Question: regarding "excess mortality was likely caused by local events, such as poverty related, injury, overdose & alcohol related deaths - and not a globally spreading novel risk-additive pathogen," what is meant by "poverty-related"? (May just be a grammar isssue there...)
Those causes of death can be correlated with poverty, yes. I think you have a superfluous comma after "poverty related".
I think the essence of my challenge is actually with what is said earlier:
"The causes of the abnormal change in mortality in some counties may be due to local events, as Injury, Overdose & Alcohol related deaths [which"] are making up a high share of the excess deaths, which are possibly driven by higher poverty levels in some counties."
Speculation is fine, but I'm unclear as to the basis for the speculation in this instance. Did you check natural vs external causes of death in those counties (even as two general cause groupings)? Is there an association between the poverty levels in certain counties and external causes of death during the period(s) of interest?
I wonder if an analysis of adverse events by the specific batches that went to Montana would show anything. The batches that went to Montana likely went to other states, this has been standard practise since the 1970’s when some hot batches all went to one location and generated alarming safety signal. Since that time batches are spread around.
As previously analyzed from VAERS and the study in Denmark, adverse events are not equally distributed among batches and actually seem focused to a small percentage of the batches. It would be interesting if the batches that went to Montana and other states had low rates of adverse events over all. This might explain why there is no correlation between percentage of the population vaccinated and amount of excess deaths by county.
Early batches had more reports due to increased awareness and since they were given to health-care personel and high-risk elderly. It wasn't "batches" being more dangerous it was who was getting those batches and WHEN.
From this data, at least, we cannot prove it, as there was no sign. Correlation in either direction. However, we know that 300 people alone have died in Germany, confirmed by government, thus any vaccine with no efficacy, only slightest harm, must be pulled immediately.
That's very interesting and it surprises me, given information on excess mortality since vax rollout coming out via Ed Dowd and insurance industry stats, as one example.
I agree it needs to be pulled. Do we have no other distinct mortality stats other than from Germany though?
The vaccines supposedly helped people who were at risk of dying from Covid. That should have lowered mortality rates. The inference that vaccines killed about as many people as they saved (including many who were not at risk from Covid) may well be correct. In other words, it seems that vaccines themselves DID cause higher mortality rates - just not significantly more than Covid did. Those experimental vaccines should never have been pushed to people outside of risk groups. And now without Covid still too many people die. Continuing excess mortality since 2023 is a bad sign.
Inevitably, a rational person is obliged to conclude that the "vaccines" could not save any lives because the virus was not deadly. What was needed in Montana and everywhere else around the world is a vaccine against government policies.
Does this analysis account for healthy vaccine user bias at the county level, and if so, how? Also, how do these data match up with the trends in worldwide excess death data (particularly post-vaccine)?
How reliable are the county vaccination rates? What ist the numerator, "number of vaccinated people living in the county", or "number of vaccinations dealt out in that county"? I am asking because issues like this are making German county-level data more or less useless (a big vaccination center in one county may have drawn people from other counties; people got their vaccines at work, i.e., in the cities, and not in the rural counties where they live. Think of vaccination rates for Bremen.).
There was low excess mortality in February to April 2021 when new vaccine doses peaked. Spikes in excess deaths coincided with spikes in PCR positivity rate and COVID deaths, which is something you neglected to account for in the opinion blog.
Obviously the fact that excess mortality was linked to COVID deaths and rising symptoms from COVID (and cases rising in wastewater right before the symptoms & deaths rise) and not to any human element (lockdowns, restrictions, drug use etc) is further evidence that COVID was the main driver of excess mortality which is the real conclusion of this opinion blog post.
No conclusion can be made on vaccine effectiveness from this data. That's not how vaccine effectiveness is determined.
But there are better ways to weigh the regression line:
If you can't even make your own point clear in a sentence or two, please refrain from commenting on my articles in the future.
Regarding the unreliability of COVID-19 deaths, read here:
"It has been argued (Islam, 2022; Vandenbroucke, 2021)
that excess deaths are a more appropriate measure of impact than
recorded COVID-19 deaths" (Levitt et al., 2022)
COVID-19 Vaccines have caused around 302 deaths in Germany, that's the ICD-10 coded official figures from Destatis, thus the COVID-19 vaccines have no measureable postivie impact on mortality with severe and possible mortality side effects: https://twitter.com/USMortality/status/1734153081863156144
I'm sorry but I've made my points very clear. You just don't like them.
Regardless of you opinion on COVID deaths and their reliability it's an indisputable fact that excess correlated to a rise in wastewater cases leading to a rise in cases leading to a rise in actual symptoms from COVID leading to a rise in hospitalizations from those specific symptoms leading to a rise in deaths from those specific symptoms. And this rise correlated exactly when excess mortality rose. Was it a coincidence? That can be your argument but you have to at least SHOW that rise when discussing potential causes as it's obviously the most likely trumping "poverty" or "alcohol." Beer doesn't lead to ARDS.
That 302 number is Germany is not confirmed vaccine deaths. You're misreading the codes.
Your data does not reveal ANY information on vaccine effectiveness. For that you'd need to look at scientific studies that compare populations and adjust for confounders.
You only proved:
A) The vaccines aren't driving excess mortality
B) COVID did drive excess mortality
Those findings may not be positive for your narrative but they are the findings your own data proved, beyond any shadow of doubt.
2) 302 German deaths of 2021/22 are coded as: T88.1: Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified - with the previous 5 years being 0 reported in that category. Which novel vaccine do you think is responsible for them?
My entire study was not about COVID. It is about all-cause mortality, which is the much more reliable metric.
1) These is an indisputable correlation between wastewater levels rising, covid cases rising, covid hospitalizations rising, covid deaths rising and excess deaths rising. Obviously there is a delay between each. Look at Montana for example!
2) Those are not COVID specific vaccine deaths. Those are deaths post any vaccination regardless of cause. This doesn't mean the vax caused the death.
In 2021 Sweden administered 14 million vaccine doses & recorded 13 deaths. (0.00009%)
Keep in mind most confirmed vaccine deaths are not mRNA.
3) Your opinion blog was about correlation and it proved the excess correlated to COVID and not vaccines. Which is not a surprising finding given it's the main driver of excess since 2020 around the world.
Thank you for this. Is there any correlation between the excess IOA deaths and lockdown rules? also did the rules differ between counties?
Good work
Question: regarding "excess mortality was likely caused by local events, such as poverty related, injury, overdose & alcohol related deaths - and not a globally spreading novel risk-additive pathogen," what is meant by "poverty-related"? (May just be a grammar isssue there...)
By "poverty-related" I am referring to all causes that are amplified by poverty, such as crime, drug abuse, alcoholism, etc.
Those causes of death can be correlated with poverty, yes. I think you have a superfluous comma after "poverty related".
I think the essence of my challenge is actually with what is said earlier:
"The causes of the abnormal change in mortality in some counties may be due to local events, as Injury, Overdose & Alcohol related deaths [which"] are making up a high share of the excess deaths, which are possibly driven by higher poverty levels in some counties."
Speculation is fine, but I'm unclear as to the basis for the speculation in this instance. Did you check natural vs external causes of death in those counties (even as two general cause groupings)? Is there an association between the poverty levels in certain counties and external causes of death during the period(s) of interest?
SARS2 was a novel virus and not in widespread circulation before 2020.
https://sars2.net/nopandemic.html#Reasons_why_SARS2_was_a_novel_virus_and_not_in_widespread_circulation_before_2020
The novelty cannot be established, just by finding a new sequence. By that definition, the flu was also novel, when they first found it.
Oh, and thanks for confirming, it's you Henjin.
It's been established regardless of your feelings.
Good objective piece of work.
I wonder if an analysis of adverse events by the specific batches that went to Montana would show anything. The batches that went to Montana likely went to other states, this has been standard practise since the 1970’s when some hot batches all went to one location and generated alarming safety signal. Since that time batches are spread around.
As previously analyzed from VAERS and the study in Denmark, adverse events are not equally distributed among batches and actually seem focused to a small percentage of the batches. It would be interesting if the batches that went to Montana and other states had low rates of adverse events over all. This might explain why there is no correlation between percentage of the population vaccinated and amount of excess deaths by county.
Just a thought.
Denmark claims have been debunked:
https://twitter.com/anders_hviid/status/1719228775710253285
"Debunked" is a hard claim, I'd say, it's a piece of evidence in a big puzzle.
However, I also think that the demographic plays a main role. Notably, Rancourt has also concluded that.
Early batches had more reports due to increased awareness and since they were given to health-care personel and high-risk elderly. It wasn't "batches" being more dangerous it was who was getting those batches and WHEN.
How many things can those clowns get wrong and still have people listen to their advice? A lot apparently, must have lots of money to work with.
Yes and climate change is driving animal spillovers like Fauci warned
Does this also mean that vaccines themselves did not cause higher mortality rates?
From this data, at least, we cannot prove it, as there was no sign. Correlation in either direction. However, we know that 300 people alone have died in Germany, confirmed by government, thus any vaccine with no efficacy, only slightest harm, must be pulled immediately.
That's very interesting and it surprises me, given information on excess mortality since vax rollout coming out via Ed Dowd and insurance industry stats, as one example.
I agree it needs to be pulled. Do we have no other distinct mortality stats other than from Germany though?
The vaccines supposedly helped people who were at risk of dying from Covid. That should have lowered mortality rates. The inference that vaccines killed about as many people as they saved (including many who were not at risk from Covid) may well be correct. In other words, it seems that vaccines themselves DID cause higher mortality rates - just not significantly more than Covid did. Those experimental vaccines should never have been pushed to people outside of risk groups. And now without Covid still too many people die. Continuing excess mortality since 2023 is a bad sign.
You are spot on. The gold-standard RCTs done by Pfizer and Moderna themselves showed a net effect of "4 killed for every 3 saved".
Inevitably, a rational person is obliged to conclude that the "vaccines" could not save any lives because the virus was not deadly. What was needed in Montana and everywhere else around the world is a vaccine against government policies.
or how about there was no virus at all ? See Scottish COVID inquiry.
https://sanityunleashed.substack.com/p/testimony-at-the-official-scottish?r=mscl1&triedRedirect=true
Does this analysis account for healthy vaccine user bias at the county level, and if so, how? Also, how do these data match up with the trends in worldwide excess death data (particularly post-vaccine)?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-per-million-covid?tab=chart&time=2020-01-25..2022-12-31&country=USA~GBR~AUS~JPN~ITA~DEU~CAN~KOR~NZL
And this for instance, just published today in mainstream media: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/06/04/covid-vaccines-may-have-helped-fuel-rise-in-excess-deaths/
How reliable are the county vaccination rates? What ist the numerator, "number of vaccinated people living in the county", or "number of vaccinations dealt out in that county"? I am asking because issues like this are making German county-level data more or less useless (a big vaccination center in one county may have drawn people from other counties; people got their vaccines at work, i.e., in the cities, and not in the rural counties where they live. Think of vaccination rates for Bremen.).
These claims suffer from the post hoc fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc
There was low excess mortality in February to April 2021 when new vaccine doses peaked. Spikes in excess deaths coincided with spikes in PCR positivity rate and COVID deaths, which is something you neglected to account for in the opinion blog.
https://twitter.com/henjin256/status/1787902108982723035
Obviously the fact that excess mortality was linked to COVID deaths and rising symptoms from COVID (and cases rising in wastewater right before the symptoms & deaths rise) and not to any human element (lockdowns, restrictions, drug use etc) is further evidence that COVID was the main driver of excess mortality which is the real conclusion of this opinion blog post.
No conclusion can be made on vaccine effectiveness from this data. That's not how vaccine effectiveness is determined.
But there are better ways to weigh the regression line:
https://twitter.com/henjin256/status/1787903935082074470
Please explain how this study suffers from "post hoc fallacy".
COVID-19 is not relevant or reliable, as it's biased, in contrast to all-cause mortality, which is completely objective.
Yet, my findings are that many counties did not see any abnormal mortality AND unvaccinated did not perform worse than vaccinated counties.
If you don't understand what post hoc fallacy is please google it.
COVID-19 is the one factor you neglected to account for and ironically the main driver behind excess mortality.
Your opinion blog can't reveal any data on vaccine effectiveness. All it showed is vaccines aren't causing mortality.
If you can't even make your own point clear in a sentence or two, please refrain from commenting on my articles in the future.
Regarding the unreliability of COVID-19 deaths, read here:
"It has been argued (Islam, 2022; Vandenbroucke, 2021)
that excess deaths are a more appropriate measure of impact than
recorded COVID-19 deaths" (Levitt et al., 2022)
COVID-19 Vaccines have caused around 302 deaths in Germany, that's the ICD-10 coded official figures from Destatis, thus the COVID-19 vaccines have no measureable postivie impact on mortality with severe and possible mortality side effects: https://twitter.com/USMortality/status/1734153081863156144
I'm sorry but I've made my points very clear. You just don't like them.
Regardless of you opinion on COVID deaths and their reliability it's an indisputable fact that excess correlated to a rise in wastewater cases leading to a rise in cases leading to a rise in actual symptoms from COVID leading to a rise in hospitalizations from those specific symptoms leading to a rise in deaths from those specific symptoms. And this rise correlated exactly when excess mortality rose. Was it a coincidence? That can be your argument but you have to at least SHOW that rise when discussing potential causes as it's obviously the most likely trumping "poverty" or "alcohol." Beer doesn't lead to ARDS.
That 302 number is Germany is not confirmed vaccine deaths. You're misreading the codes.
Your data does not reveal ANY information on vaccine effectiveness. For that you'd need to look at scientific studies that compare populations and adjust for confounders.
You only proved:
A) The vaccines aren't driving excess mortality
B) COVID did drive excess mortality
Those findings may not be positive for your narrative but they are the findings your own data proved, beyond any shadow of doubt.
1) There's no stat. sign. correlation between excess mortality and wastewater measurements of unknown origin.
https://x.com/USMortality/status/1779583269341913334
2) 302 German deaths of 2021/22 are coded as: T88.1: Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified - with the previous 5 years being 0 reported in that category. Which novel vaccine do you think is responsible for them?
My entire study was not about COVID. It is about all-cause mortality, which is the much more reliable metric.
1) These is an indisputable correlation between wastewater levels rising, covid cases rising, covid hospitalizations rising, covid deaths rising and excess deaths rising. Obviously there is a delay between each. Look at Montana for example!
2) Those are not COVID specific vaccine deaths. Those are deaths post any vaccination regardless of cause. This doesn't mean the vax caused the death.
In 2021 Sweden administered 14 million vaccine doses & recorded 13 deaths. (0.00009%)
https://sdb.socialstyrelsen.se/if_dor/val.aspx
Keep in mind most confirmed vaccine deaths are not mRNA.
3) Your opinion blog was about correlation and it proved the excess correlated to COVID and not vaccines. Which is not a surprising finding given it's the main driver of excess since 2020 around the world.