A total of over 200k US excess deaths in the second half of 2021 can be attributed to vaccinations. The situation was anticipated, pre-bunked and covered up by government and media.
Excellent and horrifying summary of the longer article! (And good call to make it more succinct for the general public.) Your hard work and obvious dedication is much appreciated by this citizen champion for scientific integrity and truth!
I don't normally, but I will indulge myself to a shot in the dark, since building network in the Resistance is key and we seem to have some competence overlap. Do you happen to be situated in south-western Germany the next few days?
I am in the North, but am actually taking a trip to Berlin for the Bundestags event with a few fellow champions for integrity speaking there on the weekend. Some of them are leaving for the South after, so I could probably catch a ride down there. Not much on my plate next week. I'll drop you an email.
This seems to point to the "intended outcome" whereby a well planned campaign to "explain fatalities as being caused by 'the disease' rather than the vaccine (within certain, and relatively few batches or lots) with the specific mechanism being obscured both by the propaganda and the disingenuous removal of the newly vaccinated from the vaccinated cohort, since the vaccine was claimed to be ineffective within the given 28 days (or similar timeline - I seem to remember varying limits by locality?). That ongoing campaign to obscure the vaccinated and unvaccinated became critical to promulagating the ideology and propaganda of Covid and remains so today with many learned people struggling to clarify this abuse of science. We should be wary of this technique and your work may be significant ultimately in this exposure. Anyway just a spitball from me ....
Thank you for clarifying! I would like to include your plot chart in a compendium I'm preparing called "Mechanisms of Harm: Medicine in the Time of Covid-19." Your work is amazing, but hard to understand for those of us who are not so attuned to the scientific/mathematical/engineering-type way of thinking ;-). My intention is to explain your chart in a way that makes it accessible and crystal clear to the average person just how devastating these Covid shots have been. Thank you again for your remarkable efforts.
Nov 9, 2023·edited Nov 9, 2023Liked by Fabian Spieker
It’s bizarre that “excess deaths” is no longer a story of interest to the “watchdog” press or official “truth-seeking” organizations. In short, many people in an official and “trusted” capacity should have done this same research and analysis. As you point out, maybe they did. The important point is that this analysis CANNOT reach the mainstream public (see this article):
In another recent article, I argue that “Covid” as we know it could not have happened WITHOUT excess deaths. A virus that’s not deadly wouldn’t serve the Establishment’s purposes. So they had to have massive numbers of panic-causing “excess deaths.” My hunch has always been that the Covid PCR tests were manipulated (via cycle thresholds) to create the requisite number of Covid cases … and then, more importantly, “Covid deaths.”
As the author points out in this excellent piece, the real excess deaths were caused entirely by the “life-saving” non-vaccines and iatrogenic/panic factors including collateral deaths from lockdowns, etc. A novel new virus - created in a lab or emerging from some bats in China - did NOT cause this massive spike in deaths. The mandated/coerced responses of our “leaders” caused these deaths … which are still occurring.
Excellent summation Fabian, but speaking as a lay person (who appreciates the simplification), I would like to know what your opposition would say to this ( I do not mean the ones who would play the game of "its oversimplification and therefore invalid statistically")? I understand, from Wilson Sy's argument about the Bradford Hill criterion of temporality with regard to excess mortality and the inevitable causality that may be attributed to the injections, which is apparent here too with your article, but to translate this into the popular domain, exposing their lies, remains the stumbling block. Most people will not engage with this evidence, don't understand it, cannot read the graphs or the intricacies of specialised debate, etc (I'm sure you know only too well). Our Senator Malcolm Roberts tried to supply the Big Pharma stooges with Wilson's artcle in our Australian Senate last week, they snubbed him and proferred "a peer-reviewed, published article" which, they claimed proves the "safety of the vaccines". Same lies, different venue .... Anyway the point is we need to compile the arguments, provide the simplified versions for the layperson, anticipate the lies and distortions, expose those too and have a global clearinghouse for the key arguments. It is just this latter aspect that we seem to lack - but your contribution here is invaluable and I thank you for every number analysed and every tear shed in your manifest humanity.
I think the strongest evidence for this we could get are RT-PCR results from those people who were exposed after their first dose. Not whether or not they were positive, but Ct-values. These data are completely missing from scientific literature. Even without linked vaccination status data we should see exceptionally low values during each vaccination wave. It would probably be easier to swallow for a lot of people than a direct link between doses and deaths.
Few people can face the truth if it is too shameful, humiliating and frightening, however presented. This is our greatest problem. And so they will fall for it all next time.
Fabian, really interesting analysis, thanks! When I have time I hope to dig into your longer article, but just from reading this abbreviated version, something doesn't add up. Your analysis led you to the conclusion that during Q3/2021, "we can chalk all 'COVID deaths' up to vaccinations." That doesn't match my personal experience at all. Briefly:
In Q3/2021, the Delta wave was going around here (Texas). My wife and I both had it, with upper respiratory infections, loss of energy, loss of smell (her), etc. We are healthy and took IVM etc. and were OK. We had dear friends here who were hospitalized for weeks with severe pneumonia and on death's door, including one in his 40s and two in their 70s. All these survived but it was extremely rough. A fourth died. (These others weren't on IVM etc., just following medical advice and using over-the-counter cold medications, etc.).
What troubles me with respect to your analysis is that NONE of us was vaccinated. So, clearly, there was a severe viral infection going around that was causing respiratory distress and other symptoms, and this was affecting non-vaccinated people. And that includes people who were truly non-vaccinated, not just vaccinated less than two weeks before illness. This anecdotal experience reflects what was reported by many health agencies. So if all COVID deaths during this time was in recently vaccinated people, how do you account for all the rest of us who also got severely ill (or died) at that time? It makes me wonder about your calculations and whether the data sources are reliable or if perhaps there are assumptions used in your calculations that are unjustified.
Thank-you, and I apologize in advance if you already addressed this concern elsewhere because I only discovered your Substack 30 minutes ago!.
I recommend you read the longer version. I don't make any such claim in that one. This one was for the lazy readers, who don't want to hear "variants", "SARS-CoV-2", "infection enhancement" etc.
You're absolutely correct in assuming not ALL these deaths can be chalked up to COVID, but it looks like most of them can.
I don't think we would've seen a wave like this without first doses being administered at the time.
That doesn't mean you didn't catch a SARS-CoV-2 infection!
Regardless of the role antibody-dependent enhancement plays here, it looks like people who caught the infection right around the time of being vaccinated had a very bad prognosis. A bad prognosis can be expected to be associated with increased viral loads and hence increased transmission.
So if first doses had a profound effect on transmission dynamics (both cases and deaths are strongly correlated with first doses), then the vaccines killed both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals.
Only detailled RT-qPCR data can prove it at this point.
Regarding the official claims. There is very conflicting information.
- From Israel we have a report where an ICU doctor says 90% of individuals were vaccinated during Delta. This is in line with the less dishonest part of scientific literature. There really wasn't much "protection" at all.
- Germany only collected the vaccination status on roughly 10% of patients, so ALL claims German agencies made on this matter are completely unfounded.
- The CDC categorized recently first-dosed individuals (<14 days) as unvaccinated for their vaccine efficacy studies and removed them entirely from their hospitalization data. I guess you could say they forged the data.
There is not one country where a large vaccination wave did not coincide with a large COVID death wave during Delta.
You probably know that it is said that asymptomatic transmission may exist, but should rarely cause severe disease in people who become exposed through an asymptomatic individual.
Similarly, we can expect exposure to individuals with exceptionally high viral loads to cause more severe disease.
When there are 3 individuals in a room with nasopharyngeal viral load X and one individual with nasopharyngeal viral load 2*X, then we would expect the air within this room to have a viral load roughly 25% higher than the air in a room where 4 individuals have viral load x.
If freshly first-dosed individuals suffer higher viral loads, then this will affect everyone in contact with them, even indirectly, because they pass more pathogen on to others, giving the virus a head start, making severe courses more likely.
Under a certain threshold of infectiousness, a virus can not cause an outbreak. If enough individuals are first-dosed at the same time, then the net infectiousness can rise above a certain level, granting the pathogen the power to cause outbreaks. All individuals in these regions will then be affected, regardless of vaccination status.
Without knowing the EXACT impact of first doses on transmission dynamics, I would rather "chalk up all COVID deaths during this time" to vaccinations, then none at all, if you catch my drift. In reality, it is impossible for me to say how many people would've caught COVID during this time without vaccinations, but data from other countries give us a some clues.
Also, out of curiosity, do you know who infected you? Were there any "recently first-dosed" individuals among your friends?
Do you still have your Ct-values? If there was a "recently first-dosed" individual among your infected friends, could you get ahold of his or her Ct-value or Ct-values is this person had more than one test?
I am already talking to a German lab, but I am looking for any data I can get my hands on, particularly if it includes vaccination status information.
Ideally, I want age-stratified time series of Ct-values from multiple locations, plus a case series of individuals where vaccination status is known, including never-vaccinated individuals like you.
So if you can supply any information at all, feel free to write me(at)pervaers.com
Also, have you seen this older paper? It was of interest to the anti-vax community when it was published because it showed that vaccination didn't prevent breakthrough infections of new VOCs. However, for your purposes, it also shows that the viral titers of vaccinated and unvaccinated were similar upon infection.
"Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California"
"Viral loads were significantly higher in symptomatic as compared to asymptomatic vaccine breakthrough cases (p < 0.0001), and symptomatic vaccine breakthrough infections had similar viral loads to unvaccinated infections (p = 0.64)."
Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant
"Here we use this viral load data to compare the amount of SARS-CoV-2 present in test-positive specimens from people who self-report their vaccine status and date of final immunization, during a period in which the delta variant became the predominant circulating variant in Wisconsin. We find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine 'breakthrough' infections." Note that this was during the Delta wave.
The Lancet published a study on community transmission.
"peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type" and "Fully vaccinated individuals with delta variant infection had a faster (posterior probability >0·84) mean rate of viral load decline (0·95 log10 copies per mL per day) than did unvaccinated individuals with pre-alpha (0·69), alpha (0·82), or delta (0·79) variant infections."
Note that some commentators have claimed higher viral load in vaccinated individuals with Delta than had been seen in unvaccinated individuals in the earlier waves. That's true, but that is due to Delta having higher viral loads, not due to vaccination status.
This study showed that not only is peak viral load similar in vaxxed vs. unvaxxed, but the virus is similarly viable and transmissible in both cases. Notably, though peak viral load had previously been found to decrease more rapidly in vaccinated people, this study found that both groups remained infectious for the same time duration.
Yes thank you. I expect extremely high viral loads in early infections (within days of dose 1).
So far I've only found three values in literature. They were from nasopharyngeal swabs taken at autopsy. Ct-values were 9, 11 and 15. 2 alpha, 1 pre-voc. Wrote about that in the main article
As I mentioned separately, India is where Delta emerged, and it was minimally vaccinated at the time. So I do believe there was plenty of transmission between unvaccinated peopled.
I don't think you need much more than a few % of people to be imprinted for specific strains to gain predominance, as long as imprinted people cross paths.
We are retired and had relatively little exposure to people during this time, but did a road trip to visit my family in another state, and on the way back, stopped to visit my sister in Oklahoma. They had some friends join us for lunch, and their healthy young daughter (20's) was there, but was wearing a mask and not eating with us. We asked why, and she said she'd just returned from a trip (via commercial aviation) and had a slight sore throat so was keeping her distance just in case. My wife felt sorry for her and went over and visited with her for 20 minutes. Two days later my wife began having symptoms that progressed, and maybe a week after that I got it. I had stayed isolated during that time. So I got it from my wife, who got it from a young woman in her mid-20s, and she got it from an unknown source during air travel. The young woman was not vaccinated. (She ended up progressing to a severe illness with cardiac issues that lasted for a year). I don't have Ct values.
Maybe some bias is adding to the effect we are observing, because during q3 the less vaccinated regions increased their vax efforts.
I don't think we would've ever seen delta at all if it hadn't been for vaccinations. A study published in the lancet is quite suggestive (but not explicitly so, you're gonna have to read between the lines) of this.
It's not about how many people were vaccinated in total, it is about WHEN they were vaccinated.
Administer first doses into a rising delta wave -> see cases and deaths explode.
States with high first dose coverage administered very few first doses in Q3/2021, so they aren't seeing as many casualties.
This creates a vaccine efficacy illusion. In reality, the vaccines killed all these people, but only/primarily when they became infected days after their first dose.
May have worked if Delta predominantly afflicted the recently vaccinated, far worse than those who abstained. Isn't Q3/2021 when that strain dominated?
1. Innate immunity decompensating upon double-exposure
2. Delta-associated ADE kicking in after a week or so, as soon as the first AB's are produced
Ct values from RT-PCR tests performed on nasopharyngeal swabs could shed light on this. I am trying to acquire age-stratified Ct-value timeseries from labs now.
Great , detailed, important work. Thank you! A couple of questions:
1) Why do you list the days on the plot chart as 0.01, 0.02 - instead of saying Day 1, Day 2, etc.? I shared the plot chart with someone and that was his first question, to which I had no answer.
2) You say "COVID mortality would've been negligible without first doses being administered at the time, so we can chalk all “COVID deaths” up to vaccinations." Is that statement based on looking at Covid deaths for each of the age groups, before the rollout of the vaccines, and comparing with increased Covid deaths post-vaccination? e.g. 25-year olds did not die of Covid in 2020, but all of a sudden, after the first shot, they did
1) The x-axis does not represent time, but the number of first doses administered per capita.
0.01 means a state administered first doses to 1% of the residents aged 50-64 between September 24th and August 23rd. The y-axis represents the total number of COVID deaths per 100k 50-64 year olds living in that state throughout August of 2021. So all it shows is that the states that administered the highest number of first doses were the ones with the most COVID deaths during the Delta outbreak.
2) When you look at the scatter chart, you can see that there was no "wave" in states that administered very few first doses in August. Delta waves happened asynchronously across the world, even though the variant prevalence rose to nearly 100% almost synchronously.
If the innate immune system is overwhelmed by spike protein from two source (injection and infection) or is somehow suppressed by the vaccine, then this not only impacts outcomes in the infected individual, but it should also affect transmission.
So we really have two groups of infected individuals: Those who were recently first-dosed and those who were not. The recently first-dosed individuals seem to be more infectious. For case rates to increase and to form a "wave", infected individual have to infect more than 1 person. If the infected individuals are not infectious enough, there won't be a wave.
And it seems this is the case during Delta predominance. There probably wouldn't have been any wave at all if we hadn't kept on first-dosing people during this time.
Thanks Fabian for that explanation, I am somewhat the wiser. It sounds rather like the concerns I saw Geert Van den Bossche make in relation to non-sterilizing/non-neutralising ABs when the jab roll-outs/mandates started...
Yeah I think ab's are part of it, but they aren't really produced in large amounts in the first few days. Before that its decompensation of innate immunity upon double spike exposure. In that state of decompensation, infection enhancement (through ab's) could have much graver effects. But it's possible that there isn't any infection enhancement at all.
In any case, a lot of freshly first-dosed individuals seem to have died "of COVID" or whatever acute effect of the shots is responsible for this.
Well again from a lay perspective, the Ct-values would potentially add another layer of confusion. However, it did stand out to me when I saw the video of Kary Mullis noting that his PCR invention could not be used for determining virus and should never be used above 20 cycles. Then we had the revelations of the German head of health (Doesten is it?) demanding 44 cycles for the PCR tests! But I am not sure I have understood you correctly? You say the scientific literature is devoid of the data on Ct-values but that "we should see exceptionally low values during each vax wave". do you mean therefore that the nucleic acid will show up in the successive waves at lower and lower Ct levels due to spike protein/LNP? You see how a layperson can trip over themselves here?
My point though would probably be one of my first impressions from your data - how can we see that very link between doses and deaths (data is anonymised right)? I don't think the average person would think differently but I acknowledge that if people understood Ct-values (and if my understanding here is right) then your point would be invaluable - its a long and difficult road to hoe by such a route ... So if I have any advice it would be steer away from the needles in haystacks and provide more of the graphic evidence you have deciphered from the US data for other countries. When I first strayed (or stumbled) across these correlations it was the temporality of deaths and doses from the World Data (John Hopkins) graphs. I showed the Indian results to an Indian engineer who had just returned from India (jabbed and suffering from family loss) and he flat out denied it. It wasn't the first example of studied blindness (free floating anxiety) I had witnessed but it was startling in its determination of denial. He remains so to this day, though a little less fervently. The walls will come down. Cheers!
Well the statistical approach would be to add more variables to the models, create a directed acyclic graph that depicts causal links between variables and show that the relationship still exists when all other important factors are controlled for. But this is a very big task that nobody has approached yet. Well, in fact the entire event has gone unnoticed, possibly because critics tend to ignore covid variables and the all cause excess mortality isn't correlated quite as strongly. The positive correlation is still there though.
RT-PCR tests are nearly useless without Ct-values and ideally information on the primers that were used. They should never be used to attest illness to a person.
What RT-PCR tests can be used for is quantifying the amount of target genetic material in a sample. The Ct-values are inversely associated with the amount of material.
Based on the time-order relationship between cases, deaths and first doses, it seems these deaths that were attributed to COVID occur within days of the first dose.
What happens during that time? The body is still expressing modRNA derived spike protein at very high rates. It seems that when it is confronted with an otherwise harmless infection during this time, the immune system is overwhelmed. This should facilitate higher viral replication rates that should be reflected in lower Ct-values.
Since it seems this only started happening in the second half of 2021, It's possible that infection enhancement exacerbated the problem as soon as the first antibodies were produced.
Yes, unless one is a psychopath running the show...too many. I wonder if there are more of them at this time or if they're feeling bold to no longer hide.
Exactly. Thank you for putting reality reinforcement to my many 'anecdotals'. And still so many ppl getting pneumonia, many recurrently. Will be interesting to see how pneumonia deaths rise 2021-2025 compared to say 2015-2020.
That is something that we are probably not ever gonna see on a large scale. Not in a sincere way. Shame and pride are very strong in most people. So is the unwillingness to regret having done what they thought and more importantly *felt* was right and just is hard to overcome.
I must agree and it pains me to think that we were not just abused and gaslighted. Now we aren’t even validated cause they can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong? I give up!
Yeah, I would agree that this is true for most of the actors, but I still believe there are people out there who acted out of sheer greed and deserve the most severe punishment their respective countries' legislations have in store.
Excellent and horrifying summary of the longer article! (And good call to make it more succinct for the general public.) Your hard work and obvious dedication is much appreciated by this citizen champion for scientific integrity and truth!
<3
Thank you, Tore. I love hearing that.
I don't normally, but I will indulge myself to a shot in the dark, since building network in the Resistance is key and we seem to have some competence overlap. Do you happen to be situated in south-western Germany the next few days?
I am in the North, but am actually taking a trip to Berlin for the Bundestags event with a few fellow champions for integrity speaking there on the weekend. Some of them are leaving for the South after, so I could probably catch a ride down there. Not much on my plate next week. I'll drop you an email.
This seems to point to the "intended outcome" whereby a well planned campaign to "explain fatalities as being caused by 'the disease' rather than the vaccine (within certain, and relatively few batches or lots) with the specific mechanism being obscured both by the propaganda and the disingenuous removal of the newly vaccinated from the vaccinated cohort, since the vaccine was claimed to be ineffective within the given 28 days (or similar timeline - I seem to remember varying limits by locality?). That ongoing campaign to obscure the vaccinated and unvaccinated became critical to promulagating the ideology and propaganda of Covid and remains so today with many learned people struggling to clarify this abuse of science. We should be wary of this technique and your work may be significant ultimately in this exposure. Anyway just a spitball from me ....
Thank you for clarifying! I would like to include your plot chart in a compendium I'm preparing called "Mechanisms of Harm: Medicine in the Time of Covid-19." Your work is amazing, but hard to understand for those of us who are not so attuned to the scientific/mathematical/engineering-type way of thinking ;-). My intention is to explain your chart in a way that makes it accessible and crystal clear to the average person just how devastating these Covid shots have been. Thank you again for your remarkable efforts.
Yeah, I'm horrible at the writing part. :D
I would be very happy if you could find a way to explain this to people.
If you need me to adjust the charts, drop a line to me(at)pervaers.com
Hi Fabian, I just emailed you the explanation I've made of your charts. I sent it to fabianspieker@pervaers.com. Was that correct? Thanks!
Almost, Lori!
fabian(dot)spieker(at)pervaers(dot)com
Better not to type out email addresses here, because that leads to more spam in the inbox.
Ah, good thinking! Okay, I've sent again. Thanks!
Read and replied!
It’s bizarre that “excess deaths” is no longer a story of interest to the “watchdog” press or official “truth-seeking” organizations. In short, many people in an official and “trusted” capacity should have done this same research and analysis. As you point out, maybe they did. The important point is that this analysis CANNOT reach the mainstream public (see this article):
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/why-excess-deaths-cant-be-a-story?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
In another recent article, I argue that “Covid” as we know it could not have happened WITHOUT excess deaths. A virus that’s not deadly wouldn’t serve the Establishment’s purposes. So they had to have massive numbers of panic-causing “excess deaths.” My hunch has always been that the Covid PCR tests were manipulated (via cycle thresholds) to create the requisite number of Covid cases … and then, more importantly, “Covid deaths.”
As the author points out in this excellent piece, the real excess deaths were caused entirely by the “life-saving” non-vaccines and iatrogenic/panic factors including collateral deaths from lockdowns, etc. A novel new virus - created in a lab or emerging from some bats in China - did NOT cause this massive spike in deaths. The mandated/coerced responses of our “leaders” caused these deaths … which are still occurring.
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/the-pandemics-start-date-had-to-be?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Thanks for your service!
You are very much welcome. <3
Excellent Viz and Reporting skills. Highly recommend for any data-interested professional
Thank you. Hearing that means a lot.
Excellent summation Fabian, but speaking as a lay person (who appreciates the simplification), I would like to know what your opposition would say to this ( I do not mean the ones who would play the game of "its oversimplification and therefore invalid statistically")? I understand, from Wilson Sy's argument about the Bradford Hill criterion of temporality with regard to excess mortality and the inevitable causality that may be attributed to the injections, which is apparent here too with your article, but to translate this into the popular domain, exposing their lies, remains the stumbling block. Most people will not engage with this evidence, don't understand it, cannot read the graphs or the intricacies of specialised debate, etc (I'm sure you know only too well). Our Senator Malcolm Roberts tried to supply the Big Pharma stooges with Wilson's artcle in our Australian Senate last week, they snubbed him and proferred "a peer-reviewed, published article" which, they claimed proves the "safety of the vaccines". Same lies, different venue .... Anyway the point is we need to compile the arguments, provide the simplified versions for the layperson, anticipate the lies and distortions, expose those too and have a global clearinghouse for the key arguments. It is just this latter aspect that we seem to lack - but your contribution here is invaluable and I thank you for every number analysed and every tear shed in your manifest humanity.
I think the strongest evidence for this we could get are RT-PCR results from those people who were exposed after their first dose. Not whether or not they were positive, but Ct-values. These data are completely missing from scientific literature. Even without linked vaccination status data we should see exceptionally low values during each vaccination wave. It would probably be easier to swallow for a lot of people than a direct link between doses and deaths.
Few people can face the truth if it is too shameful, humiliating and frightening, however presented. This is our greatest problem. And so they will fall for it all next time.
Fabian, really interesting analysis, thanks! When I have time I hope to dig into your longer article, but just from reading this abbreviated version, something doesn't add up. Your analysis led you to the conclusion that during Q3/2021, "we can chalk all 'COVID deaths' up to vaccinations." That doesn't match my personal experience at all. Briefly:
In Q3/2021, the Delta wave was going around here (Texas). My wife and I both had it, with upper respiratory infections, loss of energy, loss of smell (her), etc. We are healthy and took IVM etc. and were OK. We had dear friends here who were hospitalized for weeks with severe pneumonia and on death's door, including one in his 40s and two in their 70s. All these survived but it was extremely rough. A fourth died. (These others weren't on IVM etc., just following medical advice and using over-the-counter cold medications, etc.).
What troubles me with respect to your analysis is that NONE of us was vaccinated. So, clearly, there was a severe viral infection going around that was causing respiratory distress and other symptoms, and this was affecting non-vaccinated people. And that includes people who were truly non-vaccinated, not just vaccinated less than two weeks before illness. This anecdotal experience reflects what was reported by many health agencies. So if all COVID deaths during this time was in recently vaccinated people, how do you account for all the rest of us who also got severely ill (or died) at that time? It makes me wonder about your calculations and whether the data sources are reliable or if perhaps there are assumptions used in your calculations that are unjustified.
Thank-you, and I apologize in advance if you already addressed this concern elsewhere because I only discovered your Substack 30 minutes ago!.
I recommend you read the longer version. I don't make any such claim in that one. This one was for the lazy readers, who don't want to hear "variants", "SARS-CoV-2", "infection enhancement" etc.
You're absolutely correct in assuming not ALL these deaths can be chalked up to COVID, but it looks like most of them can.
I don't think we would've seen a wave like this without first doses being administered at the time.
That doesn't mean you didn't catch a SARS-CoV-2 infection!
Regardless of the role antibody-dependent enhancement plays here, it looks like people who caught the infection right around the time of being vaccinated had a very bad prognosis. A bad prognosis can be expected to be associated with increased viral loads and hence increased transmission.
So if first doses had a profound effect on transmission dynamics (both cases and deaths are strongly correlated with first doses), then the vaccines killed both unvaccinated and vaccinated individuals.
Only detailled RT-qPCR data can prove it at this point.
Regarding the official claims. There is very conflicting information.
- From Israel we have a report where an ICU doctor says 90% of individuals were vaccinated during Delta. This is in line with the less dishonest part of scientific literature. There really wasn't much "protection" at all.
- Germany only collected the vaccination status on roughly 10% of patients, so ALL claims German agencies made on this matter are completely unfounded.
- The CDC categorized recently first-dosed individuals (<14 days) as unvaccinated for their vaccine efficacy studies and removed them entirely from their hospitalization data. I guess you could say they forged the data.
There is not one country where a large vaccination wave did not coincide with a large COVID death wave during Delta.
You probably know that it is said that asymptomatic transmission may exist, but should rarely cause severe disease in people who become exposed through an asymptomatic individual.
Similarly, we can expect exposure to individuals with exceptionally high viral loads to cause more severe disease.
When there are 3 individuals in a room with nasopharyngeal viral load X and one individual with nasopharyngeal viral load 2*X, then we would expect the air within this room to have a viral load roughly 25% higher than the air in a room where 4 individuals have viral load x.
If freshly first-dosed individuals suffer higher viral loads, then this will affect everyone in contact with them, even indirectly, because they pass more pathogen on to others, giving the virus a head start, making severe courses more likely.
Under a certain threshold of infectiousness, a virus can not cause an outbreak. If enough individuals are first-dosed at the same time, then the net infectiousness can rise above a certain level, granting the pathogen the power to cause outbreaks. All individuals in these regions will then be affected, regardless of vaccination status.
Without knowing the EXACT impact of first doses on transmission dynamics, I would rather "chalk up all COVID deaths during this time" to vaccinations, then none at all, if you catch my drift. In reality, it is impossible for me to say how many people would've caught COVID during this time without vaccinations, but data from other countries give us a some clues.
Also, out of curiosity, do you know who infected you? Were there any "recently first-dosed" individuals among your friends?
Do you still have your Ct-values? If there was a "recently first-dosed" individual among your infected friends, could you get ahold of his or her Ct-value or Ct-values is this person had more than one test?
I am already talking to a German lab, but I am looking for any data I can get my hands on, particularly if it includes vaccination status information.
Ideally, I want age-stratified time series of Ct-values from multiple locations, plus a case series of individuals where vaccination status is known, including never-vaccinated individuals like you.
So if you can supply any information at all, feel free to write me(at)pervaers.com
As I said, none of us (including friends) were vaccinated, so no, none were "recently first-dosed".
Again, thank you. You're the first to tell me about a chain of transmission where no vaccine was involved.
This at least indicates, that delta was infectious enough to be transmitted from unvaccinated to unvaccinated individual.
Also, have you seen this older paper? It was of interest to the anti-vax community when it was published because it showed that vaccination didn't prevent breakthrough infections of new VOCs. However, for your purposes, it also shows that the viral titers of vaccinated and unvaccinated were similar upon infection.
"Predominance of antibody-resistant SARS-CoV-2 variants in vaccine breakthrough cases from the San Francisco Bay Area, California"
(Aug. 25, 2021)
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.19.21262139v1.full
"Viral loads were significantly higher in symptomatic as compared to asymptomatic vaccine breakthrough cases (p < 0.0001), and symptomatic vaccine breakthrough infections had similar viral loads to unvaccinated infections (p = 0.64)."
Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v1.full.pdf
"Here we use this viral load data to compare the amount of SARS-CoV-2 present in test-positive specimens from people who self-report their vaccine status and date of final immunization, during a period in which the delta variant became the predominant circulating variant in Wisconsin. We find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine 'breakthrough' infections." Note that this was during the Delta wave.
The Lancet published a study on community transmission.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext
"peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type" and "Fully vaccinated individuals with delta variant infection had a faster (posterior probability >0·84) mean rate of viral load decline (0·95 log10 copies per mL per day) than did unvaccinated individuals with pre-alpha (0·69), alpha (0·82), or delta (0·79) variant infections."
Note that some commentators have claimed higher viral load in vaccinated individuals with Delta than had been seen in unvaccinated individuals in the earlier waves. That's true, but that is due to Delta having higher viral loads, not due to vaccination status.
In response to the Provincetown outbreak, the CDC admitted that the vaccine didn't prevent transmission (Walensky). "Seventy-five percent of the cases in that outbreak occurred in fully vaccinated people, and there was no significant difference found in viral loads between the vaccinated and unvaccinated." https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/07/30/1022867219/cdc-study-provincetown-delta-vaccinated-breakthrough-mask-guidance
"Transmission potential of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons infected with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant in a federal prison, July—August 2021"
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.12.21265796v1
This study showed that not only is peak viral load similar in vaxxed vs. unvaxxed, but the virus is similarly viable and transmissible in both cases. Notably, though peak viral load had previously been found to decrease more rapidly in vaccinated people, this study found that both groups remained infectious for the same time duration.
I hope these references are helpful.
Yes thank you. I expect extremely high viral loads in early infections (within days of dose 1).
So far I've only found three values in literature. They were from nasopharyngeal swabs taken at autopsy. Ct-values were 9, 11 and 15. 2 alpha, 1 pre-voc. Wrote about that in the main article
As I mentioned separately, India is where Delta emerged, and it was minimally vaccinated at the time. So I do believe there was plenty of transmission between unvaccinated peopled.
I don't think you need much more than a few % of people to be imprinted for specific strains to gain predominance, as long as imprinted people cross paths.
We are retired and had relatively little exposure to people during this time, but did a road trip to visit my family in another state, and on the way back, stopped to visit my sister in Oklahoma. They had some friends join us for lunch, and their healthy young daughter (20's) was there, but was wearing a mask and not eating with us. We asked why, and she said she'd just returned from a trip (via commercial aviation) and had a slight sore throat so was keeping her distance just in case. My wife felt sorry for her and went over and visited with her for 20 minutes. Two days later my wife began having symptoms that progressed, and maybe a week after that I got it. I had stayed isolated during that time. So I got it from my wife, who got it from a young woman in her mid-20s, and she got it from an unknown source during air travel. The young woman was not vaccinated. (She ended up progressing to a severe illness with cardiac issues that lasted for a year). I don't have Ct values.
Hmmm, interesting. Thank you for these insights.
Maybe some bias is adding to the effect we are observing, because during q3 the less vaccinated regions increased their vax efforts.
I don't think we would've ever seen delta at all if it hadn't been for vaccinations. A study published in the lancet is quite suggestive (but not explicitly so, you're gonna have to read between the lines) of this.
https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2352-3964%2823%2900099-3
But India saw lots of Delta, and that was before it was much vaccinated.
I don't think that's correct, but I will look at the data. Think it was a little earlier (May?), but plenty of people were vaccinated at that point.
Thanks very much!
How is Hatu (UT - that ain't University of Texas) so low when "The Prophet" strongly suggested people get vaccinated?
It's not about how many people were vaccinated in total, it is about WHEN they were vaccinated.
Administer first doses into a rising delta wave -> see cases and deaths explode.
States with high first dose coverage administered very few first doses in Q3/2021, so they aren't seeing as many casualties.
This creates a vaccine efficacy illusion. In reality, the vaccines killed all these people, but only/primarily when they became infected days after their first dose.
This is how the vaccines caused outbreaks.
May have worked if Delta predominantly afflicted the recently vaccinated, far worse than those who abstained. Isn't Q3/2021 when that strain dominated?
Exactly. I had to skip all mentions of "variants", because people hate hearing that.
There is a longer version of this article: https://vigilance.pervaers.com/p/us-summer-deaths-of-2021
I think it's a mix of
1. Innate immunity decompensating upon double-exposure
2. Delta-associated ADE kicking in after a week or so, as soon as the first AB's are produced
Ct values from RT-PCR tests performed on nasopharyngeal swabs could shed light on this. I am trying to acquire age-stratified Ct-value timeseries from labs now.
Great , detailed, important work. Thank you! A couple of questions:
1) Why do you list the days on the plot chart as 0.01, 0.02 - instead of saying Day 1, Day 2, etc.? I shared the plot chart with someone and that was his first question, to which I had no answer.
2) You say "COVID mortality would've been negligible without first doses being administered at the time, so we can chalk all “COVID deaths” up to vaccinations." Is that statement based on looking at Covid deaths for each of the age groups, before the rollout of the vaccines, and comparing with increased Covid deaths post-vaccination? e.g. 25-year olds did not die of Covid in 2020, but all of a sudden, after the first shot, they did
Thank you :)
1) The x-axis does not represent time, but the number of first doses administered per capita.
0.01 means a state administered first doses to 1% of the residents aged 50-64 between September 24th and August 23rd. The y-axis represents the total number of COVID deaths per 100k 50-64 year olds living in that state throughout August of 2021. So all it shows is that the states that administered the highest number of first doses were the ones with the most COVID deaths during the Delta outbreak.
2) When you look at the scatter chart, you can see that there was no "wave" in states that administered very few first doses in August. Delta waves happened asynchronously across the world, even though the variant prevalence rose to nearly 100% almost synchronously.
If the innate immune system is overwhelmed by spike protein from two source (injection and infection) or is somehow suppressed by the vaccine, then this not only impacts outcomes in the infected individual, but it should also affect transmission.
So we really have two groups of infected individuals: Those who were recently first-dosed and those who were not. The recently first-dosed individuals seem to be more infectious. For case rates to increase and to form a "wave", infected individual have to infect more than 1 person. If the infected individuals are not infectious enough, there won't be a wave.
And it seems this is the case during Delta predominance. There probably wouldn't have been any wave at all if we hadn't kept on first-dosing people during this time.
Thanks Fabian for that explanation, I am somewhat the wiser. It sounds rather like the concerns I saw Geert Van den Bossche make in relation to non-sterilizing/non-neutralising ABs when the jab roll-outs/mandates started...
Yeah I think ab's are part of it, but they aren't really produced in large amounts in the first few days. Before that its decompensation of innate immunity upon double spike exposure. In that state of decompensation, infection enhancement (through ab's) could have much graver effects. But it's possible that there isn't any infection enhancement at all.
In any case, a lot of freshly first-dosed individuals seem to have died "of COVID" or whatever acute effect of the shots is responsible for this.
Well again from a lay perspective, the Ct-values would potentially add another layer of confusion. However, it did stand out to me when I saw the video of Kary Mullis noting that his PCR invention could not be used for determining virus and should never be used above 20 cycles. Then we had the revelations of the German head of health (Doesten is it?) demanding 44 cycles for the PCR tests! But I am not sure I have understood you correctly? You say the scientific literature is devoid of the data on Ct-values but that "we should see exceptionally low values during each vax wave". do you mean therefore that the nucleic acid will show up in the successive waves at lower and lower Ct levels due to spike protein/LNP? You see how a layperson can trip over themselves here?
My point though would probably be one of my first impressions from your data - how can we see that very link between doses and deaths (data is anonymised right)? I don't think the average person would think differently but I acknowledge that if people understood Ct-values (and if my understanding here is right) then your point would be invaluable - its a long and difficult road to hoe by such a route ... So if I have any advice it would be steer away from the needles in haystacks and provide more of the graphic evidence you have deciphered from the US data for other countries. When I first strayed (or stumbled) across these correlations it was the temporality of deaths and doses from the World Data (John Hopkins) graphs. I showed the Indian results to an Indian engineer who had just returned from India (jabbed and suffering from family loss) and he flat out denied it. It wasn't the first example of studied blindness (free floating anxiety) I had witnessed but it was startling in its determination of denial. He remains so to this day, though a little less fervently. The walls will come down. Cheers!
Well the statistical approach would be to add more variables to the models, create a directed acyclic graph that depicts causal links between variables and show that the relationship still exists when all other important factors are controlled for. But this is a very big task that nobody has approached yet. Well, in fact the entire event has gone unnoticed, possibly because critics tend to ignore covid variables and the all cause excess mortality isn't correlated quite as strongly. The positive correlation is still there though.
RT-PCR tests are nearly useless without Ct-values and ideally information on the primers that were used. They should never be used to attest illness to a person.
What RT-PCR tests can be used for is quantifying the amount of target genetic material in a sample. The Ct-values are inversely associated with the amount of material.
Based on the time-order relationship between cases, deaths and first doses, it seems these deaths that were attributed to COVID occur within days of the first dose.
What happens during that time? The body is still expressing modRNA derived spike protein at very high rates. It seems that when it is confronted with an otherwise harmless infection during this time, the immune system is overwhelmed. This should facilitate higher viral replication rates that should be reflected in lower Ct-values.
Since it seems this only started happening in the second half of 2021, It's possible that infection enhancement exacerbated the problem as soon as the first antibodies were produced.
Thank you for laying this out so clearly. Heartbreaking it is, and no way it's not by design.
Yeah those 14 days are just way too far out of the ordinary. You don't accidentally look away while killing millions.
Yes, unless one is a psychopath running the show...too many. I wonder if there are more of them at this time or if they're feeling bold to no longer hide.
Exactly. Thank you for putting reality reinforcement to my many 'anecdotals'. And still so many ppl getting pneumonia, many recurrently. Will be interesting to see how pneumonia deaths rise 2021-2025 compared to say 2015-2020.
Wake the F up people! Stop ignoring what’s right in front of you. Admit you were wrong and move on!!!
That is something that we are probably not ever gonna see on a large scale. Not in a sincere way. Shame and pride are very strong in most people. So is the unwillingness to regret having done what they thought and more importantly *felt* was right and just is hard to overcome.
I must agree and it pains me to think that we were not just abused and gaslighted. Now we aren’t even validated cause they can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong? I give up!
Yeah, I would agree that this is true for most of the actors, but I still believe there are people out there who acted out of sheer greed and deserve the most severe punishment their respective countries' legislations have in store.