I think there's one point for improvement. "Acute toxicity" is a very narrow view within the hundred other ways that these molecular combinations can eventually cause death. By focusing on this terminology, you risk having an audience not familiar with the breadth of Spike pathology misuse your work to say that "little (observable) *acute* toxicity" = "not harmful".
Falling into this trap is what pharmaceuticals / regulatory agencies have historically relied on in order to define "safety": if it's not a gunshot with death 30 minutes later, then it is defined as "safe" (think of the historic battles to have tobacco / asbestos danger acknowledged).
In our case, it is already well established in the medical literature that a great number of organs and cell types are targeted by the Spike motif and therefore for immune attack and eventual destruction. This takes time – it won't be acute, but it may be debilitating and deadly – something that your data may be showing us if we stop focusing on "acute".
For this reason, you may consider rewording some of these points here so that conclusions are not drawn prematurely.
I agree that excess mortality in 2022 can not have been caused by acute toxicity alone, but it might still play a significant part. Around 92% of deaths have occurred in the 60+ age group. In this group, 38% have had four or more jabs, and basically all of these have been dealt out in 2022.
What is the time frame of “acute toxicity” as you are using it? How long is an individual under exposure of either a modRNA product itself or its translated payload, the spike protein after an injection?
Looking forward to your thoughts on 2022. I was heavily coerced into the first 2 shots early 2021 and would like to know when I can stop worrying quite so much about this. However, I will never stop being angry about the manipulations and allowing myself to be bullied into going against my instincts. What is meant by 'COVID-19 sequesters'?
Many patients in my view as dr test positive for Covid 19 short after Covid 19 bioweapon injection. They get sick - I observe personel stay at home because of the
injection weeks after. Since PCR test is not reliable (too many cycles, wrong primers, temperature etc see Drosten retraction paper, K. Mullis) the so called "therapeutic effect" you see is that injection causes harm/illness and therefore it is mistaken to be Covid 19.
The shots cause autoimmune disease as Germanys best Histopathologist Burkhardt (died last year) showed in autopsies. The nanolipids are poisenous (cathionic lipids, SM 102 in Moderna for example). People get clots, myocarditis, Guillaine Barré etc which I have observed in practice.
Foreign proteins especially produced for long time are toxic, induce autoimmune disease. The body attacks itself. Christian Müeller noticed
Myocarditis among 3% of employees in University of Basel after 3:ed dose Pfizer. Pardekooper proved that different batches have wildly different amount and grade of sideeffects. That implies experimentation with different concentrations of ingredients and different ingredients in different batches. Look up former Pfizer chief scientist Mike Yeadons comment on this! So in my opinion your inerpretation is wrong. This are not vaccines. They do not protect. This is desinformation as I view it that in 2022 they lowered excess mortality.
This is a lot of work and good data to build on.
I think there's one point for improvement. "Acute toxicity" is a very narrow view within the hundred other ways that these molecular combinations can eventually cause death. By focusing on this terminology, you risk having an audience not familiar with the breadth of Spike pathology misuse your work to say that "little (observable) *acute* toxicity" = "not harmful".
Falling into this trap is what pharmaceuticals / regulatory agencies have historically relied on in order to define "safety": if it's not a gunshot with death 30 minutes later, then it is defined as "safe" (think of the historic battles to have tobacco / asbestos danger acknowledged).
In our case, it is already well established in the medical literature that a great number of organs and cell types are targeted by the Spike motif and therefore for immune attack and eventual destruction. This takes time – it won't be acute, but it may be debilitating and deadly – something that your data may be showing us if we stop focusing on "acute".
For this reason, you may consider rewording some of these points here so that conclusions are not drawn prematurely.
I agree that excess mortality in 2022 can not have been caused by acute toxicity alone, but it might still play a significant part. Around 92% of deaths have occurred in the 60+ age group. In this group, 38% have had four or more jabs, and basically all of these have been dealt out in 2022.
"The high excess mortality rates of 2022 can not be explained by acute toxicity of COVID-19 immunization products."
The word "acute" is the key. Remove that condition and the data makes perfect sense. Long term side effect coming into focus.
Curious. Why did you omit 2021 for SH?
What is the time frame of “acute toxicity” as you are using it? How long is an individual under exposure of either a modRNA product itself or its translated payload, the spike protein after an injection?
Looking forward to your thoughts on 2022. I was heavily coerced into the first 2 shots early 2021 and would like to know when I can stop worrying quite so much about this. However, I will never stop being angry about the manipulations and allowing myself to be bullied into going against my instincts. What is meant by 'COVID-19 sequesters'?
Very interesting. Perhaps you can help me.
Pfizer changed its formula in late 2021 to replace the Phosphate buffer with Tromethamine, aka Tris, Trometamol, THAM.
After frozen stocks of the old product were used up, is there evidence that the Pfizer Tromethamine jab is killing more people?
Moderna also contained Tromethamine from the outset but killed less people than Pfizer Phosphate version.
ALC-0315 is unique to Pfizer, also used from the beginning.
Many patients in my view as dr test positive for Covid 19 short after Covid 19 bioweapon injection. They get sick - I observe personel stay at home because of the
injection weeks after. Since PCR test is not reliable (too many cycles, wrong primers, temperature etc see Drosten retraction paper, K. Mullis) the so called "therapeutic effect" you see is that injection causes harm/illness and therefore it is mistaken to be Covid 19.
The shots cause autoimmune disease as Germanys best Histopathologist Burkhardt (died last year) showed in autopsies. The nanolipids are poisenous (cathionic lipids, SM 102 in Moderna for example). People get clots, myocarditis, Guillaine Barré etc which I have observed in practice.
Foreign proteins especially produced for long time are toxic, induce autoimmune disease. The body attacks itself. Christian Müeller noticed
Myocarditis among 3% of employees in University of Basel after 3:ed dose Pfizer. Pardekooper proved that different batches have wildly different amount and grade of sideeffects. That implies experimentation with different concentrations of ingredients and different ingredients in different batches. Look up former Pfizer chief scientist Mike Yeadons comment on this! So in my opinion your inerpretation is wrong. This are not vaccines. They do not protect. This is desinformation as I view it that in 2022 they lowered excess mortality.
if covid vaccines stop covid deaths, then why do they keep bending curves the wrong way?
another look at the US data
el gato malo
Jan 18
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/if-covid-vaccines-stop-covid-deaths?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Bradford-Hill Criteria – a scientific method that exposes the lethal, unsafe and ineffective C19 mRNA injections
Peter Halligan
Jan 14
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/bradford-hill-criteria-a-scientific