Question: Has anyone seen a (4D) matrix of source of harms (virus or injection). incidence rates of harms from C19 v the mRNA injections v duration of harms – ranked by severity?

We are just discovering vital facts such as “the infection has S1, but the injection has S1 and S2 components of the spike protein – which can be detected using RT-PCR testing” – and which should assist in the diagnosis of any long covid v vaxx injury.

Check that S1 and S2 differentiation in the discussion here:

(100) Bombshell interview on the McCullough Report on America Out Loud – mRNA injections promote cancer via a triple hit (substack.com)

I am perplexed as to why this S1 v S1+S2 differentiation is not global news.

Anyway, we have under-reported data for VAERS for deaths and injuries, but not the equivalent for C19 itself.

It occurs to me that an analysis of the rates of occurrence, their severity and longevity would yield useful evidence of whether the “more harm than good” case, proven in the Pfizer Phase 3 clinical trials was borne out “in vivo”.

Perhaps there is a better matric that can be constructed, but here is a list of harms identified by vaersanalysis.info that can be used as one “axis” from which to do the analysis – not by the harms compared to other vaccines, but against the other dimensions.

How one can reflect the fact that an infection lasts around 15 days whilst an injection injury can last a lifetime is another issue to resolve.

From here:

Estimating the Under-Reporting Factor (URF) in VAERS by Way of the Recently Released V-Safe Data – VAERS Analysis

There are these symptoms – which because the dead will not be phoning in to V-Safe, excludes fatalities!

Try not to be horrified by the numbers like the 6.5% of people requiring urgent outpatient treatment of the 10 million or so that participated in the V-Safe reporting study, or the 0.7& (one in 143) that were hospitalized or the decision by the FDA/CDC to terminate the study in May 2023, rather than either continue it or follow up on those injured (or killed!).

What we need to see is the frequency of injuries against the symptoms for the SARS-COV2 viral infection that led to deaths with C19 present.

It would be great to see some sort of analysis on treatments that work to cure C19 and vaxx injuries as well – maybe even studies on the success of prophylaxis. We have this great site to start with.

Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time analysis of all 225 studies (c19ivm.org)

I am not familiar with whether IVM or HCQ can prevent blood clots! I wonder if fenbendazole has any efficacy beyond cancer, as IVM is reported to have).

You can see that the symptoms are not ranked by severity for “severe” life altering, “serious” life threatening” or neither severe or serious.

Now, there will obviously be symptoms that apply to injections that won’t apply to infections and vice versa, similarly there will be unreported symptoms that the subject is simply not aware of such as “mild” myocarditis. Perhaps medical records for the infection are not sufficiently detailed or available.

An analysis of this sort would go a long way to completing the work that was NOT done during either the shortened 6 month clinical trials, the short 3 month post authorization marketing reports and the lived experience of the four years of the “pandemic” and the three years of the C19 injections.

What do you think?

Onwards!

Please buy a subscription or donate a coffee (I drink a lot of coffee) - “God Bless You!” if you can’t or don’t want to contribute. Coffee donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan - an annual subscription of 100 bucks is one third less than a $3 coffee a week!