Some years ago, I was involved in a research project that accumulated a lot of data. The point of the exercise was to use the correct statistical methodologies to sort through the data to see if there were any correlations among the large number of variables. It took me a year of reading and taking online courses to understand the statistical methodologies necessary to sort out the data. When I felt confident of my statistical prowess, I tackled the data and, to my huge relief, found some correlations. In fact, I was able to create a multivariate equation that had an r-squared of over 80 percent. That is a high correlation coefficient and particularly for the type of data I was working with. I was exultant and wrote to my thesis committee to tell them the good news of the causal relationship I had found. The most senior professor on my team wrote back admonishing me for getting too far over my skis by claiming causation from a mere correlation. He was right of course, and I wrote to thank him for bringing me back to earth. I remained exultant that I hadn’t wasted two years of tuition in my scholarly tilt at an academic windmill.
Recently, Mr. Trudeau mused about redefining “vaxxed” and mandating multiple booster inoculations with a new mRNA product that has undergone zero human testing but apparently captured the attention of eight mice. I am hopeful that his musings are a trial balloon, but one never knows. It is my belief that our recent history with covid and required mRNA inoculations did not involve informed consent making the mandates coercive and possibly illegal. Our acquiescence to this intrusion on our basic rights to informed consent (as outlined in the Nazi trial Nuremburg Code and other more recent ethical codes) was alarming to me.
I can’t speak to the efficacy or value of the new bivalent shots which are directed at the original virus and the latest of the omicron variants. I also can’t speak to whether it is a good idea to get multiple booster shots of this drug. That is a conversation that you should have with your doctor to make an informed decision. In my case I am going to be asking my doctor some questions about the impacts of the original mRNA shots on human mortality before making my decision.
I have friends who have suffered lingering and serious health impacts following their bout with covid and the phenomenon has been labelled “long covid”. Based on the name given to it, does correlation equal causality in this case? I don’t know but it is under study. It certainly seems that something is going on. Equally, I have wondered about the young athletes that are dropping dead on soccer pitches and ice rinks around the world. A Swiss study published in 2006 demonstrated that 1,101 sudden athlete deaths occurred between 1966 and 2004. Between January 2021 and April 2022 there were 673 sudden athlete deaths. That is a 1700% increase in this type of death relative to the earlier period of time. Some people relate the deaths to booster shots of mRNA and call this causal, but I don’t think there is enough data to determine anything other than “something is going on”.
In 2021, Edward Dowd, a hedge fund manager noticed that the funeral services sector was on track for a banner year and he decided to find out why. Covid obviously. Except he didn’t find the same increase in mortality in 2020. He and an actuarial expert examined CDC data of all cause mortality and discovered that many more people than expected were dying and the excess deaths were occurring in a younger than expected age group. His suspicions were provoked even more when the OneAmerica Insurance Company president revealed in early 2022 that claims increased by forty percent in the third quarter of 2021. The CEO stated that a ten percent increase would be a one-in-200-year catastrophe. This is an event screaming for a study into causality.
Dutch epidemiologists have claimed that, if they know the number of people who took mRNA vaccines last week, they can accurately predict the number of excess mortalities this week. Recently, Danish authorities have restricted the ability of people under the age of fifty to get the mRNA shots because they want the shots to be given to people who are at higher risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and death. They do not suggest that the mRNA shots are necessary to stop the spread of the virus and, in fact, anticipate a significant spread of infection in the autumn. But weren’t we told that everyone needed to be inoculated to stop the spread of the virus? And didn’t we all need to get the shots so that the virus would be eradicated? It turns out that the shots don’t work that way. In fact, some research articles conclude that the shots preferentially enhance mutations, viral spread, and infection among the inoculated. In August 2021 the CDC stated that fully vaccinated people can get covid and transmit it to others. The data since then has born this out and the CDC even changed the definition of “vaccine” to accommodate this new understanding of the efficacy of the mRNA shots.
A Portuguese research team examined British data and determined that excess mortality (using a 2010 - 2019 baseline death rate) for children up to fifteen declined during covid and then rose to 160% of baseline starting in late 2021. The primary cause of death for kids in England is accidents. Being locked up during the pandemic resulted, unsurprisingly, in a decline in excess deaths. But why did the excess deaths spike when the lockdowns were lifted? Perhaps the kids enthusiastically started doing stupid things? The curves of excess deaths for older age cohorts are very similar to those for younger children so maybe the explanation is more complicated than this. Kids under twelve are no longer able to get mRNA shots in England unless they have serious underlying conditions. The decision is not without its controversy.
In August 2022, the Society of Actuaries Research Institute published a report called the “Group Life COVID-19 Mortality Survey Report”1. This is a statistical analysis of people who worked for large corporations and received a life insurance benefit as part of their pay package. These are people who rarely die because, if they did, they wouldn’t be insured. If you like statistics this is a fascinating read. If you don’t, it is as dry as dust. On Table 5-7, page 22 of the report, the authors include a “heat map” table showing increases in excess all cause mortality for different age groups. For people between twenty-five and forty-four, the excess mortality was 179 percent in the third quarter of 2021. It has since dropped to 126 percent in the first quarter of 2022. But remember, a ten percent increase is deemed a one in two-hundred-year event.
Alex Berenson has written extensively about rates of excess mortality from around the world (Berenson). The state of Victoria in Australia had 4,896 deaths from all causes in August 2022 which is 27 percent above the monthly average of the previous five Augusts. In the first quarter of 2022, Singapore happily registered a 7.5 percent increase in live births. In the second quarter they registered an 8.5 percent decline in births. The second quarter of 2022 was nine months after the mass inoculation of people of childbearing age.
These are shocking reports that demand investigation but lest you be too alarmed, the excess mortality rates are trending down and the numbers of deaths as a percent of age cohort basis are low - generally under one percent based on the data I have seen. However, it does mean that more American twenty to forty year-olds died unexpectedly over the past year than were killed in the ten years of the Vietnam War.
On September 10, 2022 a group of doctors from around the world signed a declaration of medical crisis related to the mRNA shots. They call the phenomenon “iatrogenocide” - death by doctor. Pretty strong words. The correlation between mRNA shots and unaccounted death is strong and getting stronger as more study is being done. But correlation is not causation.
But I think we can all agree that something very unusual is going on in those parts of the world that relied on mRNA shots to control the pandemic. The questions remain and, in the absence of any answers, why is our government proposing to mandate a new version of an old product? Would not answers to the many questions around the sudden and unexpected increase in all cause mortality be necessary for informed consent? Equally, would it not be useful to understand the phenomenon of long covid rather than just assume a causal link to covid? If there is a link, then let’s find it so those who suffer can hope for some relief.
Based on the result of a freedom of information request, Mr. Dowd claims that, in the original Pfizer clinical trials for the mRNA injections, more people died in the injected group than in the control group. Based on his Wall Street experience, in any previous drug trial this result would end the study and collapse the stock price. The US regulatory bodies had this data and, we now know why they didn’t want the information to be released for seventy-five years. Would I have taken the shots had I known that more people died in the group that took the shots than in the group that did not take them? I honestly don’t know the answer to the question, but I was certainly owed the data.
The risk-benefit analysis and subsequent decision to participate or not in an experimental drug treatment is, by all ethical standards, an individual choice. Is that risk-benefit analysis possible or valid when critical information is withheld and not made available? Can consent be informed when answers to relevant questions cannot be provided? Does a free society mandate drug trial participation based on, “trust us”? Surely the past two years have demonstrated that medical institutions, regulatory bodies, and government agencies are not trustworthy, or they would have divulged the necessary information required for informed consent. We are owed some answers rather than another set of unethical mandates from our government.
I will be asking my doctor pointed questions and requiring a lot more detailed information before I make the decision to participate in the next round of drug trials. How you decide is entirely up to you. You may need much less information that I require to come to your decision. But nobody should be coerced into a particular decision based on a government mandate rather than an informed choice.
************************************** UPDATE ***************************************************
I found this article interesting (Marijuana induced psychosis) and relevant to the discussion about the psychotic effects of marijuana use among young males. This article updates marijuana research with studies from Europe indicating that fifty percent of heavy marijuana users are at risk of long term schizophrenia due to higher concentrations of THC in current versions of marijuana. If you find your kid’s stash, flush it down the toilet… just saying.