anonymous
Anonymous
7 months ago

Questions, in the posted article, ideas why death rates double and higher in the vaccinated from May 2021 onwards?

How contrary are the over double death rates in the vaccinated, and in seeing this how come no uproars except ironically
to continue to jab many more to join the over double death rate vaccinated group too?

What does this strangeness all amount too meanings of seeing happening?

Anonymous
Anonymous
7 months ago

This is intriguing ~50,000 deaths within 14 days of Covid jabs of Medicare patients.
However author points out not counted as vaccine linked deaths even though died shortly after 14 days as not considered vaccinated until after 14 days so apparently not counting theses 50,000 that died shortly after shot less then 14 days.

20,000 + 50,000 = ~70,000 report of linked covid vaccine deaths bulk not counted died before 14 days for to be counted as vaccinated??

Seems??

Sheeeeees she ma lee
Mummamia

My concern is backfiring if misread something in such huge corruption never before seen? In what was suppose to merely, vanish disappear, said Trump, a hoax? Yeah hoax, on the citizens, presto abracadabra wave his wand magically, presto, going to vanishing before your eyes.
Did he mean after the jab going to disappear vanishing before your eyes too? Could be?

Paul Zarembka
Paul Zarembka
7 months ago

Meryl,

You need to be more critical of the data you post before you post.

A commenter has correctly pointed out to you how Simpson's Paradox leads to a distortion of the data for 10-59 wide age grouping, when claiming higher death rates for only that grouping. I am aware that you may want people to be skeptical of the current vaccines. But you need to be scientific about it, and if you don't understand how data manipulates, better not to report data offered by others. Statistics is not so easy and can manipulate.

In this instance ONLY the 10-59 grouping has higher death rates for the vaccinated and the reason for that is that groupings must be subdivided before presentation if you wish to be scientific. Under Simpson's Paradox, the results for the 10-59 large grouping would be similar to the narrower three groups for 60 and above IF the grouping had been subdivided, say, to 10-19, 20-29, 30-39,40-49,50-59. Each of these smaller groups can easily show lower high rates for the vaccinated, and STILL obtain the result reported for the large grouping as far being vaccinated raises your chances of death.

Unfortunately, there is not much of a dialogue among folks who posts here and many stay anonymous, which itself is not good (as far as I am concerned).

Paul

Meryl Nass, M.D.
Meryl Nass, M.D.
7 months ago

Dear Paul Z,
As you probably know, the graph in Jane Orient's article which you refer to has been used by multiple others. I did not write the article but I think the article has merit.

As I know you know, most articles that discuss statistics can be easily challenged, because making bulletproof sense of raw numnbers is not easy.

There are numerous issues and problems with both the raw data we are presented by governments (especailly the USG) and the interpretations of those data.

We need to look at all of it and muddle through as best we can. For example, the shocking UK data that shows if you are over 30, the rate at which new Coronavirus cases occur is approximately double in the vaccinated. Maybe that is because in the early months, when the vaccine provided more protection, they remained corona-naive, so are at higher risk as the vaccines fail.

But we don't have enough data to make that claim with certainty. If you, Paul, have bulletproof data or analyses I hope you will offer them up for the rest of us. up

Paul Zarembka
Paul Zarembka
7 months ago

Meryl,

Thanks for your response (although I don't think what others are posting should be your criterion; else, you'd also have to post mainstream articles without bias against).

I will add to my observation using the same U.K. data source as the cited article, but focusing on 60+ age groups which have MANY more deaths, unvaccinated or vaccinated (I also include the data for 10-59 that the posted article cites):

Weekending 6/4/2021 (Alpha variant dominant in UK)
Unvaccinated first then vaccinated, by age group
10-59 1.1
60-69 33.9
70-79 83.4
80+ 278.5

10-59 2.7
60-69 10.0
70-79 32.1
80+ 143.9

Weekending 9/24/2021 (Delta variant dominant in UK)
Unvaccinated first then vaccinated, by age grouping
10-59 0.9
60-69 24.0
70-79 59.6
80+ 214.4

10-59 2.2
60-69 12.8
70-79 37.2
80+ 157.4

First, and against a claim that vaccines are more harmful than beneficial, we can observe that vaccinations help in all three groups 60-69, 70-79, and 80+ (these having the highest deaths, of course).

Second, the same data suggest that the vaccines seem LESS effective against the Delta variant, compared to the Alpha variant.

Paul

Scroll to Top