the more temporally remote from injection the less likely the association.
previous estimates of one in 40 for the US are likely higher for this reason - guesstimate around 50-60 for the US - Europe has always probably been around 70 - and Europe has higher reports of events and deaths already than the US.
reconciling the V-Safe data to VAERS indicated a URF of 60 back in October
I am aware of the Lazarus report. There is another detailed analysis out of the US that I need to dig up.
Temporality used to apply and probably still does for acute AEs and reactogenic events . However, for a novel experimental injection bereft of controls Bradford-Hill may be trickier to fulfill as consistency with current knowledge, biological plausibility is a moving feast and we need more time to elapse. For example, it remains impossible to predict those likely to sustain an serious adverse event or death, or converely those for whom a trivial short lived antibody response may occur, those who develop killer 'clots' a 3 - 4 months, or revitalised indolent Ca in a year. Trouble is, latent periods grow longer and as the 'fix' is in, a causal relationship becomes harder to establish.
It's murderous chaos. It was designed to be. It will continue as long as we permit it.
Ah yes, recycling the original studies c.2000 - 2012 that led to abandoning the approach? After all, they don't appear to have moved beyond VAED, still recognised as a significant problem in the conference report to CEPI/BC (P.-H. Lambert, D. M. Ambrosino, S. R. Andersen et al., Consensus summary report for CEPI/BCMarch 12–13, 2020 meeting: Assessment of risk of disease enhancement with COVID-19 vaccines, Vaccine) to be overcome with adjuvants ... that went well didn't it?.... let alone properly understanding individual RNA epigenetics (still in its infancy), or understanding the myriad of interactions when one interfers with signalling systems (Seneff et al.)
Oh, and we still have no "virus" ... or ethics.
We must reject and move on without 'them' now. Circling the drain while watching the bath empty seems to lack utility or happiness.
I struggle with the concept of NOT reconciling clinical trial data with post marketing authorization data then with adverse event reports and actual research done independently following authorization - in a formal way.
I may be missing the point, but absent fraud and wilful malfeasance, all the checks and balances are in place. These have been subverted (as in broken into, like a bank) by criminal acts that either won't be prosecuted or will take longer than the 55-75 years the FDA wanted to NOT disclose its criminality.
I too struggle, with just about everything since 2020. Having worked through, "eliminating the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth," one is faced by a reality very difficult to accept. Most clearly don't, won't, can't. I realise that perhaps as many as 80% are duped, while 20% recognise that they are living in an evolving dystopia. New communities are gradually coalescing and when they come at us again, a clamorous sense of déjà vu should convert a few more.
Yep. Lifts US deaths using a URF of 40, rather than 41, at over 650,000 in the US and 1,350,000 deaths from around the world (reported to VAERS for companies operating in the US).
adverse events/Injuries are up to 26.8 million (multiple per person, for the US but more than one in ten of the population) and 60 million globally.
FRESH ON THE HEELS OF DAVOS BILLIONAIRES REQUIRING UNVAXXED PILOTS - WE HAVE THIS FROM THE REGULATOR "HIDE THE EVIDENCE"!!! (AGAIN) (SUBSTACK.COM)
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/fresh-on-the-heels-of-davos-billionaires/comment/12094713
IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO TALK ABOUT THE SERIOUS HEALTH RISKS OF THE VAXXED.
IT PAST TIME TO TAKE CORRECTIVE MEASURES, AS LISTED BELOW:
NEXT STEPS NEEDED TO REPAIR THIS TOXIC VAXX DISASTER:
Stop ALL Covid-19 injections immediately; DO NO MORE HARM!
Make available the best medical treatment to reduce harm to the vaxxed.
Make inexpensive, voluntary, over-the-counter “Ivermectin Plus” packages widely available for treatment of the Covid illness and the vaxx-injured.
Reinstate and compensate the un-vaxxed who were dismissed from their employment.
Reinstate those who were persecuted because they spoke out against the Covid-19 false narrative.
Start Nuremberg 2.0 - and include the bought media.
Under-reporting, about x100?
https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/02/underreporting-vaccine-adverse-events
100% On Point!!!
Maybe. The Lazarus Report page 6 of 7 para 3 here indicated less than 1% = >100 here
https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf
the more temporally remote from injection the less likely the association.
previous estimates of one in 40 for the US are likely higher for this reason - guesstimate around 50-60 for the US - Europe has always probably been around 70 - and Europe has higher reports of events and deaths already than the US.
reconciling the V-Safe data to VAERS indicated a URF of 60 back in October
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/v-safe-suggests-the-vaers-under-reporting Factor (URF) averages over 60 for the many different adverse event symptoms
I am aware of the Lazarus report. There is another detailed analysis out of the US that I need to dig up.
Temporality used to apply and probably still does for acute AEs and reactogenic events . However, for a novel experimental injection bereft of controls Bradford-Hill may be trickier to fulfill as consistency with current knowledge, biological plausibility is a moving feast and we need more time to elapse. For example, it remains impossible to predict those likely to sustain an serious adverse event or death, or converely those for whom a trivial short lived antibody response may occur, those who develop killer 'clots' a 3 - 4 months, or revitalised indolent Ca in a year. Trouble is, latent periods grow longer and as the 'fix' is in, a causal relationship becomes harder to establish.
It's murderous chaos. It was designed to be. It will continue as long as we permit it.
Yes. How to prove statistical significance without the data that would have emerged from properly run clinical trials that take 5-10 years
Ah yes, recycling the original studies c.2000 - 2012 that led to abandoning the approach? After all, they don't appear to have moved beyond VAED, still recognised as a significant problem in the conference report to CEPI/BC (P.-H. Lambert, D. M. Ambrosino, S. R. Andersen et al., Consensus summary report for CEPI/BCMarch 12–13, 2020 meeting: Assessment of risk of disease enhancement with COVID-19 vaccines, Vaccine) to be overcome with adjuvants ... that went well didn't it?.... let alone properly understanding individual RNA epigenetics (still in its infancy), or understanding the myriad of interactions when one interfers with signalling systems (Seneff et al.)
Oh, and we still have no "virus" ... or ethics.
We must reject and move on without 'them' now. Circling the drain while watching the bath empty seems to lack utility or happiness.
Yes.
I struggle with the concept of NOT reconciling clinical trial data with post marketing authorization data then with adverse event reports and actual research done independently following authorization - in a formal way.
I may be missing the point, but absent fraud and wilful malfeasance, all the checks and balances are in place. These have been subverted (as in broken into, like a bank) by criminal acts that either won't be prosecuted or will take longer than the 55-75 years the FDA wanted to NOT disclose its criminality.
I too struggle, with just about everything since 2020. Having worked through, "eliminating the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth," one is faced by a reality very difficult to accept. Most clearly don't, won't, can't. I realise that perhaps as many as 80% are duped, while 20% recognise that they are living in an evolving dystopia. New communities are gradually coalescing and when they come at us again, a clamorous sense of déjà vu should convert a few more.
Makes my head spin and my heart break. Thank you for the report.
Prayers for the children.
So that puts us at approximately (assuming the URF of 41 is still correct) ...
42*41 ~ 1722 deaths in a week.
251*41 ~ 10,291 adverse events (and I would assume a decent chunk of those are life altering).
And yet ... they still keep doing it. Thank you and shared.
Yep. Lifts US deaths using a URF of 40, rather than 41, at over 650,000 in the US and 1,350,000 deaths from around the world (reported to VAERS for companies operating in the US).
adverse events/Injuries are up to 26.8 million (multiple per person, for the US but more than one in ten of the population) and 60 million globally.
Thank you Sir.
You are welcome.