Only this week it came to light that Queensland Health, presumably with the blessing of the truly evil and hopefully terminal Queensland Government, is sacking nurses who, during the Covid plandemic, refused to take the unnecessary, ineffective and lethal mRNA jabs. Then, they were stood down. Now, they are being dismissed.
Two points can be made on this, right up. First, it is only Sky News that seems to have noticed this. The rest of the bought-up-by-Pharma media stayed schtum.
And second, Sky being a Murdoch vehicle, didn’t question the core issue – that unsafe, unnecessary, in effective vaccines should never have been allowed in the first place, let alone mandated for anyone. No, Sky kept to the standard “hypocrisy” line. This is a problem because the Queensland Government ended the mandates for health workers last September. Nothing more to be seen here. Stupid, not evil. “Ridiculous” was the word used.
Any investigative journalist worth his or her salt might have taken this latest outrage as a teaching moment in relation to Covid’s “transfection devices”. Please don’t ever call them “vaccines” without the irony quotation marks. He or she might have brought up unexplained global excess deaths. Or SADS (Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndrome). Or TV hosts and athletes dropping dead in the studio or on the pitch. Like Mark Crispin Miller does. Or myocarditis. Or turbo-cancers. Or the cover-ups by the Covid State and its many acolytes over these issues.
These deaths and injuries continue apace. Not only that, but governments here and internationally continue to spruik the death jabs. Few of them now risk mandates, since the knowledge of widespread vaccine harms is now embedded in a sufficiently large segment of the population as to make such a course politically risky. And we know that is all they care about.
(And we didn’t need the idiot Mike Baird to point it out).
The question is raised, what should the Covid-awake do to further the cause of truth-seeking in relation to Covid jab deaths and injuries? One response is to calculate deaths from the jab, to raise awareness of the sheer extent and lethality of the harms. Bret Weinstein has done this, most recently.
There are several ways to calculate the quantum of vaccine harms. Apart from adding up the huge (endless, really) amount of anecdotal evidence of people keeling over after their shots. One is to study autopsies to determine whether deaths following vaccines are matters of cause and effect and not merely correlation. Then to determine the numbers of unexplained, “excess” deaths in any jurisdiction and apply to that number the percentage of deaths from the autopsy study that could be ascribed to the shot.
One such study found that three-quarters of deaths following vaccines were caused by the vaccines.
Another approach is to use published data from agencies like VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) in the United States, which records self-reported vaccine harms, to calculate proportions at scale. To extrapolate. All the while remembering that harm reporting systems like VAERS and all the others massively under-report vaccine harms.
All of these methods have their shortcomings, as readers of Paul’s Newsletter on Substack have pointed out, quite correctly.
Though not on the scale of the shortcomings of the modelling done in 2020 that convinced governments everywhere that there was a Covid “crisis”. Imperial College London should be sued for global damages and its chief “scholars” sent to prison. See under Professor Pantsdown, aka Neil Ferguson. These “errors” of modelling were out by orders of magnitude, and caused massive harm. Harm that was lethal, and spread across the public health, economic, governance and social realms.
One of the shortcomings of attempts to calculate vaccine deaths and injuries has nothing to do with methodology. It is simply the result of poor raw data, and this is due to the deliberate, self-serving efforts of governments and their health institutions in refusing to acknowledge even the slightest problem with the jabs, and so themselves investigate jab harm. This should be their highest calling, as it should also be of doctors, their professional and regulatory bodies, of journalists and the media, and of academics. Alas, all of these institutions have been bought up by Pharma, and hence they hide data, fail to release it publicly, stop real scientists from getting anywhere near it, and, in some cases, simply do not collect it (at least collect it properly).
As has been pointed out in relation to Australia’s own Therapeutic Goods Administration by Dystopian Down Under (Rebekah Barnett). The strategy is resist, resist, resist. Deny, deny, deny. Hide, hide, hide.
So, it has been left to maverick researchers working with poor and hidden data to unearth relationships of cause and effect and, using the tools at their disposal, to calculate overall harm. (In this, the researchers have been ably assisted by the forensic efforts of hero-politicians like the Covid Five, Rennick, Babet, Canavan, Roberts and Antic).
One of the fruits of their endeavours is detailed here.
Their task is noble and to be encouraged. Their work is real science, formulating and testing hypotheses against real-world evidence. Ground-truthing and triangulating (that is, using more than one research methodology to reach conclusions), where possible. Where they cannot do this, they should still try. And like the Steve Kirschs, Pierre Korys, the Harvey Rischs, the Denis Rancourts and Peter McCulloughs of the world, submit their findings to both their peers and to the court of public opinion.
It was a study by Rancourt and colleagues that came up with the 17 million number, as Judy Mikovits has noted:
The researchers found the fatal toxicity was 1 death per 800 doses across all ages and countries. "When you scale up to billions [of doses], it's not hard to reach a number like that [17 million] with a technology that's dangerous."
Source, Telegram channel, 9 January 2024.
Mikovits also reported (on 1 January):
A groundbreaking study by Drs. Denis Rancourt, Marine Baudin, and Jérémie Mercier found 17 million people died worldwide after the COVID-19 "vaccine" rollout.
"We calculate the toxicity of the vaccine for all ages," explained Dr. Rancourt, "given the number of doses given worldwide to conclude that 17 million people would have been killed by this vaccine."
The shocking study, COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere, was published September 17, 2023, and, rather than garnering worldwide attention, has met only censorship and narrative-confirming "fact-checks" on the safety and effectiveness of the as-yet untested Covid-19 "vaccines."
Rancourt self-describes:
I currently write about medicine, COVID-19, individual health, climate change, geopolitics, civil rights, political theory, sociology … and I have also written over 100 peer-reviewed-journal articles in technical areas of science and technology.
I obtained BSc, MSc and PhD degrees in physics. I held post-doctoral research positions at prestigious institutions in France and The Netherlands, before being a physics professor and lead scientist at the University of Ottawa for 23 years.
I am an experienced self-represented litigant at several levels of court and in many administrative tribunals, in both Ontario and Quebec. I have been a volunteer Researcher with the Ontario Civil Liberties Association (ocla.ca) since 2014.
https://denisrancourt.ca/page.php?id=1&name=home
A presentation by Rancourt on his study can be found here, along with those of other Covid hero-speakers, including Bret Weinstein.
https://www.internationalcovidsummit.com/
Mike Yeadon is cautious. He describes the statement of the 17 million number as “extraordinary”. The jury is out. Another study in 2023, in which Rancourt also participated, got to 13 million. As in, “could be related to 13 million deaths”. This is suitably cautious.
All the while, these independent scholars know that they will be lied about, pilloried, described as nutters and conspiracy theorists, just like they (and we) were during the plandemic. By all of the bought-up, usual suspects. The now-sheepish brigade. They know who they are.
But as with all science, the work of the truth tellers and their methods should (must) be questioned and challenged, where appropriate. In spite of the fact that the efforts of their opponents (and mortal enemies) will not be challenged. The playing field is, indeed, anything but level. The formal institutions of learning and investigation, being bought-up, are running dead on the issue of Covid policy. This is the most shameful betrayal of truth-telling in my life time, ironically done at a time when a version of, and an appeal to, truth-telling is suddenly trendy in other areas.
The questioning is important for two reasons. One, to keep science, now moribund, alive and capable of a full recovery. Capable of re-discovering its robustness and value to society. Two, we have to question the work of those on our own side because we want our findings to be right, and therefore to be widely accepted without any chance of rebuttal. Despite the earnest and indefatigable efforts of the fact-checker industrial complex, strategically deployed by the liar-class. It is a war, and, yes, while all things are in play in war, real scientists do want to win on merit as well as on the scoreboard.
There is also an argument for being very conservative in one’s conclusions. It should not, other things being equal, require shock-horror level data to convince well-meaning citizens (those between the active conformists and the active dissidents) of the need to pressure governments and health authorities to pull the shots off the market forthwith. As Rebekah Barnett says, “vaccines have been pulled from the market for far less than this”.
Sadly, not all things are equal. The governments and health authorities of which we speak are peopled by scumbags (as David Warner’s father might say). Scumbags, crooks, charlatans, and chancers who took up the reins of power very briefly, which resulted in mayhem and death on their watch. Like Margaret Thatcher (in very different circumstances), they ain’t for turning.
Which leads us to the counter-argument, that because things are not equal, the independent researchers seeking to highlight vaccine harms should use their own “bag of tricks”, as Weinstein described Pharma’s routine methods, and not over-think the need for robust conservatism. After all, they are largely flying blind and operating with, at best, nil cooperation from the authorities, and, at worst, with massive opposition and obfuscation, and with scant data. And it isn’t as if the dissidents aren’t already treated with anything other than contempt. What’s to lose, you might well conclude.
17 million dead might be wrong. It may well be exaggerated. Probably not by orders of magnitude, though. As the Vigilant Fox notes:
First, it was a conspiracy theory that there would be vaccine mandates. It was also a conspiracy theory that the shots didn’t stop transmission. Booster shots, also once a conspiracy theory, came after waning efficacy. And it turns out that people who took the most shots had the most COVID. Now, it’s a conspiracy theory that the shots are responsible for 17 million deaths worldwide. Will that eventually prove to be true?
Vigilant Fox, Telegram channel, 9 January 2024.
And going big may serve life-affirming, indeed, life-saving purposes. That WOULD be noble cause corruption. This IS a war, after all. And Queensland nurses are still being sacked for refusing the lethal jab.
Oh, there is one more point.
One thing we know and most with a semblance of knowledge of these things will accept is that the harms caused by the jab are only just beginning. One of the many things NOT tested during the vaccine trials was their long-term effects. How could they have been? They were given emergency use authorisation within nano-seconds of the shoddy trials. So, it was literally impossible for anyone to say that there were no long-term adverse impacts. They simply couldn’t know.
What Bret Weinsten demonstrated convincingly in his recent Tucker Carlson interview (referred to above) was that the very nature of the “transfection” trick embedded in the mRNA jabs was that the vaccine would not stay in the area of injection, but would travel to cells all over the body, join with those cells and cause damage to those cells. Like those in the heart and the ovaries. And the damage would be felt differently according to the health of those cells, and might not appear instantly but rather accrue only over time in the case of many now-healthy people.
So, 17 million might only be the tip of the long-term iceberg. To mix metaphors, a smoking gun. We shall see.
Paul Collits
10 January 2024
This whole disaster started as a mindless panic, especially by the people who we pay to make rational and considered decisions. They deliberately transmitted their panic to the general population. This resulted in the classic "madness of crowds" syndrome.
There would have been opportunities to reassess the situation from the beginning but these were not taken up. Instead the elements in control doubled down on their mistakes and they continue to do so.
The responsible parties have been running on fear from the beginning. Now it is fear of loss of face and fear of consequences for their culpable stupidity.
It is essential that this whole miserable episode, in all its crazy detail, be exposed and debated. Not for revenge on those responsible. Revenge is a pointless exercise and does more harm than good.
The object should be to prevent this happening again as it surely will if left unaddressed.
It all certainly should be investigated. The people involved should face consequences. But will the people who willingly visited all the nonsense on us ever be held to account? I am pessimistic. Life has been changed for the worst forever. Trust is gone. Immune systems ruined.