Excess deaths later in COVID’s timeline were largely from alcoholism mental health problems and delayed cancer care, not from Covid or its vaccines.
Sorry but that's patently speculative opinion not remotely fact. Though correllation does not immediately equate to causation there are stagering amounts of correllation with the roll-out of the "vaccines" and the sudden and appalling rise in excess deaths. The numbers are so bad that under any other circumstances ANY government in the world would be instigating immediate and far reaching investigations as to the source of the deaths, it would be deemed a national emergency, and yet no government has been remotely interested in performing any investigation and the reason is again patently obvious. If they've all been complicit in the worst crime against humanity (which I believe they have) then they will of course do everything to protect themselves from subsequent prosecution. If the "vaccines" are a primary cause of the deaths then the deaths are going to continue and thus Pharma and their useful idiots will have to concoct some other bogus excuse for those deaths. Will they blame Monkey Pox, Bird Flu or some new pathogen? Time will tell. I predict the deaths in 2025 will be suddenly attributed to some new pathogen which will again be used to declare a state of emergency and once again yet another (cough) "vaccine" will be forced as the, not cure, but way to alleviate the situation. There is just too much money involved in this entire business model for it not to be repeated endlessly. Only by bringing those responsible to justice will it ever stop.
A LOT of effort was made to distinguish a Covid death from a non-Covid death. I realize this remains controversial.
Yes ironic that wasn't it During the pandemic the public were outraged by the government's appalling skulduggery in trying to inflate Covid death numbers by labelling any and all deaths as a Covid Death. In the UK medical doctors, coroners were instructed that they were allowed to label deaths as Covid Deaths
even if no Covid test had been performed on the deceased! It was deemed enough that if the deceased had exhibited any symptoms of Covid before death then they were a Covid Death which was patently ridiculous. You might have an ordinary cold, a bit of a sniffle but the symptoms are so similar to Covid that you would be deemed a Covid Death. It was imo totally fraudulent and appalling
So how utterly double-faced was it when AFTER the pandemic and in the face of countless new excess deaths coinciding with the roll-out of the "vaccines" that the powers that be suddenly didn't want these to be labelled as vaccine deaths and instead everyone now needs to find any and all other causes for those deaths.
Remember at the time, if you died within X number of days of having Covid then it was deemed a Covid death, but if you died within X number of days of having a "vaccine" shot that wasn't likewise a Vaccine Death. Hmmm.
In short, when it suited their narrative a death was a Covid Death. When it doesn't suit the narrative a subsequent post-vaccine death mustn't be a vaccine death it must be something else. It's appalling.
Data mean everything. All else is guesswork.
Yep which is why your claim that all the excess deaths were mental health and alcohol is bogus. You don't have the data to know what the causes are because the prime culprits of the causes have not been investigated and quantified nor will they ever be.
10,000 people need to take a long-term baby aspirin to help seven of them, while harming four. A hedge against fatal heart attack. Should I flush my relatively cheap and safe aspirin down the toilet based on the above numbers?
Well I certainly would. Those odds are ridiculous. And you need to be consistent in your life risk mitigations too if you're going to try and defend that one. If you set out in your car on a trip somewhere you have a 1 in 400 chance of being involved in an incident. If you're going to worry about a 7 in 10,000 risk then you should equally worry about a 1 in 400 risk, more so. So tell us all, do you refrain from going out in cars? No, didnt think so!
Similarly, you have to
inject 71 people with a tradition Flu vaccine in order to prevent just ONE case of Flu. Since all vaccines produce some level of adverse side effect, some of them very serious, then that also has to be thrown into the equation. Add to that the fact that
the SCIENCE states clearly that repeated flu jabs adversely impact the already very low effectiveness of the vaccines then I can't see that there is any case whatsoever to continue selling Flu shots at all. It's just a very profitable business model offered to the ignorant masses who can't be bothered to do their research imo.
There’s a pretty high level of sophistication in this thread. Good thing, as vaccines are complex Prudent to ask do we know how our antilock brakes work and what liabilities and experiments the car company undertook? The fallibility of the software? Nope. How many would disable their antilock brakes if they could?
I would certainly disable at least one of the safety features of my current car if I could, but sadly it's not a menu option for the user. I'm not even sure if my garage would be able to do it in the diagnostics suite. We should always be prepared to drill down in to the detail of all aspects of life and make changes as needed.
I premised thoughts on experience, insider information and a little personal agony. ( Not lay interpretations of public documents or theories about hidden data.)
I think it's a bit insulting to label people's research as "lay interpretations" TBH. You don't have to be a medical scientist for example to look at the numbers of people involved in the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccine trials. That's simple maths. For example
here's the data for the Moderna vaccine trial paper which provides the numbers below:
There were 30,420 volunteers who were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either vaccine or placebo (15,210 participants in each group).
In the placebo group only 185 people out of 15,210 were confirmed with symptomatic Covid-19 illness which is just 1.2%
So
98.8% of people in the placebo group
didn't get Covid illness anyway despite not being vaccinated.
Those are great odds imo.
In the vaccinated group 11 people out of 15,210 had Covid illness which is 0.07%
The difference between the placebo and vaccinated group was therefore
1.13%
This is simple maths. The figures show the stark difference between a "relative difference" and an "absolute difference".
That difference WAS NOT communicated to the public. Had the public realised how tiny a difference there was between the placebo and vaccinated group I believe millions if not billions would have refused the shots.
The paper also went on to talk about side effects:
"Solicited systemic adverse events occurred more often in the mRNA-1273 group than in the placebo group after both the first dose (54.9%, vs. 42.2%) and the second dose (79.4%, vs. 36.5%). "
"The severity of the solicited systemic events increased after the second dose in the mRNA-1273 group, with an increase in proportions of grade 2 events (from 16.5% after the first dose to 38.1% after the second dose) and grade 3 events (from 2.9% to 15.8%). "
Again was this communicated to the public? No I don't believe it was. Appalling stuff.
If you want to call this "lay interpretation" then I think you're working towards a particular narrative for whatever reason. For myself, I'm very comfortable looking at those figures and seeing the appallingly low difference between vax and placebo groups.
Speaking of Africa, denizens of that continent were angry not to be prioritized in terms of vaccine distribution.
And yet Tanzania flatly refused the vaccines saying:
""We are not yet satisfied that those vaccines have been clinically proven safe”, Health Minister Dorothy Gwajima told the news conference"
Data. There’s almost no hard data in the original post, all due respect to Jefferson. I agree with much of it. And there’s a reason David Letterman didn’t do a top 31.
By this you mean that Jefferson didn't include citations to the data in the OP, not that such data does not exist for it surely does exist and it exists in spades. I wholeheartedly agree with Jefferson in that OP. There has been an utterly appalling onslaught of deliberate scare-mongering, witholding of important information, inhuman coercion, vilification of truth sayers, manipulation of science all resulting in irreversible damage to the vaccine industry, to governments and to the medical industry as a whole. In many ways, though the cost in human life is disastrous and unforgiveable, the good things that emerges is that millions of people have now woken up from their induced slumber and are realising that their former blanket trust now needs to be replaced with diligent research on just about every medical decision.
