‘1 in a billion’ chance COVID emerged from nature.

The COVID-19 lab-leak theory — far from being a myth or conspiracy theory — is supported by a “preponderance of evidence” U.S. senators today acknowledged in a historic bipartisan hearing.

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Gary Peters, a Democratic senator from Michigan, and ranking member Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) led the two-hour committee hearing examining the available evidence on the origins of COVID-19. CHD.TV aired the hearing.

The Chinese government refuses to release key data from the Wuhan Institute of Virology from around the time COVID-19 emerged, making it difficult to assess the lab-leak theory and come to a conclusion.

Nonetheless, much evidence points toward a lab leak rather than a natural spillover from animals, according to both expert witnesses Steven C. Quay, M.D., Ph.D. — CEO of Atossa Therapeutics Inc. and former faculty member at Stanford University’s School of Medicine — and Richard H. Ebright, Ph.D., professor of chemistry and chemical biology and lab director at the Waksman Institute of Microbiology at Rutgers University.

Ebright is also on the leadership team of Biosafety Now, a nongovernmental organization that “advocates for reducing numbers of high-level biocontainment laboratories and for strengthening biosafety, biosecurity, and biorisk management for research on pathogens.”

‘1 in a billion’ chance COVID emerged from nature

Quay — who began by telling the committee he was speaking “as an independent scientist” with no relevant financial ties — explained that the genome of SARS-CoV-2 has seven features that would be expected to be found in a virus constructed in a laboratory and which are not found in viruses from nature.

“The statistical probability of finding each feature in nature can be determined,” Quay said, “and the combined probability that SARS2 came from nature is less than one in a billion.”

Ebright said his extensive research and gathering of documents likewise pointed toward a lab leak.

He also said the “gain-of-function” research on potentially dangerous pathogens — like the experiments underway at the Wuhan Institute when COVID-19 emerged — “has no civilian application” but is easy for researchers to do and make money doing.

“Researchers undertake it because it is fast,” Ebright said, “it is easy, it requires no specialized equipment or skills, and it was prioritized for funding and has been prioritized for publication by scientific journals.”

“These are major incentives to researchers worldwide, in China and in the U.S.,” he pointed out.

Moreover, gain-of-function research is largely unregulated, Ebright said.

There needs to be an independent agency that oversees and regulates this risky research, he said.

“Only after there is an acknowledgment,” Ebright said, “that there is a very real possibility — not a remote possibility, but a very real possibility — of a lab origin will there be the political will to impose regulation on this scientific community that has successfully resisted and obstructed regulation for two decades.”

Ebright added, “I see this acknowledgment today in a bipartisan fashion among members of this committee.”

When asked how important it is that legislators pass a law to regulate gain-of-function research, Ebright said it’s a “matter of survival.”

“It’s that important,” Ebright said. “There needs to be an entity that is independent of agencies that fund research and perform research to eliminate the structural conflict of interest that has existed with current self-regulation by agencies that perform and fund research.”

Paul said the committee will hold a hearing in the future focused on reforming gain-of-function research in the U.S.

Private comments don’t match public words

Attending committee members cited numerous instances in which federally funded researchers said one thing in private while saying something else in public.

For example, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) called out Robert F. Garry, Ph.D., professor and associate dean of Tulane University’s School of Medicine — who gave expert testimony during the hearing — for being part of the “propaganda efforts” led by Dr. Anthony Fauci to suppress the lab-leak theory.

Garry co-authored the “Proximal Origin” paper, published on March 17, 2020, in Nature Medicine.

The paper — in which the authors concluded that SARS-CoV-2 was “not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus” — was used by Fauci and Dr. Francis S. Collins to “tamp down” the idea that a lab leak caused the COVID-19 pandemic, reported The New York Times.

However, Garry expressed in a private email written close to the time the paper was written that he thought it unlikely the virus had natural origins, Hawley pointed out.

Ebright said he signed two petitions calling on Nature Medicine’s editors to review and retract the paper due to scientific misconduct.

The authors of the paper reported conclusions they knew at the time to be untrue. “This is the most egregious form of scientific misconduct,” Ebright said.

Hawley said, “People lost their jobs because of this. They lost their standing. They were kicked off Facebook. They were kicked off Twitter.”

Hawley asked Garry, “Do you regret being part of this effort, this propaganda effort?”

Garry said he was “just writing a paper about our scientific opinions.”

Hawley asked again: “Do you regret the fact that your paper was used to censor your fellow scientists? It was used to censor ordinary Americans who asked questions about the virus. Do you regret that?”

Garry said, “When you write a paper, I mean, you get it in the journal, we can’t control what happens.”

Hawley said, “So you’re not responsible at all. It’s amazing. Nobody who is involved in any of this is responsible.”

Later, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked Garry how much money he had received in government grants over his career. “I’m not sure,” said Garry.

Johnson revealed that between 2020 and 2022, Garry and Kristian Andersen, Ph.D. — another co-author of the “Proximal Origin” paper — received $25.2 million in grants from the National Institutes of Health.

Multiple U.S. agencies concluded it was a lab leak

When Garry started to explain how the intelligence community came to the same conclusion as he and his co-authors, Hawley interrupted him. “That is a lie,” Hawley said. “Let’s stop there.”

Hawley pointed out that “multiple intelligence community agents and components” have concluded the virus was likely a lab leak.

The U.S. Department of Energy concluded COVID-19 came from a lab, Paul said. So did the FBI, he said.

A CIA whistleblower revealed that the scientists convened to study the issue voted 6-1 to say it came from the lab, Paul said. “Then they were overruled by superiors for political reasons.”

“So there’s a lot of evidence that people within the intelligence agencies actually do believe that there is evidence that it came from the lab,” Paul said.

Emily Kopp, a reporter with U.S. Right to Know, debunked more of Garry’s statements in an X post.

Sen. Rand Paul opens a bipartisan hearing on COVID origins by reading the statements of virologists who privately agonized about the lab leak theory but cried “conspiracy theory!” publicly.

He includes the statements of Bob Garry, one of those virologists, who is a witness… pic.twitter.com/bGZQOkMjh4

— Emily Kopp (@emilyakopp) June 18, 2024

Johnson calls for unredacted copies of Fauci emails

Johnson held up copies of the final 50 pages of Fauci’s emails — which were heavily redacted. “We had to FOIA for these. They didn’t turn these over, which they should have.”

He suggested some are still looking for clear, conclusive evidence — as in a “smoking gun” — proving Fauci and the research he funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were responsible for the COVID-19 virus.

“My guess is the smoking gun exists somewhere under these heavy redactions,” Johnson said.

Johnson asked the chairman to issue a subpoena to get the final 50 pages unredacted.

Watch here:

https://boxcast.tv/view-embed/origins-of-covid-19-an-examination-of-available-evidence–june-18-eaolimafad39kbbqwwev

June 18, 2024 › Agency Capture › COVID › News

COVID

‘1 in a Billion’ Chance COVID Emerged From Nature, Scientist Tells Lawmakers

The COVID-19 lab-leak theory — far from being a myth or conspiracy theory — is supported by a “preponderance of evidence” U.S. senators today acknowledged in a bipartisan hearing.

by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

JUNE 18, 2024

Steven Quay on the right and coronavirus under a microscope on the left

2746 PAGEVIEWSREPUBLISH 

PRINTSHARE

 18 COMMENTS

The COVID-19 lab-leak theory — far from being a myth or conspiracy theory — is supported by a “preponderance of evidence” U.S. senators today acknowledged in a historic bipartisan hearing.

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Gary Peters, a Democratic senator from Michigan, and ranking member Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) led the two-hour committee hearing examining the available evidence on the origins of COVID-19. CHD.TV aired the hearing.

The Chinese government refuses to release key data from the Wuhan Institute of Virology from around the time COVID-19 emerged, making it difficult to assess the lab-leak theory and come to a conclusion.

Nonetheless, much evidence points toward a lab leak rather than a natural spillover from animals, according to both expert witnesses Steven C. Quay, M.D., Ph.D. — CEO of Atossa Therapeutics Inc. and former faculty member at Stanford University’s School of Medicine — and Richard H. Ebright, Ph.D., professor of chemistry and chemical biology and lab director at the Waksman Institute of Microbiology at Rutgers University.

Ebright is also on the leadership team of Biosafety Now, a nongovernmental organization that “advocates for reducing numbers of high-level biocontainment laboratories and for strengthening biosafety, biosecurity, and biorisk management for research on pathogens.”

The Vaccine Safety Project

LEARN MORE

‘1 in a billion’ chance COVID emerged from nature

Quay — who began by telling the committee he was speaking “as an independent scientist” with no relevant financial ties — explained that the genome of SARS-CoV-2 has seven features that would be expected to be found in a virus constructed in a laboratory and which are not found in viruses from nature.

“The statistical probability of finding each feature in nature can be determined,” Quay said, “and the combined probability that SARS2 came from nature is less than one in a billion.”

Ebright said his extensive research and gathering of documents likewise pointed toward a lab leak.

He also said the “gain-of-function” research on potentially dangerous pathogens — like the experiments underway at the Wuhan Institute when COVID-19 emerged — “has no civilian application” but is easy for researchers to do and make money doing.

“Researchers undertake it because it is fast,” Ebright said, “it is easy, it requires no specialized equipment or skills, and it was prioritized for funding and has been prioritized for publication by scientific journals.”

“These are major incentives to researchers worldwide, in China and in the U.S.,” he pointed out.

Moreover, gain-of-function research is largely unregulated, Ebright said.

There needs to be an independent agency that oversees and regulates this risky research, he said.

“Only after there is an acknowledgment,” Ebright said, “that there is a very real possibility — not a remote possibility, but a very real possibility — of a lab origin will there be the political will to impose regulation on this scientific community that has successfully resisted and obstructed regulation for two decades.”

Ebright added, “I see this acknowledgment today in a bipartisan fashion among members of this committee.”

When asked how important it is that legislators pass a law to regulate gain-of-function research, Ebright said it’s a “matter of survival.”

“It’s that important,” Ebright said. “There needs to be an entity that is independent of agencies that fund research and perform research to eliminate the structural conflict of interest that has existed with current self-regulation by agencies that perform and fund research.”

Paul said the committee will hold a hearing in the future focused on reforming gain-of-function research in the U.S.

Magnifying glass and an envelope

Do you have a news tip?We want to hear from you!

CONTACT US

Private comments don’t match public words

Attending committee members cited numerous instances in which federally funded researchers said one thing in private while saying something else in public.

For example, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) called out Robert F. Garry, Ph.D., professor and associate dean of Tulane University’s School of Medicine — who gave expert testimony during the hearing — for being part of the “propaganda efforts” led by Dr. Anthony Fauci to suppress the lab-leak theory.

Garry co-authored the “Proximal Origin” paper, published on March 17, 2020, in Nature Medicine.

The paper — in which the authors concluded that SARS-CoV-2 was “not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus” — was used by Fauci and Dr. Francis S. Collins to “tamp down” the idea that a lab leak caused the COVID-19 pandemic, reported The New York Times.

However, Garry expressed in a private email written close to the time the paper was written that he thought it unlikely the virus had natural origins, Hawley pointed out.

Ebright said he signed two petitions calling on Nature Medicine’s editors to review and retract the paper due to scientific misconduct.

The authors of the paper reported conclusions they knew at the time to be untrue. “This is the most egregious form of scientific misconduct,” Ebright said.

Hawley said, “People lost their jobs because of this. They lost their standing. They were kicked off Facebook. They were kicked off Twitter.”

Hawley asked Garry, “Do you regret being part of this effort, this propaganda effort?”

Garry said he was “just writing a paper about our scientific opinions.”

Hawley asked again: “Do you regret the fact that your paper was used to censor your fellow scientists? It was used to censor ordinary Americans who asked questions about the virus. Do you regret that?”

Garry said, “When you write a paper, I mean, you get it in the journal, we can’t control what happens.”

Hawley said, “So you’re not responsible at all. It’s amazing. Nobody who is involved in any of this is responsible.”

Later, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) asked Garry how much money he had received in government grants over his career. “I’m not sure,” said Garry.

Johnson revealed that between 2020 and 2022, Garry and Kristian Andersen, Ph.D. — another co-author of the “Proximal Origin” paper — received $25.2 million in grants from the National Institutes of Health.

This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.

PLEASE DONATE TODAY

Multiple U.S. agencies concluded it was a lab leak

When Garry started to explain how the intelligence community came to the same conclusion as he and his co-authors, Hawley interrupted him. “That is a lie,” Hawley said. “Let’s stop there.”

Hawley pointed out that “multiple intelligence community agents and components” have concluded the virus was likely a lab leak.

The U.S. Department of Energy concluded COVID-19 came from a lab, Paul said. So did the FBI, he said.

A CIA whistleblower revealed that the scientists convened to study the issue voted 6-1 to say it came from the lab, Paul said. “Then they were overruled by superiors for political reasons.”

“So there’s a lot of evidence that people within the intelligence agencies actually do believe that there is evidence that it came from the lab,” Paul said.

Emily Kopp, a reporter with U.S. Right to Know, debunked more of Garry’s statements in an X post.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1803085571276800187&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fchildrenshealthdefense.org%2Fdefender%2Fcovid-origins-congress-hearing-wuhan-lab-leak%2F&sessionId=9fd048ce44ad2f3a14c68af40b7b425ca3214790&siteScreenName=ChildrensHD&theme=light&widgetsVersion=2615f7e52b7e0%3A1702314776716&width=550px

Johnson calls for unredacted copies of Fauci emails

Johnson held up copies of the final 50 pages of Fauci’s emails — which were heavily redacted. “We had to FOIA for these. They didn’t turn these over, which they should have.”

He suggested some are still looking for clear, conclusive evidence — as in a “smoking gun” — proving Fauci and the research he funded at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were responsible for the COVID-19 virus.

“My guess is the smoking gun exists somewhere under these heavy redactions,” Johnson said.

Johnson asked the chairman to issue a subpoena to get the final 50 pages unredacted.

Watch here:

https://boxcast.tv/view-embed/origins-of-covid-19-an-examination-of-available-evidence–june-18-eaolimafad39kbbqwwev

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa.REPUBLISH THIS ARTICLE

SUGGEST A CORRECTIONSHARE ARTICLE

———————————————————————————————————-

Statistical analysis shows that NOBODY under 60 should take the COVID vaccine

This is a PRELIMINARY result based on over 1,500 death reports we’ve received so far. You are welcome to download our data yourself and analyze it and see if you agree. You may find some new things.

STEVE KIRSCH

MAY 17, 2022

Share

Summary

This is big. Really big. This may prove to be one of the most important articles I will write this year.

Figure 1 below is an analysis of survey data I collected. The analysis shows that the vaccines are harmful to those under 60. The red dots higher than the error bar means more vaccinated people observed dead than expected based on the population of vaccinated to all people. In other words, if we vaccinated 60% of people (middle of the grey bar) and 70% (red dot) of the deaths are vaccinated, we have a serious problem.

The precautionary principle of medicine suggests if you are under 60 and thinking of taking a vaccine, you shouldn’t. These preliminary results are both statistically significant.

Figure 1. Red dot below error bar = vax works. Red dot above error bar = vax likely causes harm. Red dot inside the error bar = Insufficient evidence to justify taking a new, unproven vaccine. Conclusion: Vaccine shouldn’t be considered unless there is a clear benefit. 60 and older seems to justify use based on the data we have so far. Limitations: we are waiting for others to confirm / challenge the analysis. See text for more info. Joel Smalley did the analysis..

However, there could be errors in the analysis and/or survey bias errors that will change the result, so this is preliminary. I hope to make these not preliminary in a few days.

I created a mortality survey which asked people to report the date, age, and vaccine status of the people who died who they had the tightest relationship with. You could report as many deaths as you wanted for people you PERSONALLY knew, but if you didn’t report them all, start with the person closest to you. All deaths should be reported no matter what the cause of the death. If they died after December 1, 2020, report it.

The first 1,700+ results are in and Joel Smalley had time to do the analysis. It is stunning. The conclusion is very clear: nobody under 60 years old should get the vaccine because there is no evidence of a benefit. In fact, if you are between 40-60, it’s clear that vaccination makes it more likely you’ll die, not less likely. It’s statistically significant. The result that the younger you are, the less sense it makes, is consistent with what pretty much everyone has been saying.

The only thing that surprised me in the analysis is that data showed that if you are 60 and older, getting vaccinated reduces your chance of dying.

I’m astonished by the data showing a benefit for >60 because it is inconsistent with the VAERS data (which is off the charts showing nearly 500,000 deaths), embalmer data, and this article about 6 elderly deaths in Palo Alto out of 9 people vaccinated, and medicare data, and UK ONS data. I’m confident of the embalmer data and Palo Alto deaths: there is absolutely no way if the vaccine was protective that those events could occur. This means there must be an error in the analysis or confounding of the data. There cannot be two truths.

My advice is to avoid the COVID vaccines for ALL ages. If you get sick, get early treatment. This is because we have strong DIRECT evidence (embalmer, nursing home data is clearly strongly negative) that the vaccines are deadly to the elderly and until someone explains how the direct evidence is wrong, the precautionary rule of medicine says we should respect that possibility and thus early treatment is the preferred alternative.

In other words, if you have conflicting evidence, better to avoid that option until the conflict is resolved especially when the more direct evidence suggests that the intervention is deadly.

I’m not trying to cherry pick here. I’m saying that quality direct evidence rules over calculated numbers. If the best evidence I have is calculated numbers, I go with that.

For example, if the calculations show that the vaccine is safe for those over 60 and I find that 9 out of 10 people over 60 who get the shot die within 24 hours from blood clots, which evidence do you believe?

I cannot reconcile the discrepancy at this time.

Joel may have made a mistake. So take all these results (including under 60) with a grain of salt for now. We are getting close to finding the truth. There could be a bias that shifts everything in one direction. We’ll see.

We want to have many eyes on this data before we will announce a definitive result.

I’m making all the data to date available for people to validate or invalidate the result. I’ll periodically update the spreadsheet as we collect more data.

We’ll be collecting a lot more data to refine the result and employ 3 different third party survey firms as well. This eliminates the risk of people trying to game the survey (not that anyone would do that). So if the independent polling firm results don’t match our results, we’ll look for what happened. Using five or more sources of independent data (mine, Joe’s, 3 polling firms, etc.) will give everyone more confidence that the results are valid.

Note that the definition of vaccinated here is “got the vaccine” not “two weeks after they got the vaccine.” We are NOT using public data that is encumbered this way. Such definitions are misleading since if the vaccine kills everyone within two weeks of the shot, the vaccines look amazingly safe and not being vaccinated looks risky.

Notes on Figure 1 from Joel Smalley

Joel Smalley did the analysis of the two datasets described below.

Figure 1 represents the percentage of deaths between Jan ’21 and May ’22 that were of vaccinated people of different age groups compared to the expected percentage of deaths.

The expected percentage was determined as a function of the vaccinated population on the day of death of a vaccinated or unvaccinated person in the dataset.

The expected value was calculated by randomly selecting a number from 1 to 100 and specifying it as vaccinated if it was at or below the vaccinated population for that age range on that day. Otherwise, it would be considered an unvaccinated death.

The model was run 1,000 times and the average point estimate taken to be the expected value with a confidence interval of 2 standard deviations from the mean.

The survey

There were two versions of the survey.

The first one left too much wiggle room in the responses so the first 931 results need to be scrubbed to put in a consistent format to be usable. I modified the survey mid-survey so that messes things up a bit; that column needs to be normalized.

If someone would like to volunteer to do that, please note that in the comments and then email me the updated spreadsheet at stevekirsch-request (at) protonmail.com. That email is NOT monitored by me and if you send anything there other than in response to a specific request it will be ignored.

The data

PostVaxMortality1: 932 rows. Note that I changed things around mid survey, so be careful. This is the database I need someone to clean up and I’ll replace it, e.g., “Days after dose” column was changed from fill in to choose 1. However, most of the other columns are fine so you can use them immediately. Just check the column first.

PostVaxMortality2: 834 rows. No need to fix the data. Use immediately

Here is the CDC vaccination data used to determine the person-years of each dose bucket (and the unvaccinated bucket) over time.

Technical logistics

  1. It took me about an hour to design the survey questions and about 25 minutes to create the Google form
  2. It took me about 20 minutes to write up a promo on substack and launch the survey
  3. It took 24 hours to get over 1,000 responses
  4. It took Joel 30 minutes to analyze the results

That’s damn time efficient. Can’t imagine why the CDC can’t replicate this?

Limitations

  1. Most of the respondents were my followers so can be classified as “anti-vaxx.” However, this survey makes the case that the vaccines work for those over 60. If it was biased that people were only reporting people with vaccines who died right after, this signal would be impossible. So it’s unlikely there is selection bias, but there could be. That’s why we are using 3 outside survey firms for our next data collection.
  2. Joel did the analysis very quickly and may not have adjusted for all the biases and confounders that are always present.
  3. Nobody else has had a chance yet to replicate or refute the result on the data collected so far.
  4. Things to consider that could affect the final result include: the virus IFR changes over time, the age mix of people in the vaccinated group changes, background death rates are seasonal and differ in each age range, people may report someone who dies 13 days after Dose 1 to be unvaccinated, people who answer the survey.
  5. For the purposes of this survey, only the date, age at death, and vaccination status of the deceased matter. These can be misreported.
  6. There may be an error in the analysis.
  7. There may be errors in the public underlying data such as reporting vaccination status as vaccinated 14 days after the jab rather than at the moment of the jab.
  8. This is not a complete list.

In short, we’re getting very close to the truth.

Was my sample biased?

The survey data we use is objective, fact-based questions: date, age, got vax?

The results we got show the younger you are, the harder to justify the vaccines are. This shouldn’t surprise anyone.

People don’t get to chose who dies. But they could have selective recall.

However the results were consistent with other research.

In her interview with Freddie Sayers, Professor Christine Stabell Benn said her best guess on current data is that those under 50 probably don’t benefit from the vaccine. She has been looking at non-specific effects of vaccines and finds the mRNA vaccines may have been associated with an overall higher mortality from non-covid related issues.

What will happen next

One of two things will happen now:

  1. The medical community will do their own survey and replicate the result and realize they’ve been had. They will call a halt to the vaccine immediately for those under 60.
  2. The medical community will fail to replicate the result and call me a misinformation spreader. However, this will only cause them to dig themselves even deeper into a hole because they know other independent people will be able to replicate it. There will not be a rock big enough for them to hide under.

Will the medical community double down in the face of evidence they cannot refute? Or admit they made the biggest error of all time?

Finally, it is ridiculous that nobody in the world has done a similar survey and published the results. Nothing prevented anyone from doing this. The only person that I’m aware of doing this is UCSF Professor Aditi Bhargava. I’m a major funder of her work.

Anyone could have done the same survey I did. It took only an hour or so to create the survey the first time and I had 1,000 results back less than 24 hours later. Why is the CDC incapable of doing this?

Why isn’t there a proper risk benefit analysis of these vaccines from the CDC? We have NOTHING.

Nobody in the medical community demanded evidence of a positive risk-benefit. You can’t assume that the vaccines are safe. That would be trusting a drug company who has stated, without any evidence whatsoever, that all the excess deaths in the vaccine group were not related to the vaccine. The FDA and medical community accept their word without asking for proof.

Nobody wanted to see the risk benefit analysis. Did you ever hear the VRBPAC or ACIP committee members asking for one? Of course not!!

So I did it using the VAERS data and the UK ONS data and here’s what I found:

If I got it wrong, where is the CORRECT analysis of that same data? People like to throw darts at my work, but they NEVER show me the CORRECT analysis of the same data set. I wonder why that is? Some claim the VAERS data is “unreliable” but that’s a lame excuse for not looking at. Nothing keeps you from doing a proper analysis and then having a Limitations section that notices that VAERS is underreported.

Why isn’t there a study that follows 100,000 unvaccinated people over time vs. 100,000 vaccinated in equally matched groups and observing how many people are alive after each week in the two groups and categorize each death as COVID or not. You’d look at the benefit (decrease in # of COVID deaths compared to the unvaccinated group) and risk (increase in non-COVID all-cause mortality in the vaccinated group) and compute the ratio. That gives you a risk benefit analysis stratified by age and you can see how the risk/benefit changes over time so people can answer the question, “If I am age xxx, does it make sense for me to be vaccinated today?”

Nobody has asked for this. Why? Do we not want to know?

Any sane society should be DEMANDING such an analysis before even considering approving such a drug. Mandating a drug with no risk benefit analysis that is obviously not being done is the height of irresponsibility.

Why is nobody speaking out about this?

Why is it so unreasonable to ask for a risk-benefit analysis BEFORE doctors advise their patients? There is simply no excuse for not computing this from this “real world” mass experiment.

If we don’t have the data, we need to get it before we experiment on people.

We need to stop the experiment now.

Is it the responsibility of electrical engineers to check the work of the medical community?

That this survey and analysis comes from a high tech software executive in Silicon Valley with two EECS degrees from MIT is an embarrassment. This is not my responsibility to do this. I did it because nobody in the government, medical community, no public health official, and nobody in the mainstream media did it. It’s almost as if they didn’t want to know that the vaccine worked or not.

If the vaccines aren’t protective, what can we do? Early treatment!

Just like Dorothy could have always returned to Kansas just by clicking her slippers, we have had the cheapest, safest, and fastest solution to treat COVID available since March 2020.

Early treatment such as the Fareed-Tyson protocol has a near perfect track record against COVID with few hospitalizations and no deaths. The NIH and mainstream doctors (who follow whatever the NIH says) ignore it. That tells you everything.

So what we should be telling people is have the drugs on-hand so you can start treatment ASAP after you get sick.

Instead, the CDC tells people to get vaccinated and that early treatment with repurposed drugs should be ignored.

We’d be better off if everyone listened carefully to what the CDC says and does the opposite. I’m serious. I can’t think of anything they’ve recommended that has been helpful in the pandemic. I’d love to debate them on that. I could sell tickets to that one.

We never needed screening, lockdowns, social distancing, remdesivir, masks, vaccines, etc. All we needed is one thing: let people know early treatment works if given early.

How you can help

  1. If you are into data analysis, have a look at the data (see “The data” section above)
  2. If you live in the UK, please take Joel’s survey of deaths in the UK so we can compare the results.
  3. If you live anywhere else, please take my survey if you have not already

Summary

We now have a simple objective way to assess the safety and efficacy of a vaccine. Anyone can do the surveys themselves to verify the result. Anyone can take our data and analyze it.

The analysis is troubling: nobody under 60 should take the vaccine.

I’m awaiting confirmation from other researchers.

Please share this article so we can collect more data to reduce the size of the error bars. If you are not a subscriber, please subscribe so we can let you know what the subsequent analysis shows.

With your help, we can change the world. Thank you!

Share

A summary of the evidence against the COVID vaccines

Here’s a quick summary of the key pieces of evidence that taken together show that the COVID vaccines are unsafe and that the medical community should…

JAN 7•

STEVE KIRSCH

1,095

375

Latest

Top

Discussions

Alec Zeck’s claims of the “end of virology” are VERY seriously flawed

He calls it “Perhaps The Most Important Work of Our Time.” Hardly. It’s all BAD science that proves (or disproves) absolutely nothing other than it is…

JUN 16•

STEVE KIRSCH

184

709

How can millions of people, all exhibiting signs of COVID have whole genome sequences that match the SARS-CoV-2 reference genome if viruses…

Do you know? They were sequenced from scratch. The machines computed the sequences solely based on the samples under test using random primers.

JUN 14•

STEVE KIRSCH

378

1,599

VSRF LIVE Tonight – I Debate Dr. Andrew Kaufman, M.D. about the Existence of the COVID 19 Virus

Thursday, June 13th: 7pm Eastern | 4pm Pacific

JUN 13•

STEVE KIRSCH

133

181

NOBODY can explain what happened at Apple Valley Village

Apple Valley Village Health Care center had 0% COVID death rate before the shots rolled out, but a 30% death rate from COVID **AFTER** the “lifesaving…

JUN 8•

STEVE KIRSCH

794

250

VSRF LIVE Tonight – Live from the #ReAwaken Tour in Detroit

Thursday, June 6th: 7pm Eastern | 4pm Pacific

JUN 6•

STEVE KIRSCH

81

14

How many kids under age 21 did the COVID vaccines kill?

We know there were no benefits. How many kids, aged 20 and under, died from the COVID shots? PLEASE HELP ME FIND OUT.

JUN 4•

STEVE KIRSCH

413

204

HPV Vaccine

The war on adolescents

PUBLISHED ON DR’S NEWSLETTER•JUN 4See all

Steve Kirsch's newsletter

Steve Kirsch’s newsletter

I write about COVID mitigation policies, vaccines, corruption, censorship, and early treatments. The data shows that vaccines are ruining the health of Americans and driving the epidemic in a variety of health conditions.

———————Next————————————-

June 17, 2024 › Censorship/Surveillance › COVID › News

COVID

‘Silent Epidemic’: Maine Lawmakers Shrug Off 18% Increase in Excess Deaths

Rep. Heidi Sampson, a Republican legislator from Maine, said the state’s Democratic lawmakers “shrugged their shoulders” when she proposed investigating the increase in sudden deaths since 2020 among young and middle-aged adults in Maine with no known previous illness.

by John-Michael Dumais

JUNE 17, 2024

heidi sampson and increasing chart with word death

9250 PAGEVIEWSREPUBLISH 

PRINTSHARE

 33 COMMENTS

Rep. Heidi Sampson, a Republican legislator from Maine, in recent months made headlines for her actions on the floor of the Maine House of Representatives, where she presented alarming data on Maine’s “silent epidemic” of excess deaths.

She also raised critical questions about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines and warned against the growing influence of international organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO).

Excess death data ‘literally earthshaking’

As the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, Sampson grew increasingly concerned about the data showing a rise in excess deaths among young and middle-aged adults in Maine.

In March, she decided to take action. Using 2015-2022 Maine all-cause mortality data analyzed by a statistician, she told her colleagues that Maine has since 2020 seen close to an 18% increase in excess deaths among 25- to 64-year-olds.

The spike in excess deaths for 2020 was 6.3% compared to the background rate of about 1.5% from 2015-2020.

Sampson cited the CEO of the One America insurance company, saying he “publicly disclosed that during the third and fourth quarter of 2021, death in people of working age 18 to 64 was 40% higher than it was before the pandemic.”

“This data was compiled by actuaries who are the mathematical experts insurance companies rely upon,” she said. “A 40% increase in deaths is literally earthshaking. Even a 10% increase in excess deaths would have been a 1-in-200-year event.”

She went on to describe the increasingly common phenomenon of “sudden deaths,” citing examples such as death by heart attack, stroke, meningitis, brain aneurysm, pulmonary embolism, anaphylaxis and asthma.

She encouraged lawmakers to do their own searches. “You will find hundreds, even thousands, of examples. A few years ago, this was unheard of.”

Sampson said the newly coined term “sudden death syndrome (SDS)” was a “silent epidemic” that demanded immediate attention and investigation.

She told lawmakers:

“SDS is an umbrella term. It includes biologically based scenarios describing [the] quick onset of unexpected mortality without prior signs of illness. I’ll repeat: without prior signs of illness.

Autopsies may be non-conclusive due to the lack of obvious abnormalities. They may also be non-conclusive because we may not be asking the right questions.”

Citing what she called the “shocking” nature of the data, Sampson called for the Maine House to investigate.

“If there is even a chance this data is correct, we have the moral obligation to our children to investigate,” she said. “This data represents a flashing red light.”

However, despite her efforts, Maine lawmakers swiftly rejected Sampson’s joint order, along party lines. “The Democrats could not reject this order fast enough,” she told The Defender.

Two Democratic lawmakers, both doctors, approached her after her speech, wanting to know where she got the data and stating they thought the increased deaths were due to suicides.

In other discussions, Sampson said people didn’t want to believe the data. She encouraged them to “trust but verify” and asked why they were not doing their due diligence to investigate.

“They just shrugged their shoulders,” she said.

“We shut the whole damn state down for 6%,” she said. “What are we doing with almost 18%? As a mother and a grandmother, this entire issue deeply concerns me. I want my children and their children to have long, healthy lives. We need to get to the bottom of this.”

The Vaccine Safety Project

LEARN MORE

V-safe data ‘a resounding alarm’ on vaccine harms

In addition to her concerns about excess deaths, Sampson also has been a vocal advocate for vaccine safety and transparency.

In a separate action on the House floor on April 3, she presented alarming data from the CDC’s V-safe surveillance system, which tracks adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, and called for a ban on these vaccines.

Sampson began by explaining the significance of the V-safe data, noting that it was collected from over 10 million people who were among the first to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

“These were excited participants, eager for this new novel vaccine,” she said. “They wanted it to be safe and effective. They believed it was a good thing, and therefore would have no incentives to make up their stories.”

She revealed the shocking results of the V-safe data analysis:

“7.7%, or 782,013 people, needed medical attention. Of those 7.7%, 70% needed to be hospitalized or went to the ER or urgent care. Slightly less than 30% needed telehealth care. On average, each person needed medical attention two to three times.

“Additionally, 13% of the individuals reported they were unable to go to work or go to school, and about 12% were unable to perform normal activities.”

Sampson noted another 2.5 million people had to miss school, work or other normal activities. “This means 33% of unique individuals were affected by negative health impacts.”

She also highlighted the concerning symptoms reported in the free-text entries of the V-safe survey, including chest pains, heart palpitations, shortness of breath, tinnitus, menstrual disturbances and miscarriages.

Calling these statistics “a resounding alarm,” Sampson asked her colleagues to halt all COVID-19 vaccinations.

“The data are in — it is not safe and effective,” she said. “And until the federal government removes the liability shield from the vaccine manufacturers, the COVID-19 shot must be removed from the Maine market.”

Sampson told the Defender she once again faced resistance from her colleagues. She described their response as tense and uncomfortable, with many refusing to engage in further discussion or consider the implications of the V-safe data.

Did DOJ Lawyers Commit Fraud in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding?

LEARN MORE

Pushback against WHO agenda

As the end of Sampson’s eight-year term limit approaches, she has turned her attention to the WHO agenda and its potential effect on Maine’s sovereignty and self-determination.

On April 11, she warned her Maine House colleagues about the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations, arguing that they would grant the organization sweeping powers to dictate public health policies at the expense of individual states’ rights.

“Did you consent to it?” she asked her colleagues. “I know I didn’t.”

She warned about the critical votes of the World Health Assembly that took place several weeks ago in Geneva, Switzerland, explaining how these policies would be binding to Maine and other states “unless we make a clear declaration they have no authority.”

With the assistance of Dr. Meryl Nass and the information on the Door to Freedom website, Sampson provided her colleagues with a wealth of background information on the WHO’s agenda.

She highlighted specific aspects of the WHO’s agenda that she found particularly concerning, such as the proposed BioHub pathogen-sharing system and the push for nations to develop genetic sequencing labs.

This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.

The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.

PLEASE DONATE TODAY

“Does anyone see a problem with this?” she asked. “Is it just me? What about the high risks of lab leaks?”

Sampson said her colleagues “very quickly” voted down this joint order, also.

“It was heart-sickening to watch my colleagues on the other side of the aisle rapidly stand, object, and vote against this motion,” Sampson wrote.

“All I can say is now they are responsible for the information they have heard,” she told The Defender. “It is on the record.”

As Sampson prepares to leave the Maine House of Representatives, she shows no signs of slowing down in her fight for health freedom.

Sampson’s experiences in the legislature have only reinforced her belief in the importance of being a “squeaky wheel” and speaking truth to power, even in the face of overwhelming opposition.

She is spearheading the Maine Education Project, an initiative to expose the failures of the state’s education system and empower parents, teachers and school board members to effect change.

John-Michael Dumais

John-Michael Dumais

John-Michael Dumais is a news editor for The Defender. He has been a writer and community organizer on a variety of issues, including the death penalty, war, health freedom and all things related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

———————–NEXT————————————

The struggle or fight between the forces of light and Dark now on earth. Please click on the link for the original video/link please.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nU-p_7kbQk
Fraud to be disclosed.

☣️WHEN FRAUD WILL BE DISCLOSED!!

The Truth Can Change Your Life

Support my work on Subscribestar: https://www.subscribestar.com/truth-c…

Special thanks for your support joining our Youtube membership

Join us on 👇:
💜 / truthcanchangeyourlife
💜 / 384441361989233

Voice-over Recording , Audio & Video Production by Truth Can Change Your Life Youtube Channel

5D #Starseeds #EndTimeMadness

Transcript

Greetings my dear beloved children;
today I would like to talk about the current events taking place on your planet I see my dear that your patience is failing since the agony of dark’s henchmen on Earth is being delayed and sometimes it seems to you that they are winning actually it is no.

Ques so the things now in progress on the planet Earth have no analoges in the universe while change of epics used to be realized either by global cataclysms that wiped off Earth entire continents with their inhabitants or due to the intervention of extraterrestrial races that annihilated your planet’s population with mass destruction weapon.
Now Earth is moving to another energy space with the humanity Representatives who have managed in prompt time to cover the road of spiritual Evolution and to increase their vibrations up to the level enabling them to make this transition.
But those who have hold sway over your planet for so many centuries cannot put up with the fact they are losing their prey and are trying tooth and nail to keep their power on Earth remember my series of message about the higher Archy pyramid of power on Earth.

While at the subtle level this pyramid has almost gone to Pieces the executors of the program on Humanity Annihilation embodied as humans are still vehemently struggling for their life it is them who sew panic and fear among Earth’s population making people accept the procedure fateful for them the the one insidiously disguised as injection that most people on the planet associate with the salutary means rescuing them from diseases until the mass media are in the grip of the criminals who seized Earth it is extremely hard to turn the tide the voices of thousands and thousands of pure human Souls trying to convey truth to people get lost in the tremendous flow of Li proceeding from TV screens newspapers and magazines Pages as well as the internet you see how alternative sources of information are being ousted out of the internet how censorship is Raging.

Added and not part of the video/link

The world upside down. Instead of doing there work the so-called elected politicians are busy to sell us and pushing through the so-called NWO-Alien contact agenda.

It is quite obvious that the Rockefellers helped establish and finance the Chicoms, just as they have done with the Bolsheiviks several decades before. After visiting China and surveying its “progress” in 1973, David Rockefeller stated, “One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony…. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution it has obviously succeeded… in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive….The enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly form the singleness of ideology and purpose…. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.”

Reading the above quote and looking at the picture of Rockefeller and Zhou Enlai, I am immediately reminded of George Orwell’s masterful (and prophetic) book, Animal Farm. In the book, a wealthy “Mr. Pilkington” visits a farm operated by communist totalitarian pigs who were supposed to be rebelling against him and everything he represented. Here is a section from the final chapter:

“Too many farmers had assumed, without due enquiry, that on such a farm a spirit of licence and indiscipline would prevail. They had been nervous about the effects upon their own animals, or even upon their human employees. But all such doubts were now dispelled. Today he and his friends had visited Animal Farm and inspected every inch of it with their own eyes, and what did they find? Not only the most up-to-date methods, but a discipline and an orderliness which should be an example to all farmers everywhere. He believed that he was right in saying that the lower animals on Animal Farm did more work and received less food than any animals in the county. Indeed, he and his fellow-visitors today had observed many features which they intended to introduce on their own farms immediately.”

Those words were written in 1945, nearly two decades before David Rockefeller’s trip to China. Today, the Council on Foreign Relations (again, through its nefarious publication, Foreign Affairs) is hyping the preferred “China Model” of state capitalism as the most efficient way of managing economies and societies.

I should also mention that it was George Soros who said that China, by its example, would lead the West into the New World Order.

What we are witnessing is an inside struggle between different faction in the NWO/Alien and positions of power. China will get the lead as agreed. ( Jan)

Orwell was right again.


How persecution is Rife and rampant towards honest doctors lawyers and journalists.
The palpy of the Dragon reptiles have reached every corner of your planet and every person tracking
their actions and hunting them every time they feel danger coming from them just imagine my dear the large
scale of the work that is being carried out by the representatives of the light forces on Earth.
Every minute putting their life at risk to deliver Humanity from digital enslavement and let the best representatives of it to make a unique transition.

I into another dimension in their physical bodies their matter Brooks no haste and is regulated
from higher Dimensions they are getting enormous support but as enormous is their sphere of activity because it
Embraces not some specific country but all the planet of yours the enemy is too dangerous my dear
and they have nothing to lose.

Feeling their soon collapse the shadow government’s marionet have staked it all limiting people’s freedoms to the utmost yet by their actions have got just the opposite effect millions of people have risen to fight for their rights and though it happens unevenly in different countries the infeed of the energies of freedom and desire to dispose of one’s life into the collective human conscience has already outweighed the energy of apathy and obedience typical of the co-called average man.

Light always wins over dark and the energy of unity and freedom always wins over the energy of fear and
cility as their vibrations are incomparable so please my dear when you suddenly lose heart and it seems your strength is draining away sit for a meditation and send your love and support to all the Warriors of light both on Earth and in heaven then the streamlet of your energy will join the vigorous High vibration torrent of the best representatives of humanity that will wash away the last traces of dark’s henchmen and will encourage the long awaited disclosure that will become the turning point of Earth’s rebirth and that of her best inhabitants as well.

I would like to digress from our topic and talk about how Mass protests taking place in many countries of the world influence the current situation on Earth.

I see that for many of you it seems they do not bring the desired effect since restrictive measures for
the side of the ruling top are just getting toughened it is actually not true people’s protests do not simply
frighten the Govern governments of these countries they make them panic because they understand that globalist plans are falling apart at the seams and that it is field employees for these plans implementation who will have to answer for their criminal actions before the nation those who pushed them.

Into to this will remain in the shadow while the atonement will overcome those in the public eye the ones who gave orders spoke on TV and criticized those who disagree but having a feeling of the impending catastrophe immediate executors are becoming still more aggressive as they are perfectly aware that confessing their mistakes cannot mitigate their lot this time too horrible are the consequences of the injections fatal for humans.

They promote what frightens them most is the moment when the fraud will be disclosed and it is already in progress all across the globe and only those deep in dorcy cannot notice this these marionet of the world government keep afloat just thanks to the fact that all the mass media are still in their grip.

But as soon as alternative trustworthy sources of information appear the truth like a powerful stream will gush out being fortified by irrefutable facts and proofs now on Earth there are two parallel realities that are to cross soon.


Anyway because the degree of lie in the mainstream media has reached its maximum being aware they have nothing left to lose now the executives at all the levels of power decided to stake everything trying to stifle the growing discontent of of the society by forc making use of all the facilities at hand physical moral and financial.


But as you can see the result appears to be just the opposite more and more people start to revive and feel being deceived it is quite soon now when Mass people’s disorders will sweep away all the Absurd restrictions and the salutary injections imposed by force and it will be the very victory that was spoken about in my recent message people will win over Freedom with their own strengths by realizing the current events and understanding who are at the helm right now and what actual goals of these rulers are unfortunately Mass Revival will not occur though but the best part of humanity will manage to defend their freedom and stop the criminal activities of the deep State and I am happy that many of you will find themselves among these brave people who did not yield to the Menace and provocations for the side of the ruling top your unity and solidarity will work a miracle and believe me my dear your Victory is close now.

Now now we will digress a little from our topic and we’ll talk about the current developments at the physical level the cornered representatives of the world government their field employees to be exact are now desperately trying to bring till final Victory the human enslavement plan they have been carefully contrived for years in some countries their attempts have really been a success and now we will try to find out why it has happened and on the contrary why in other countries their plans face Reckless opposition for the side of their Nations.
As a matter of fact my dear pure human Souls always tell the truth from a Lie by intuition and especially when it is their soul their Divine hypostasis that is endangered.

And if to follow this principle according to the reaction of this or that country’s population there can be made conclusions on its population elements in terms of living beings embodied as humans as well as the amount of clones among them.

As you see the least opposition to the Absurd and inhumane demands of the authorities was shown by the inhabitants of China who have accepted the new conditions of their existence in an almost unmm way.

It is just the location of huge Laboratories for clone production who were evenly distributed all over the country it is mainly due to this that the economy of China has revived so quickly where whole armies of clones were created for certain types of activities with their efficiency and endurance many times exceeding those of an average man the same thing on a smaller scale though occurs in some other Asian countries with a low level of culture and education with national and religious Traditions being based on submission to the customs and traditions established from above.

Both social and religious ones as far as European countries and American continent countries are concerned a lot here is determined by Collective consciences of beings embodied as humans
and they are numerous indeed as you know. As for people with two souls in whose physical bodies human Souls exist side by side with Souls of other races and civilizations.

Representatives everything is determined by the level of these people’s vibrations since all the media are aimed at filling people with fear for their life all these negative energies are responded to first of all by low
vibration souls in the human body because it is these energies that are native and dear to them.
Therefore human souls are stifled and as a result of mass psychosis and fear for one’s life most of such people also become obedient executors of all the Authority’s rules and instructions this is what was staked at by those who have arranged this Balia on Earth they are well informed about the actual composition of your planet’s population yet they did not take into consideration that the pure and ancient human souls in minority will be able to turn the tide which is the case now in many countries of the world.
The pure energy of the human soul has turned out so powerful that has managed to outweigh the energy of hundreds of thousands of weak and intimidated creatures which came as an unpleasant surprise to the dragon reptiles and Orion who came to believe in their omnipotence.

This is due to this energy that mass Revival on Earth is taking place like fairy tale Heroes all across
the globe there have risen pure human Souls who are ready to sacrifice their life but not their freedom they have
rebelled against the dragons eager to ens slave them and will bring this fight till final Victory.

I believe in you my dear and know that your efforts will be a success by all means since you are supported by all the light forces of the universe with your Galaxy brothers and sisters being among them I bless you and love you immensely.

Father absolute spoke to you

Links of electricity-from-space;

A New Financial System Just To Steal Your Assets nearing completion?

The real motives behind the increase in totalitarian control and introduction of new laws?

Our Cristal mind and changing functions due to our changing environment.

5000 patents blocked because of the so-called national security only to partly resurfaces now.

Planet earth is on the move & humanity affected.

Urgent: A message of extreme importance today the most crucial period of your planet’s entrance into the space of 5D has started

Super connectivity at room temperature and missing key to understand free electric energy.

Sound & Vibrational Medicine & Tesla.

Why this industry should be in public hands.

The Tesla World?

Use of frequencies and effects on our bio energy field that surrounds our body.

Owners of the empire

Finite Element Model for Atmospheric IR-Absorption Joseph Reynen. (CO2)

Free energy and T. E. Bearden, Ph.D

Free energy from space and the Climate Debate.

The climate debate!