9
1

Vax Death Spike


8,193 views  276 comments             share      

by Onvacation   $0.10 total tips   💰tip   follow   2021 Jul 13, 11:13am  

I downloaded a csv file from the CDC

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Week-Ending-D/r8kw-7aab

I was curious about trends so I then downloaded the last six years of death data from the cdc and concatenated it into one file. I graphed it:


It was obvious that there was quite a spike from the corona virus (Blue Gray line) when I eliminated total deaths from the chart.


At this point I was curious if some of the other causes of death had gone down so I eliminated heart disease, cancer, and covid-19.

This is when I noticed the annual winter spike from flu and pneumonia was gone in 2020-2021. I also noticed the spike in "not elsewhere classified". I zoomed in and got this:


Logic using people can see there is a problem here.

« First    « Previous    Comments 264 - 276 of 276   

264   mell   2021 Nov 23, 5:20pm  

sjmoca says
mell says
Math doesn't lie, the chances of a kid having a severe covid case is around 2 in a million, dying around 1 in a million. The incidence of SAE incl. myocarditis from the jab is anywhere from 1 in 10 for the early dosages to 1 in 10000.


The risc of MIS-C after Covid-19 is around 1 in 3200 children.


No it's not. Around 40% or close to 30MM children have seroprevalence and rising.
265   Patrick   2021 Nov 23, 5:21pm  

OK, that's in the range mell mentioned.

But children will die from the vaxx who literally have a higher risk of being hit by lightning than dying from Wuhan Virus. This is outright murder of children for profit. Can you think of a more evil crime?

Myocarditis is indeed serious:

While 60% to 70% of patients improve clinically and hemodynamically, the remaining patients will develop chronic heart failure or dilated cardiomyopathy within months or years


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3370379/
266   Patrick   2021 Nov 23, 5:25pm  

Posting info from the CDC is like posting articles from the National Enquirer.

Not a reputable source.
267   mell   2021 Nov 23, 5:26pm  

Patrick says
OK, that's in the range mell mentioned.

But children will die from the vaxx who literally have a higher risk of being hit by lightning than dying from Wuhan Virus. This is outright murder of children for profit. Can you think of a more evil crime?

Myocarditis is indeed serious:

While 60% to 70% of patients improve clinically and hemodynamically, the remaining patients will develop chronic heart failure or dilated cardiomyopathy within months or years


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3370379/


It's 1 in 5400 if you believe the 5500 cases and you can be sure there is no significant underreporting, Pediatrics will always send kids for tests even with mild symptoms. That is still far less than the 1 in 10 SAEs from pfisters own study.
268   mell   2021 Nov 23, 5:48pm  

Patrick says
It sure looks like the vaxx has negative efficacy in terms of cases.


Don't forget that stat is conveniently calculated for all cases, it doesnt say anything about the ability of the jab to prevent mis-c which is probably close to zero, then add in SAEs.
269   Onvacation   2021 Nov 23, 6:48pm  

sjmoca says
Myocarditis is caused by infections like colds, influenza, covid-19, and bacterial infections. What the vax hesitant keep ignoring is that pediatric experts are saying covid-19 causes more fucking myocarditis than the vax!

Why do you want to kill kids? They have no risk of dying from the Wuhan.

Anybody pushing this jab on people that don't need it are brainwashed, ignorant, or evil.
270   Patrick   2021 Nov 23, 10:41pm  

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/if-you-like-heart-problems-youll

If you like heart problems, you'll love the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines
So says a report on almost 600 patients presented last week at the American Heart Association's annual conference



271   Onvacation   2021 Nov 24, 8:25am  

sjmoca says

Or maybe it just means you are having an immune response to the vax...

Why are you pushing the jab?

Do you think the jab works? If it does work why do we need a booster? Why would we need a booster for the delta variant if the original jabs don't work against the delta variant. If the boosters do work for the delta variant why didn't the original jabs work against the delta variant since they are the same experimental biologic agent?

I am not expecting cogent answers to these simple questions but can @sjmoca attempt to answer?
272   Onvacation   2021 Nov 24, 8:29am  

sjmoca says

"Apoptosis and other immune biomarkers predict influenza vaccine responsiveness"
https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1038/msb.2013.15

The Wuhan is not the flu. It is a laboratory created gain of function cold virus. The jab is not a vaccine it is an experimental biologic agent that tens of millions of people have taken.

This flu season should tell us a lot. If the jab works the jabbed will stop dying and the unjabbed will start dying in larger numbers. Time will tell.
273   Onvacation   2021 Nov 24, 9:18am  

sjmoca says

All I did was dismantle your theory on "Vax Death Spike" with data. Make an informed choice.

So no answers. Wasn't expecting any.
274   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2021 Nov 24, 9:37am  

sjmoca says
Obviously the Covid mRNA vaccine must be causing gastric cancer, joint infections, emphysema, rheumatoid arthritis, myocardial infarctions, taiwanese lung cancer, glioma, osteosarcoma.
Non-Sequitur.

The PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). Multiple biomarkers, not just one or two biomarkers. It has been validated as a tool for classifying Heart Disease.

Publications
https://pulstest.com/articles

Clinical Utility of the PULS Cardiac Test in Classifying Intermediate Risk Patients
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4231217/

Analytical Performance Validation of the PULS Cardiac Test
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23530883/

Clinical Validation of the PULS Cardiac Test for Improved Coronary Risk Assessment
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4231217/

etc.....
275   GNLusedtobeWine   2021 Nov 24, 10:36am  

sjmoca says
I disagree. The PULS test thing is extremely weak on research. Those few papers just say "yes this test measures the markers we want to measure" and "physicians adapted their treatment plan in response to our test", but critically, no studies are available that validate the predictive efficacy.

Which is most weak...The PCR test or the PULS test?
276   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2021 Nov 24, 1:28pm  

sjmoca says
I disagree.
You are engaging in hit-and run non-sequiturs by asserting that il-16 alone is a non-specific biomarker, and by providing an irrelevant reference (https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.1038/msb.2013.15) that does not measure the three biomarkers described as elevated in the ahajournals.org abstract 10712 cited above.

If you could cite publications where Il-16, soluble Fas, and HGF, the biomarkers described as elevated in the ahajournals.org abstract, were elevated in diseases other than heart disease, that could be a reasonable argument. But you have not, and it is not.

« First    « Previous    Comments 264 - 276 of 276   

Please register to comment:

about   best comments   contact   latest images   one year ago   random   suggestions