Covid: A pandemic of the vaccinated?

The statement

“Could it be that Australia’s Covid story has morphed into a pandemic of the vaccinated?

So I checked out the Commonwealth Department of Health’s coronavirus website, but it too, while providing all manner of details on Covid statistics by age, sex, states etc, was conspicuously silent on the relationship between Covid cases, hospitalisations and deaths on the one hand, and vaccination status (unvaccinated, single dose, double dose, boosters) on the other. …..

The NSW Respiratory Surveillance Report for the week ending 14 May offered the answers I was looking for. In this ‘epidemiological week 19’, there were 570 Covid cases admitted to hospital, 58 in ICU and 90 deaths (Figure 4). Of these, just 30, 34 and 17 per cent, respectively, were unvaccinated (or vaccination status unknown).

Conversely, fully 82 per cent of all Covid-related deaths in the state in this week were at least double vaccinated, including 64 per cent who had received boosters.

Figure 4

And still the conspiracy of silence continues among all state and federal governments about this disappointing failure of vaccine efficacy and lack of justification for vaccine mandates and passports.

There never was any ethical justification for vaccine coercion to begin with.

And clearly the regulators, health authorities and governments are stubbornly refusing to entertain, let alone scrutinise, the current data coming in for the pandemic, either by accelerated loss of efficacy or by weakening natural immunity with successive doses.

The source

Professor Ramesh Thakur, in Australian Spectator

(https://spectator.com.au/2022/05/is-this-what-success-looks-like/ )

Ramesh Thakur, Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University and former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, is based in Australia.  

My take on it

Table 4 above includes a category for No dose/Unknown. It is a pity that this category was not further divided, because in an exercise to determine association, No dose and Unknown are very different categories. If they had been so divided, I would have been inclined to do the analysis on a reduced sample size after excluding the Unknown.

The best I can do is to exclude the bundled category, thereby reducing the sample size to 399.

The table then looks like this:

Would someone like to run a regression analysis on those numbers for me?

But is there any need?

Professor Thakur calls out ‘the conspiracy of silence (that) continues among all state and federal governments about this disappointing failure of vaccine efficacy and lack of justification for vaccine mandates and passports.’

‘A disappointing failure of vaccine efficacy’ ???

This wording implies that the virus remains the villain.

What I and others observe rather is a conspiracy of silence about the toxic nature of this injection.

The jab: Is shedding real? Looks like.

The statement

“Initial comparison of nasal swabs acquired from children living in vaccinated households revealed readily detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG , especially when compared to the complete deficit of SARSCoV-2-specific antibody detected in the few nasal swabs we obtained from children in non-vaccinated households.”

The source

Dr Ross Ked and others, from the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, in a pre-print article, Evidence for Aerosol Transfer of SARS-CoV2-specific Humoral Immunity, published on 28 April 2022

://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.28.22274443v1.full.pdf

My take on it

We were warned that it might happen.

Then we were reassured that it couldn’t.

Now the research says that it does.

Mind you, the research only goes so far. It shows that vaccinated parents will engender a related immune response in their (unvaccinated) children, via air-borne antibody transfer; and that unvaccinated parents will not.

It remains to be seen what the longer term effects will be, for good or for ill.

The jab: Isn’t it a crime to conceal evidence?

The statement

“Utah ICU Nurses Try To Hide Fibrous Clot Coughed Up By Jabbed 32 Year Old”

The source

Dr Jane Ruby, on her Show (?Tuesday 26 April 2022), from which the above statement is a program title.

(https://www.brighteon.com/e550e5d1-ff99-4312-ac87-d42475d69363 )

The background to this story is that an ICU nurse in a Utah hospital recently witnessed and photographed a very unusual, grotesque, fibrous clot exuded (“coughed up”) by an ‘otherwise healthy’ (?) 32 year old young man who was known to be double-jabbed. When she and her colleague enquired they were told the clot was caused by vaping. A partial transcript follows:

“These shots are creating this material, which is self-assembling, according to Fauci’s December 4th 2019 testimony before the House Energy Committee  – he said it, he said ‘self-assembling nanoparticles’ – the body is cooperatively creating, co-creating along with these materials, being directed by these materials, self-assembling, these obstructive, disgusting, horrific, slimy – we don’t know what they’re made of –  clot castings in lungs, in blood vessels, God knows what else.   …..

”I don’t know what else to say, ladies and gentlemen. I am doing my best here. But you nurses in these hospitals that see this … You think this is the only one that happened in Utah? This is happening in hundreds and hundreds of hospitals across the United States right now, today.  Come forward, band together, stop this from going into six-month-olds.  It’s a matter of time.  And there’s not much time left.”

My take on it

I continue to pray for whistle-blowers, and to thank God for them.

Dr Ruby rightly calls the others to account, for their complicity of silence.

I know very little about vaping (aka e-cigarettes). If this clot is one of the side-effects, it looks like a great advertisement for reverting to conventional smoking.

A quick scan of the literature shows multiple references to blood clotting from e-cigarettes, but none to a clot of this nature. (See eg https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8056776/ which references the CDC criteria for the diagnosis of e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury (EVALI))

We await confirmation, either way.

And either way, there is no justification for concealing the evidence. Isn’t that a crime?

The jab: The deadly evidence is unequivocal

CE 530 - From Evidence to Causality: How do We Determine Causality?

The comment

“It is beyond any shadow of a doubt, it’s unequivocal, the vaccines are causing large numbers of deaths.”

The source

Dr Peter McCullough , 1 April 2022 ( https://rumble.com/vzc8pe-dr.-peter-mccullough-its-unequivocal-the-vaccines-are-causing-large-numbers.html )

My take on it

Following introduction of the Covid injection program, relevant agencies have been monitoring the incidence of adverse events, including deaths, following the injection. As always, the question has been asked, Are these adverse events caused by the injections; or are they simply associated with them?

In these circumstances there is an established set of criteria that can be applied in order to prove or disprove causation. They are called the Bradford Hill causation criteria .

In Australia 801 deaths have thus far been associated with the introduction of the Covid injection program, according to the latest (24 March) Weekly Report of Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). The TGA attributes just 11 of these deaths to the effects of the injections. Is that a reasonable conclusion? Is it based on comprehensive autopsies, for example? (No it’s not.) Is it based on the Bradford Hill criteria? (No it’s not.)

Dr McCullough applied the criteria. His conclusion is not a throwaway line, but the application of best practice.

It behoves the TGA to ‘go and do likewise’. To do any less is culpable negligence.

This report alone should be sufficient for those responsible to call an immediate halt to the injection program, based on the precautionary principle.

But will they?