"Different companies, using different vaccine technologies, being produced in different labs, that are stored differently, and given to people of different ages in different geographical locations by different people - YET have a common inverse power law Adverse Event/Death profile by lot number.
Can't wait to see how they explain this one."
Karl over at Market Ticker has really dug into the VAERS data to analyze the following claim:
There is a wildly statistically-significant skew in the death rate from Covid-19 vaccines by lot number.Quoting: Karl Denninger
He was expecting to debunk it (he has a passionate hatred of tinfoil hats) but instead found that across all three of the vaccine producers they showed a similar abnormal grouping of deaths by lot number. Much less than 50% quoted, this is the TLDR summary:
The only thing all three of these vaccines have in common is that all three of them rely on the human body to produce the spike protein that is then attacked by the immune system and produces antibodies; none of them directly introduce the offending substance into the body. The mechanism of induction is different between the J&J and Pfizer/Moderna formulations but all exhibit the same problem. The differential shown in the data is wildly beyond reasonable explanation related to the cohort dosed and the reported person's average age for the full set of events (not just deaths) does not correlate with elevated risk in a given lot either so it is clearly not related to the age of the person jabbed (e.g. "certain lots all went to nursing homes since they were first.") While the highest AE rate lots all have early use dates so do some of the low-AE rate lots so the attempt to explain the data away as "but the highest risk got it first" fails as well.
In other words the best-fit hypothesis is that causing the body to produce part of a pathogen when that part has pathological capacity (as we know is the case for the spike) cannot be controlled adequately through commercial manufacturing process at-scale. This means that no vector-based, irrespective of how (e.g. viral vector or mRNA), not-directly-infused coronavirus jab will ever have an acceptable safety profile because some lots will be "hot" and harm crazy percentages of those they're given to with no way to know in advance. The basic premise used here -- to have the body produce the agent the immune system identifies rather than directly introduce it where you can control the quantity, is a failure.
The entire premise of calling something that does this a "vaccine" is bogus and in the context of a coronavirus this may never be able to be done safely.
Full article here:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244109Comments:
I've said months ago that I believe big pharma is experimenting with the materials in the vacccccccines from batch to batch. They know exactly who's getting what, so get great research data. But until recently WE weren't seeing batch numbers in VAERS data. We are all expendable lab rats.
this basically confirms what we speculated. Different concoctions for different demographics. which explains why my grandmother at 79 is still rockin and rollin with 2 shots, yet there are thousands of testimonies of injuries and death.
Reminds me of that story of that black lady scheduled to get her shot in a rich white neighborhood but was refused because she was black.
Check out the great work Steve Kirsch has been doing:
Cost benefit by age analysis: The COVID vaccines kill more people than they save for all age groups:
[link to
www.skirsch.com (secure)]
Steve has analyzed the data from multiple independant sources and methodologies and believes that the true (conservative) number of deaths due to the vax is around 150000 people so far.
See here: [link to
www.skirsch.io (secure)]
Good analysis.
They don't have to explain it. The anti-vaxxers already know and the vaxxed don't care. It's a genocide.
Source:
https://www.godlikeproductions.com/foru ... 949136/pg1