Great speech/article and subsequent discussion, Nick. Any relevant statistics on the sparsely populated Botswana? The local government seems to be the ultimate WHO/WEF/UN lap dog, still promoting Covid vaccines and a suspiciously high number of people wearing masks in public at the moment.
Haven’t looked at any Covid data series recently in light of where my views on the soundness of the attribution processes have ended up.
It is completely bananas that a country with such young average age and so many far more important health and economic problems is paying any attention to Covid.
One set of comments on the comparison of VAERS reports for flu shot versus the COVID shot (and these are in no way a criticism of Ms. Rose's analysis).
I humbly submit that many averse events begotten of the flu shot would not have been viewed or "detected" as such, let alone subsequently reported to VAERS, unless they occurred fairly soon after the injection was administered. The COVID shot, by contrast, is highly likely for people to associate with all manner of adverse health consequences.
At least in the U.S., the flu shot has long enjoyed a remarkably "cushy" situation.
--Uptake is fairly high (and least from a profitability angle);
--There is a base of captive recipients (children, many nursing home residents, healthcare workers in which the flu shot is mandated and/or highly coerced);
--The formulation changes every year, with little real scrutiny from the general populace
--People regard efficacy as hit or miss and the formulators having simply guessed the right/wrong seasonal strain(s).
--"Not working" is equated with "getting flu anyway," as though there is strong evidence that pathogens quite literally circulate in the air, so to speak, and/or "spread" at especially high levels during the winter months, when testing is high.
--Doctors don't associate ILI as a consequence of the flu shot (i.e., being immunosuppressive)
Instead of believing mythology about lab-leaked pathogens racing from a single point to locations around the world (which I know you don't subscribe to, Nick), more attention should be paid to the annual direct mechanism that was already at work -- and which isn't much different from the COVID shot racket in implementation.
This sequence can't be ignored:
2017 flu shot, followed by a very bad "flu season"
2018 flu shot, followed by a (suspiciously) not-bad flu season
2019 flu shot, followed by reports of a bad flu season, which turned into Operation COVID in early 2020 and saw positive flu tests disappear from the surveillance radar
2020 flu shot, which followed the spring 2020 mass casualty events and "miraculously" kept positive flu tests (but not positive SARS-CoV-2 tests) at bay and preceded the COVID shot
2021 flu shot, which followed the COVID shot and was attended by preceding and subsequent boosters
Etc, etc
All that to say, though I don't necessarily challenge the good work and research people have done on mortality and averse events associated with the COVID shot, I don't see how it can be divorced from that "other" shot being in the mix. (We also have the shingles shot in there...which in another ball of wax altogether.)
Thanks, Jessica. I'm Jessica Rose will also find these remarks interesting. My sense is that the whole vaccine game is a racket, with quite significant aggregate net harms, and when it comes to mucosal respiratory viruses, no benefits whatsoever.
LOL - not even slightly "brilliant" - a rehash of antivax tropes. Also, LOVE your influenza conspiracies and your "the DOD brought bodies to NYC" - stay hilariously irrelevant!
The DNA contamination in the Pfizer chemical concoction was a possibility that was in the EMA's original PAR written in late-2020 (this was the report used to approve and issue the EUAs) along with the differences in the final product between the 2 processes:
From an FOI exchange I had with the UKHSA in 2022 and I would like to know how Ferguson et al could model the effects of something that had no evidence it was actually causing any health issues in humans:
"Saliva will be collected from healthy adult volunteers at PHE Porton Down" which is then spiked with virus stock.
"Saliva samples from 15 different individuals will be spiked with SARS-CoV-2 virus stock (7.8x106 plaque forming units(pfu)/mL VIC/1/2020) "
But they have never categorically stated they have SARS-CoV-2 virus fully isolated, only some genomes and proteins. So I asked them and the UKHSA why are saliva samples being used to "test" the LFTs as opposed to the swabbing almost to the brain and to the back of the throat.
I received an answer back from the UKHSA about where the original SARS-CoV-2 virus stock came from. The answer was basically "we don't know, ask the DHSC, they may know". This was then changed when challenged:
UKHSA admits that they gave me a wrong answer in an FOI - this is a different substack post
Well well well - UKHSA lied in a FOI answer. They do know where the SARS-CoV-2 virus stock came from, it's here: "The stock of virus used for all of UKHSA’s LFD evaluations was cultured from a stock supplied by Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Doherty Institute, Melbourne and sequence authenticated. This work is ongoing in UKHSA…
Also asked them how they knew what they were using to calibrate the tests with was SARS-CoV-2.
Their answer was when translated from their gobbledlygook to plain English "we were told to look for something in March 2020 by the WHO, took swabs from some people ill with cold like symptoms that matched what they wanted, this we assume is SARS-CoV-2 and we use that".
They also admit that whatever they have found in these samples has not been proven to cause problems in humans and that back in 2020 they thought it wrong and unethical to inject it into healthy people to see what happened as they claim that they did not know how to cure it but now 2 years later they have started to run trials doing exactly that. Here are the links they sent:
So for over 2 years they had no idea if what they found in the swabs and called SARS-CoV-2 as it matched what they had been told to look for but could not prove was even SARS-CoV-2 even made anyone ill."
That's really interesting. The original sequencing process led by Eddie Holmes was comical--from the supposed patient zero's characteristics, to the attempt to pass it off as a Chinese endeavour. I battle to contend with the jargon in the area, but it has always smelt of the proverbial.
One FOI also said that they received the sample to calibrate the "tests" against from a lab in Melbourne Australia, you know the place with the longest, strictest lockdowns in Australia where by coincidence the UN WHO's 'flu lab is.
If you root through my substack you will find quite a few posts about my FOI battles with the UK Government and what they told me.
The only interaction I've had with the IFoA was in connection with three completely bogus complaints that went nowhere, though they did take every opportunity to drag the whole process out, even though the original complaints were no longer in sight of land. Nothing with the SoA.
A symphony orchestra in the gut? An estimated 70 - 90% of all immune cells in the body are located in the intestine, which thus houses more lymphoid tissue than all other lymphoid organs in our body combined - including the spleen and all lymph nodes!
.
WOW
💡However, this concentration of the immune system on the intestine also makes real sense, because the intestine is also a possible gateway for harmful organisms.
.
Therefore, their rapid detection and elimination directly on site is vital for us so that they cannot penetrate our organism.
.
🎼Many different cell types and tissues work together in the intestine for this immune response. As in a large orchestra, they combine their special skills so perfectly that a deadly symphony is created for harmful intruders:
.
✔The detection of harmful bacteria in the intestine is primarily carried out by sensors and specialized cells in the intestinal wall, especially in the vicinity of the so-called Peyer plaques. These plaques are special lymphoid tissues in the intestinal wall that are rich in immune cells (see clip).
.
✔Once harmful bacteria have been detected, the phagocytes (macrophages) are sent out to quickly engulf the identified bacteria. They then present fragments of the bacteria, so-called antigens, on their surface.
.
✔Dendritic cells recognize the presented antigens on the macrophages and take them up themselves. Then they dash to the nearby mesenteric lymph nodes, where they activate T and B lymphocytes.
.
✔Activated T lymphocytes stimulate further immune cells and additionally coordinate the release of signaling substances (cytokines) for targeted enhancement of the immune response.
.
✔Parallel stimulated B lymphocytes begin to produce specific antibodies against the harmful bacteria. These antibodies bind to the bacteria and mark them for final destruction.
.
✔Together, all these activated immune cells and antibodies manage to destroy the bacteria directly, or they call on other immune cells, such as neutrophils, to strengthen and finally destroy the invaders.
.
📣VERY IMPORTANT: As soon as the harmful bacteria are eliminated, the immune response is controlled and stopped to prevent an excessive permanent reaction. To do this, some of the T lymphocytes become regulatory T cells to dampen and shut down the immune response. If this does not happen, chronic inflammation can develop, usually accompanied by a change in the microbiome.
.
These are microorganisms that are our normal roommates in the intestine.
.
😍I have to admit, I'm always really speechless when I admire this perfect orchestra of immune cells that pursue only one goal: the preservation of our health.
Great speech/article and subsequent discussion, Nick. Any relevant statistics on the sparsely populated Botswana? The local government seems to be the ultimate WHO/WEF/UN lap dog, still promoting Covid vaccines and a suspiciously high number of people wearing masks in public at the moment.
Haven’t looked at any Covid data series recently in light of where my views on the soundness of the attribution processes have ended up.
It is completely bananas that a country with such young average age and so many far more important health and economic problems is paying any attention to Covid.
Thanks for continuing to be a sober voice 🙏🏽
Brilliantly done, Nick.
One set of comments on the comparison of VAERS reports for flu shot versus the COVID shot (and these are in no way a criticism of Ms. Rose's analysis).
I humbly submit that many averse events begotten of the flu shot would not have been viewed or "detected" as such, let alone subsequently reported to VAERS, unless they occurred fairly soon after the injection was administered. The COVID shot, by contrast, is highly likely for people to associate with all manner of adverse health consequences.
At least in the U.S., the flu shot has long enjoyed a remarkably "cushy" situation.
--Uptake is fairly high (and least from a profitability angle);
--There is a base of captive recipients (children, many nursing home residents, healthcare workers in which the flu shot is mandated and/or highly coerced);
--The formulation changes every year, with little real scrutiny from the general populace
--People regard efficacy as hit or miss and the formulators having simply guessed the right/wrong seasonal strain(s).
--"Not working" is equated with "getting flu anyway," as though there is strong evidence that pathogens quite literally circulate in the air, so to speak, and/or "spread" at especially high levels during the winter months, when testing is high.
--Doctors don't associate ILI as a consequence of the flu shot (i.e., being immunosuppressive)
Instead of believing mythology about lab-leaked pathogens racing from a single point to locations around the world (which I know you don't subscribe to, Nick), more attention should be paid to the annual direct mechanism that was already at work -- and which isn't much different from the COVID shot racket in implementation.
This sequence can't be ignored:
2017 flu shot, followed by a very bad "flu season"
2018 flu shot, followed by a (suspiciously) not-bad flu season
2019 flu shot, followed by reports of a bad flu season, which turned into Operation COVID in early 2020 and saw positive flu tests disappear from the surveillance radar
2020 flu shot, which followed the spring 2020 mass casualty events and "miraculously" kept positive flu tests (but not positive SARS-CoV-2 tests) at bay and preceded the COVID shot
2021 flu shot, which followed the COVID shot and was attended by preceding and subsequent boosters
Etc, etc
All that to say, though I don't necessarily challenge the good work and research people have done on mortality and averse events associated with the COVID shot, I don't see how it can be divorced from that "other" shot being in the mix. (We also have the shingles shot in there...which in another ball of wax altogether.)
P.S. Speaking of actuaries, I observed a note in the 2020 SOA report about attribution of cause of death in recent years toward Alzheimer's and away from other causes of death. See figure 17, page 22 https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/setting-the-stage-for-flus-disappearing
This inspired me to ask an SOA member who was involved with the report for Alzheimer's and P&I on the same graph. https://x.com/Wood_House76/status/1485977397665095685?s=20 Fascinating, yes?
Figure 11 in this flu post of mine also highlights the inverse relationship, in the context of COD attribution and competing incentives in both directions. https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/setting-the-stage-for-flus-disappearing
Thanks, Jessica. I'm Jessica Rose will also find these remarks interesting. My sense is that the whole vaccine game is a racket, with quite significant aggregate net harms, and when it comes to mucosal respiratory viruses, no benefits whatsoever.
LOL - not even slightly "brilliant" - a rehash of antivax tropes. Also, LOVE your influenza conspiracies and your "the DOD brought bodies to NYC" - stay hilariously irrelevant!
Maybe you need to refute point by point with data.
You mention the jibbyjabbies and deaths etc.
The DNA contamination in the Pfizer chemical concoction was a possibility that was in the EMA's original PAR written in late-2020 (this was the report used to approve and issue the EUAs) along with the differences in the final product between the 2 processes:
https://awkwardgit.substack.com/p/200-billion-pieces-of-dna-contaminating
Didn't anyone except me read this report back then?
Add DNA contamination to something that reasonably easily changes DNA in the person it is injected into does not seem like a really good idea.
I was reading about these DNA changes due to mRNA transcription back in 2021:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/06/210611174037.htm
It was also mentioned in the SENEFF report from early 2021:
https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/23
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/5-ways-to-skin-a-genetically-modified
Very interesting comments.
Could you possibly post the FOI requests and responses?
If you root through my substack you will find quite a few posts about my FOI battles with the UK Government and what they told me.
https://awkwardgit.substack.com
Most of my earlier FOIs are on here (personal details redacted) - you'll find the link on the right-hand side of the page.
https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSceptics/
Unfortunately I'm at work at the moment and not due home for a few months so don't have access to them all.
Would like to correspond with you if possible - if amenable what is your email address?
Social media e-mail is awkwardgit53@gmail.com then you'll get replies from my "real" self.
Will be a bit hit and miss as I'm away at work and won't be back in the UK properly until at least January but will try and answer as and when I can.
I second that request. Your perspectives here are valuable. Thank you for the work you have done.
Social media e-mail is awkwardgit53@gmail.com then you'll get replies from my "real" self.
Will be a bit hit and miss as I'm away at work and won't be back in the UK properly until at least January but will try and answer as and when I can.
From an FOI exchange I had with the UKHSA in 2022 and I would like to know how Ferguson et al could model the effects of something that had no evidence it was actually causing any health issues in humans:
https://awkwardgit.substack.com/p/ukhsa-states-that-they-have-no-proof
"In a FOI the MHRA sent this link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/assessment-and-procurement-of-coronavirus-covid-19-tests/protocol-for-evaluation-of-rapid-diagnostic-assays-for-specific-sars-cov-2-antigens-lateral-flow-devices
In it is the quote:
"Saliva will be collected from healthy adult volunteers at PHE Porton Down" which is then spiked with virus stock.
"Saliva samples from 15 different individuals will be spiked with SARS-CoV-2 virus stock (7.8x106 plaque forming units(pfu)/mL VIC/1/2020) "
But they have never categorically stated they have SARS-CoV-2 virus fully isolated, only some genomes and proteins. So I asked them and the UKHSA why are saliva samples being used to "test" the LFTs as opposed to the swabbing almost to the brain and to the back of the throat.
I received an answer back from the UKHSA about where the original SARS-CoV-2 virus stock came from. The answer was basically "we don't know, ask the DHSC, they may know". This was then changed when challenged:
UKHSA admits that they gave me a wrong answer in an FOI - this is a different substack post
https://awkwardgit.substack.com/p/ukhsa-admits-that-they-gave-me-a
Well well well - UKHSA lied in a FOI answer. They do know where the SARS-CoV-2 virus stock came from, it's here: "The stock of virus used for all of UKHSA’s LFD evaluations was cultured from a stock supplied by Victorian Infectious Diseases Reference Laboratory, Doherty Institute, Melbourne and sequence authenticated. This work is ongoing in UKHSA…
Also asked them how they knew what they were using to calibrate the tests with was SARS-CoV-2.
Their answer was when translated from their gobbledlygook to plain English "we were told to look for something in March 2020 by the WHO, took swabs from some people ill with cold like symptoms that matched what they wanted, this we assume is SARS-CoV-2 and we use that".
They also admit that whatever they have found in these samples has not been proven to cause problems in humans and that back in 2020 they thought it wrong and unethical to inject it into healthy people to see what happened as they claim that they did not know how to cure it but now 2 years later they have started to run trials doing exactly that. Here are the links they sent:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/233514/covid-19-human-challenge-study-reveals-detailed/
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1121993/v1
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-04-19-human-challenge-trial-launches-study-immune-response-covid-19
So for over 2 years they had no idea if what they found in the swabs and called SARS-CoV-2 as it matched what they had been told to look for but could not prove was even SARS-CoV-2 even made anyone ill."
That's really interesting. The original sequencing process led by Eddie Holmes was comical--from the supposed patient zero's characteristics, to the attempt to pass it off as a Chinese endeavour. I battle to contend with the jargon in the area, but it has always smelt of the proverbial.
One FOI also said that they received the sample to calibrate the "tests" against from a lab in Melbourne Australia, you know the place with the longest, strictest lockdowns in Australia where by coincidence the UN WHO's 'flu lab is.
If you root through my substack you will find quite a few posts about my FOI battles with the UK Government and what they told me.
https://awkwardgit.substack.com
Superb article and presentation. Have you engaged with the IFOA and SOA in the UK and US respectively?
The only interaction I've had with the IFoA was in connection with three completely bogus complaints that went nowhere, though they did take every opportunity to drag the whole process out, even though the original complaints were no longer in sight of land. Nothing with the SoA.
Ah, Nick. Thank you for having been, and continuing to be, the cool, calm voice of reason. (Well, in public at least 😉).
Thanks for this excellent summary!
Classic Nick, thank you for such a comprehensive summary. You give me hope for our country.
P.S. how are actuaries explaining the consistent rates of excess deaths still happening in 2023? I’m afraid that Long Covid just doesn’t cut it.
The most common response is denial, followed by entirely unsubstantiated attribution to "Long Covid", a phenomenon of dubious ontological credibility.
Fantastic work. Bravo. And thank you.
STEPHAN BARTH THE IMMUNE SYSTEM
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dr-stephan-barth_gesundheit-activity-7110850203355607040-4a3w
A symphony orchestra in the gut? An estimated 70 - 90% of all immune cells in the body are located in the intestine, which thus houses more lymphoid tissue than all other lymphoid organs in our body combined - including the spleen and all lymph nodes!
.
WOW
💡However, this concentration of the immune system on the intestine also makes real sense, because the intestine is also a possible gateway for harmful organisms.
.
Therefore, their rapid detection and elimination directly on site is vital for us so that they cannot penetrate our organism.
.
🎼Many different cell types and tissues work together in the intestine for this immune response. As in a large orchestra, they combine their special skills so perfectly that a deadly symphony is created for harmful intruders:
.
✔The detection of harmful bacteria in the intestine is primarily carried out by sensors and specialized cells in the intestinal wall, especially in the vicinity of the so-called Peyer plaques. These plaques are special lymphoid tissues in the intestinal wall that are rich in immune cells (see clip).
.
✔Once harmful bacteria have been detected, the phagocytes (macrophages) are sent out to quickly engulf the identified bacteria. They then present fragments of the bacteria, so-called antigens, on their surface.
.
✔Dendritic cells recognize the presented antigens on the macrophages and take them up themselves. Then they dash to the nearby mesenteric lymph nodes, where they activate T and B lymphocytes.
.
✔Activated T lymphocytes stimulate further immune cells and additionally coordinate the release of signaling substances (cytokines) for targeted enhancement of the immune response.
.
✔Parallel stimulated B lymphocytes begin to produce specific antibodies against the harmful bacteria. These antibodies bind to the bacteria and mark them for final destruction.
.
✔Together, all these activated immune cells and antibodies manage to destroy the bacteria directly, or they call on other immune cells, such as neutrophils, to strengthen and finally destroy the invaders.
.
📣VERY IMPORTANT: As soon as the harmful bacteria are eliminated, the immune response is controlled and stopped to prevent an excessive permanent reaction. To do this, some of the T lymphocytes become regulatory T cells to dampen and shut down the immune response. If this does not happen, chronic inflammation can develop, usually accompanied by a change in the microbiome.
.
These are microorganisms that are our normal roommates in the intestine.
.
😍I have to admit, I'm always really speechless when I admire this perfect orchestra of immune cells that pursue only one goal: the preservation of our health.
Video Credits: (Nature Videos)I