Fool me again, PLEASE

This graphic ought to sound the immediate death knell for mRNA vaccines, as the Hindenberg disaster killed commercial airships:

Actuarial data on sudden unexpected deaths in Germany, 2016-2022

Even with German captions, it needs little explanation. It shows Germany’s actuarial data on sudden unexpected death, and you don’t have to be scientifically literate to see that a catastrophe begins in the first quarter of 2021, when the COVID vaccines were rolled out.

Now, for non medics, sudden unexpected death, if you don’t count accidents and murders, has few common causes. A smallish proportion is due to massive pulmonary embolism from deep vein thrombosis, and the vast majority to cardiac arrest. Both, of course, are circulatory disorders. So there is little doubt that Germany has an epidemic of fatal heart attacks that correlate with vaccine roll-out, and with no other notable event, since lockdowns peaked a year earlier, as did the COVID epidemic, with little or no such effect.

Germany’s health services did not break down to the extent that Britain’s did, but in any case, to be frank, even the best acute care doesn’t make that degree of difference to survival after cardiac arrest. Nobody I’m aware of has suggested any plausible alternative explanation for the correlation of an ongoing epidemic with the roll-out of vaccines and boosters, which makes it a slam dunk case, at least for halting vaccination pending further investigation.

Note this is not a rare cause of death, though far more heart deaths occur less suddenly and less unexpectedly. 6,000 deaths quarterly is a significant proportion of all German deaths, so a hike up to more than double that that is an awful lot of dead friends, colleagues and relatives.

Readers will, I hope, know by now that Germany’s experience is far from unique. A similar pattern emerged from a study in Israel months ago, and life insurance people in more than one US state reported a 40% increase in sudden deaths quite early this year. Studies on the worldwide phenomenon of excess deaths over a similar time-frame show the majority to be cardiac in nature. A more complete treatment of the matter has recently been uploaded by HART.

We know that the mainstream media has been actively suppressing anything that casts doubt on the Damascus road conversion of Big Pharma from the most corrupt industry in the world to angels of mercy, but this story has appeared in the mainstream media, most notably in the UK through cardiologist Aseem Malhotra’s call for the suspension of the vaccines because of just this kind of data, which had a big spread in the popular rag the Daily Mail.

Even in Parliament’s question time one brave MP has drawn attention to the unprecedented adverse reaction reports from the Yellow Card scheme (but why should he have to be “brave” to quote the government’s own surveillance scheme?). His subsequent character assassination on social media is to be expected, but more significant was PM Rishi Sunak’s crass reply, “First of all, I believe the vaccines are safe and effective.” “Don’t bother me with facts – I believe in fairies” is not the response of a competent national leader, but everyone knows he is a lame duck anyway. So why would anyone hearing be reassured?

What troubles me more than the politicians is how, three years after the gas was turned up to full under the propaganda and psyops burner, most ordinary people can see a graph like this one and still not join the dots. I’d briefly mentioned to a friend a couple of weeks ago how there were problems with the boosters, and he came back later and said, “You mentioned a conspiracy theory about vaccines last week… what did you mean?”

I printed off a (different) HART article for him on the corruption associated with the vaccines, and as I gave it to him he said, “It’s not going to make me regret having the vaccine, is it?” Well, yes – but that’s the price of doing truth, isn’t it? Now I hear he’s self-isolating because his vaccinated and boosted wife has tested positive for COVID having had a cold for a week… why vaccinate? Why test? Why isolate? Because, because, because – goodbye, goodbye, goodbye.

Another friend overheard our original conversation and said, “But the vaccines have saved millions of lives.” Well, it’s true the press are still trotting out Imperial College models with absurd projections that defy the actual experience of countries both heavily vaccinated and unvaccinated, but surely we all ought to have noticed just how the claims for the wondershots have drained away over time, as this screenshot from a Norman Fenton overview reminds us.

A third friend, with whom I’ve discussed the risks and disbenefits of the vaccines since before they were even released, was absent from recent events because of the horrible way he feels after his latest booster. His wife felt so bad after all the previous ones that she said she would not have the latest shot (though I haven’t dared ask if she followed through). Neither seems to consider that the things might actually kill them. I don’t get the impression that any of these folks have responded actively to the medical information I’ve given them, even by doing a bit of their own research. Why not?

I suppose one reason is that most of us know only one or two people who have kicked the bucket prematurely because of the vaccines. And I think most of us do know at least one, though few realise it, simply from the stories I keep hearing: “Please pray for my son-in-law, who’s been rushed to hospital with chest pain at 35 years old.” People, heart attacks just don’t happen at that age, except in heroin addicts, and certainly not every few weeks in the same social circle.

But the German figures show that, although it’s an international tragedy, only 0.06% of the population suffered sudden death in 2021. So if before 2019 you heard of some acquaintance dying of a heart attack perhaps once a year, you probably haven’t noticed one or two more in the last year and thought it significant. Incidentally this shows the difference between what we saw in COVID and a true pandemic – in the latter, there would be an empty seat at every table, but many of us still know personally nobody who died of COVID. In reality, though, we have probably long passed the point at which deaths from lockdowns and vaccines combined far outweigh deaths genuinely attributable to SARS-CoV-2. But we’re still doling out the vaccines, and for reasons only really accountable in terms of profit the MHRA has authorised the boosters, only tested in eight mice, even for infants.

Why such blindness? Unless any readers have better ideas, I must suppose that most people, despite everything, are still happy to soak up the news from the Beeb or the Guardian and believe it even as they say, “You can’t trust anything in the news nowadays.” It’s just too much to believe that all the organs of authority would have lied about the vaccines, and would continue to do so with such complete conviction now. “Safe and effective” gives security to most, even as it causes acute nausea to some of us.

That’s my conclusion, since it’s not just regarding COVID that people are able to ignore something as obvious as the chilling chart at the top of this piece. For here’s another chart that, in various updated forms, has been widely published over the last five years or so.

Here we see that only one climate model (the Russian one, as it happens) even vaguely matches the satellite sea surface temperature actually measured, the rest overestimating warming massively and increasingly. Slam dunk debunk of climate alarmism, and recalibrate your view of “government experts.” And yet most people we meet will read in the press that global warming is far worse than the experts thought, without raising an eyebrow, and tell that to their children whenever they ask for a plastic straw.

Sometimes it seems that to be a “trusted source” you simply have to tell the most self-evident lies.

Avatar photo

About Jon Garvey

Training in medicine (which was my career), social psychology and theology. Interests in most things, but especially the science-faith interface. The rest of my time, though, is spent writing, playing and recording music.
This entry was posted in Medicine, Politics and sociology, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Fool me again, PLEASE

  1. shopwindows says:

    Unfortunately whilst it has long been obvious to those who cared to look that the risk of particularly the mRNA EUA drugs was not worth taking, once bitten twice shy hasn’t kicked in with vengeance. The favoured reaction seems to be I’m not getting another jab, with a resigned shrug.

    Especially as I didn’t get browbeaten into it I feel sorry for those who did but they need apologies – and alleviation…..

    Whilst Aseem Malhotra establishing the cause of his own fathers demise secured a committed activist for suspension there is not yet a groundswell against the poison – and I haven’t heard his contrition for supporting the original rollout based on nothing more than his willingness to bask in limelight. About as principled as “celebrity” flogging funeral savings plans to those with no capital.

    It is remarkable that Sunak dismissively recanted the childish mantra two years after the roll out, fingers firmly in ears. It is offensive that Bridgen was effectively blackballed by near enough every sitting MP, the chamber should have been packed.

    Abandonment of mRNA might be crucial, accountability for malfeasance important, but in the interests of those afflicted there are many urgent questions some of which whilst widely discussed deserve an authoritative focussed response, perhaps a self help web site?

    1. Is the damage cumulative?

    2. Does the effect dissipate?

    3. Are there antidotes to stop ongoing damage?

    4. Could we identify succinctly the adverse health impacts in an actionable manner; blood circulatory issues, cardiovascular inflammation issues, neurological capillaries impairment, tinnitus, headaches, blurred vision, rapid onset and resurgent cancer, impaired reproductive function?

    5. Can ADE be ameliorated?

    6. Can VAIDS be counteracted?

    Ongoing teeth gnashing, whining at the mass psychosis, marvelling at the epochal cultural cataclysmic changes, it’s all understandable, but the diffusion is not helpful. At this stage the priorities surely are stop the poison, arrest and treat the physical damage, stop the despotic revolution.

    Easily said, less easily achieved?

    • Avatar photo Jon Garvey says:

      Agree with all, but I think Malhotra’s initial vaccine enthusiasm is explicable by the long indoctrination within the profession that vaccines, for reasons not clear, are exempt from all the problems everyone knows about regarding new drugs.

      Especially as a cardiologist with, I assume, little interest in vaccines since medical school, the idea that vaccines are just a little bit of the bug working naturally to cause immunity without disease was likely just assumed.

      I think the most serious of your points are whether damage is cumulative (given frequent boosters) and fades: it would be good to do research on the ongoing cardiac health of those who bottled out after the first pair of AZ (or Pfizer) shots.

      I remember it was a while after the COVID vaccine development started that I heard, from a friendly pharmacist, that they were novel mRNA therapies, and started (with him) to dig deeper and discover their appalling track record. And that was having some clues over the last few years that there was some dirty linen associated with vaccine programmes. Even now, most of the public don’t have any real idea that there is a material difference between a COVID jab and a tetanus jab.

  2. Peter Hickman says:

    Well said, Jon and Richard. Excellent!

    For readers who are unaware of MP Andrew Bridgen’s speech on 13th December in the House of Commons, here is a link to Will Jones’s Daily Skeptic article about it yesterday; it contains a transcript of the entire speech (excluding interventions):

    In the context of the issue of Covid vaccine damage, Bridgen discusses the risk-benefit analysis with reference to the original vaccine data and NNTs (number needed to treat in order to have a beneficial effect). For example:
    Against the original ‘ancestral, more lethal strain of the virus … the absolute risk reduction for an individual was only 0.84% [and] Pfizer revealed that we needed to vaccinate 119 people to prevent one infection’.
    ‘Real-world data from the U.K. during the three-month wave of Omicron at the beginning of this year reveals that we would need to vaccinate 7,300 people over the age of 80 to prevent one death’.
    Given the overwhelming amount of prima facie evidence of serious vaccine harms, he concludes his excellent summary of what is known by saying, ‘the Government’s current policy on the mRNA vaccines is on the wrong side of medical ethics, it is on the wrong side of scientific data, and ultimately it will be on the wrong side of history.’

    Bridgen is right, of course. Others with a public profile, such as GBNews, continue to cover Covid policy sequellae regularly. The cat is well and truly out of the bag. The abiding concern for those of us who care is that those who are accountable for health policy will neither listen (“don’t bother me with facts”), nor act, nor accept responsibility. Let alone commission new research on the longer-term effects of the vaccines!

Leave a Reply