Part 1: Just how dangerous are these mRNA ‘vaccines’?
R. McCarter c/ John Mills
Steve Kirsch has recently done some online polls, posing questions about vaccine status and the related health consequences. The polls are managed by professional pollsters and the questions range from “Have you received a COVID vaccine?” to “Are you planning on getting future COVID vaccines?”.
Along the way there are some grittier questions:
Were you injured from the COVID vaccines?
And out of 518 responses, 11.11% answered, “Yes”.
How serious is your vaccine injury?
And 45% of the respondents thought their injury was ‘serious’ or ‘very serious’.
Did any members of your household die from the COVID vaccine?
And 9.5% responded “Yes’.
Steve has repeated the survey several times with different pollsters and he keeps getting similar results, results that indicate that the COVID vaccines are much more dangerous than the health ministries are letting on.
Recenty the blogs were abuzz with the German Federal Ministry of Health (GFMH) announcement that 1 of every 5000 shots causes a serious adverse event. This was considered a large danger signal, after all, 1 in 5000 in a country with 184 million shots delivered means 36,800 serious vaccine injuries. To give some perspective, previous vaccines were pulled when there were a few dozen serious injuries.
Confirmation of a large safety signal came from the European Medicine Agency (EMA) which has recorded over a million adverse events. Of those the Pfizer Comirnaty has had 848,204 adverse events out of 649,000,000 shots and the Moderna Spikevax has had 230,524 adverse events out of 155,000,000 shots.
To compare the different results, adverse events can be reported as the number of vaccine injuries out of every 10,000 shots. The German Federal Ministry of Health, therefore, reports 2 serious adverse events out of every 10,000 shots The European Medicine Agency reports that Pfizer has 13.1 adverse events per 10000 shots and Moderna has 14.9 AE/10,000 shots.
But these estimates of vaccine injuries are orders of magnitude smaller than the approximate 11% adverse events and 5% serious adverse events found in the Steve Kirsch polls. If Steve is right, this vaccine could be an unparalleled disaster, and, if it is intentionally being covered up, the greatest crime against humanity ever. It is important to resolve these discrepancies.
The following table lists several estimates of the number of vaccine injuries per 10,000 shots by country.
For all adverse events, including non-serious and serious, the ratio ranges from a low of 2.9 adverse events per 10,000 in the Philippines to a high of 56.5 AE/10,000 in New Zealand. With a 19.5 times range in estimates and no clustering of values, taking an average would be just a crude guess. For serious vaccine injuries the numbers vary 10 fold from a low of 0.3 to as high as 3.1 AE/10,000 shots.
Why so much variation? The numbers of shots and injuries are huge so random fluctuations shouldn’t be large. Possibly the definition of what is an adverse event may differ from country to country; one country might include symptoms of fatigue or malaise while another might exclude these vague symptoms. With different geographical or personnel challenges different countries may also have more difficulty in following up on vaccine injuries.
Another complication, these vaccines are unique and their action is prolonged by the continuing translation of mRNA sequences and production of spike proteins. This means that the adverse events could be spread out over more time, weeks, months, maybe even years, compared to the usual few days of conventional vaccines. One country might include events that occur for a month after vaccination another might exclude injuries that occur after a couple of days.
It is probable that there is a large undercount in the number of vaccine injuries. Historically the US VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) system has had only 1% to 10% of the actual number of adverse events reported and this is probably true in most countries.
Could it be that the Philippines is reporting only 1% of its vaccine injuries and the actual number is closer to 290 AE/10,000 and that New Zealand is reporting 10% of its vaccine injuries and the actual number is 565 AE/10,000 shots. At least that correction would bring the estimates within only a 2 fold variation.
Then there is that spoiler from Steve Kirsch with about 1100 vaccine injuries out of 10,000 shots, of which about 500 are serious. Steve’s estimates of non-serious adverse events are 20 times greater than the highest listed country estimate and the number of serious events is 160 times greater. However, if we take into account a 99% to 90% undercount of vaccine injuries the numbers may be closer than it appears.
Can Steve Hirsch’s data be taken seriously?
The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) has estimated there are 5.7 adverse events per 10,000 shots which is the total of 4.5 non-serious and 1.2 serious adverse events per 10,000 shots.
Compared to most of the above listed countries, the Canadian estimates are low, the total events are 10 times smaller than the New Zealand estimate, and serious events are 2.5 times smaller. As large as these differences are, the Canadian figures are wildly less than Steve Kirsch’s poll results with 190 times fewer adverse events and 400 times fewer serious events.
If we were not living in a topsy-turvy world where science follows the politics and not the facts we would dismiss Steve Kirsch out of hand.
When you are confronted with such disparities it is helpful to make an estimate from your own experiences. If someone is telling you that sea level will rise by two meters while another is telling you a couple of millimeters, it is instructive to take a trip to the beach.
The Public Health Agency of Canada observations show about 48,670 adverse events among Canadians from about 86 million shots. That is about 1 adverse event for every 800 Canadians or about 1 in every 1000 if 20% of the victims have had 2 adverse events.
Of these, 9,878 of the adverse events are considered serious. Distributing 9,878 serious adverse events over 37.7 million Canadians means about 1 in roughly 4,000 Canadians has had a severe reaction, somewhat fewer, about 1 in 5000, if 20% of the vaccinated have multiple injuries.
Now in my limited number of friends and family there are a few who have had adverse events. There is 40 year Lauren who had incapacitating spasms 9 days after vaccination, and even though she had even worse spasms that hospitalized her 9 days after the second dose her physician said they were not vaccine related because they occurred too long after the shots.
Then there is Rita who at 40 years old had similar spasms after her second vaccination but they also were not reported as a vaccine injury. Therapist Sally, age 40, developed severe pain after her vaccinations and Alan developed a large underarm swelling, incapacitating him for several days. Within a couple of weeks of vaccination Gerald, aged 35, developed heart problems and pneumonia and was off work for several weeks. Walt, 80 years old, was diagnosed with myocarditis after both his first and third shots. Good friend Don unexpectedly died from a massive heart attack less than a month after the first shot, age 75.
Out of these 9 temporally associated vaccine injuries among 7 people I believe only 3 were reported as actual adverse events.
Although these problems all occurred within days or a few weeks after being vaccinated, they may not all be adverse events , but all of the affected people were in good health prior to their shots. I learned of these adverse events from casual conversations. I wonder how many more I would have found if I put out a questionnaire?
If the numbers from PHAC are right and 1 in 4000 to 1 in 5000 Canadians have had serious adverse events then my own experience must be extraordinary. This would indicate that I have somewhere between 28,000 and 35,000 family and friends. I assure you I am not nearly that gregarious.
Even if a large swelling and serious pain are not considered serious, and if I discount the death and pneumonia as possibly unrelated to the vaccines, the number of hypothetical acquaintances shrinks to a still considerable 12,000 to 15,000. A crude estimate of people that I actually know well enough to discuss their health would be under 200.
However improbable, this observation is only anecdotal, but it is not isolated; at various protests I have chatted with others who describe similar if not greater numbers of friends and family who have been seriously affected by the vaccines.
Are these informal observations mere coincidence or is there something wrong with the Public Health Agency’s calculations of adverse events? Just spitballing, but could there be a 100 times or more discrepancy in what the health ministries are reporting and what I am observing.
Could Steve Kirsch be right?
In the second article in this series I am going to examine how PHAC records and calculates vaccine injuries and determines whether their estimates of adverse events per 10,000 are accurate or just convenient guesses.