Good article but “cards on the table,” I don’t have an ounce of confidence left in our health authorities. I love the part where the FDA has commissioned Pfizer—currently banking billions from the shots—to look into a safety issue. Strangely, it has not heard back yet! Meanwhile, the shots continue, and those who have been raising questi…
Good article but “cards on the table,” I don’t have an ounce of confidence left in our health authorities. I love the part where the FDA has commissioned Pfizer—currently banking billions from the shots—to look into a safety issue. Strangely, it has not heard back yet! Meanwhile, the shots continue, and those who have been raising questions are continuously vilified as anti-science. You know what strikes me as anti-science? Hiring a company making billions to do its own safety studies. That is just pathetic.
I completely agree with the lack of accountability on this as well as the US being an outlier on pretty much all things related to Covid and children.
But one question that I haven't heard addressed is, how do we know these incidences of Myocarditis are due to the vaccines and not contracting Covid itself?
Myocarditis can occur from contracting the virus too (as well as other viruses) and these cardiac issues may be due to Covid circulating so widely now vs at the start of the pandemic when we were all on lockdown. I remember when reports of Myocarditis came out in 2020. (I had a 5 month old baby at the time, so was really paying attention to reports concerning young children). It's true that almost all of them recovered fully, so I agree that the risk to young kids is extremely low, but I don't understand how we distinguish between the 2 possible causes, especially since young kids who get Covid often don't even know that they got it and these reactions typically come after the virus is no longer detectable on tests. Am I missing something here?
The message is clear from Dr. Bhattacharya and these two doctors: the Covid booster has been very effective in preventing death and serious illness in the elderly and in those with underlying conditions, but it’s not necessary for younger healthier people.
Because of skepticism regarding government policies like lockdown and facemasks, people are turning to unscientific, unverified, anecdotal at best, Substack quacks who fuel the flames with crazy talk for their, conspiracy-believing subscribers. But these doctors have poured cold water on the outrageous claims about serious adverse effects, sudden death, etc.
And yet, there will be many who read these highly credible doctors’ comments and with a wave of their hand dismiss them as “being in on it“. To them I ask, do you also think the moon landing was staged?
I first lost confidence in our health authorities over the promotion of Gender Ideology and "necessary life saving affirmative medicine" (drugs and mutilation) for children. There's tons of money to be made by pharma and doctors by making lifetime patients. It is now "abuse" to keep kids away from this. Who profits? Not the child who will wake up broken some day.
This is why I pay close attention to data from Europe, Israel, et al. Also, take a look at the FDA and CDC's web sites. There are often remarkable discrepancies between public statements of senior people at both places and the content of the web sites. The latter has been reviewed and edited, usually multiple times, and is presumably more reliable. The red meat handed out to the media is almost always less reliable.
I saw Chris Hayes last night opining on how everyone needs to run out immediately and get the booster. No mention of European countries de-recommending it for under 50. He is really just a corporate shill at this point.
You're just a conspiracy theorist. What would companies making billions have to gain from being less than truth full or covering their eyes and ears and saying they don't see anything. Aside from all the times they have been caught and fined for doing the exact same thing and killing thousands, and the fact that governments are funneling money to them at a rate never before seen in history I can't think of any incentive for these truly altruistic organizations to lie. Pharmaceutical companies are the only companies filled with saints, not like all other greedy capitalists who are solely responsible for inflation and poverty.
I knew Pfizer lied through its teeth when shortly after the November 2020 election (rather than before) it announced that the vaccine was ready to be released. This was political and criminal.
Euromomo data tracks mortality across reporting EU entities. Just look at the mortality trends for people under 65. Covid correlates to zero real increase in all cause mortality. Something changes in Jan of ‘21. Something REALLY changes in mid ‘22. “Correlation isn’t causation” but it’s very difficult to have causality WITHOUT correlation , so blaming covid is VERY difficult. So where else should we look…?
A simple glance at Pfizer’s trial data shows a very easily observable difference in all-cause mortality and specifically heart related causes between the treatment and control groups. Certainly enough that in any even semi-reasonable time they would have asked for more and longer research. That they didn’t almost certainly illustrates they knew the outcome but were being pressured to take the drug live regardless.
The question isn’t “why are people who actually looked at the data concerned,” it’s “why aren’t more people looking at the data and asking questions.”
I broke this all down in absurd detail on my personal choice not to get vaccinated detailed on my substack. If you just want to understand how many of us got where we are, give it a read. It may not change your mind, but it will at least provide insight into a counter perspective
There's a spike in early 2020 in all cause mortality. It tapers off through the year, mostly due to lack of human contact, which -- you're right about this -- was a terrible idea. Then you get another spike in winter 2021 -- BEFORE the vaccine is rolled out! then again a tapering into spring. The summer spike could be due to a dropping away of precautions or it could be due to vaccine side effects. There is no way to tell.
Your data and CDC's basically match each other. And neither supports the idea that there has been a broad increase in al-cause mortality in parallel with the COVID vaccine rollout.
The vaccine causation question is also directly addressed in the British mortality data. It breaks down everything for vaccinated vs not.
So, you see the overall trends observed here, including that younger people's mortality was significantly impacted by factors other than COVID. We can speculate as to the causes - maybe lockdowns were bad for folks' health as they stopped exercising and got out of shape; maybe reopening was deadly as folks came out of lockdowns somewhat loopy and less careful and so had a horrible period with auto accidents and similarly risky daily activities.
What is clear is the vaccination is not a cause of mortality among the young, at all. In every scenario folks raise in these comments and posts, when you look at vaccinated vs unvaccinated young people, it's never the case that the vaccinated are dying and the unvaccinated aren't - that, as folks proudly imply here, younger people who would otherwise be healthy are dying when they're vaccinated and living when they're not.
The entire premise of this post - to legitimate that there could be something to the #DyingSuddenly concerns, is hogwash. It's just validating the usual gangs who routinely get riled up about wrong things because they're bad at assessing threats and risks - the scared, misinformed, overly suspicious, oppositional, dim, innumerate, overly believing of anecdotes, overly believing of local "trends" (basically old-school evening news watchers), plus the cranks, contrarians, fraudsters, and evildoers.
I like Weiss' publication in many ways. But its comment section, and too many of its posts, are popular because they provide unwarranted and misleading succor and validation to these groups.
I see no reason to feed BS to other groups just because they like it (again, a reason I'll often like this publication; it's clear eyed about this tendency in other groups not like themselves). I don't think it's helpful or good to do so here either.
Look at the 15-44 age range in Euromomo... The trendline was still trending down, despite covid, through most of 2020 (or, at the worst, was flat). Outside of 1 week, from January '21 (available "vaccines") all the way through late spring of '22 mortality exceeds the baseline. You can take this as far back as it goes and we've never seen a sustained increase like that. It stayed elevated for so long it actually changes the baseline. We are now seeing the largest spike, by orders of magnitude, that we've ever seen in that age range, currently taking place.
I'm not blaming the "vaccine," nor do I do so in my article. I claim, as I claimed above, that it's very hard to have causation WITHOUT correlation, so correlating all-cause mortality increases to covid is near-impossible. I also highlight that Pfizer's own data showed more all-cause mortality in the treatment arm than the placebo, and that the size of the increase, while not statistically relevant, certainly warrants greater analysis, especially when it's repeated at a population level. Because Pfizer included almost no one of actual threat age for the virus in their trial it's impossible to compare the data for ages over 65.
For the 45-64 age range, who knows. We see a spike, very short lived, in 2020 when covid was apparently killing everyone (that somehow lasted only 3 weeks), and then normal mortality until the following winter. So mutations, or restrictions on medical care and personal freedom, or lack of sunlight and exercise, or the introduction of an insanely poorly tested "vaccine," or who knows, killed a bunch of people, and since then the trends look more or less the same pre-"vaccine" and post-"vaccine," with an odd spike in the summer of '22 (not seen in '20 or '21) corresponding with booster campaigns.
If this is what "success" looks like, I'd hate to see what failure looks like...
I think you're reading a lot into graphs. You'd need to run regression on this raw data to know whether your theory about flat prime demo mortality is correct. I agree with your take that the actual data (blue line) it looks like there is a slight increase throughout 2020 and early 2021 (less touching of the baseline) and a spike in late 2021. It's hard, since prime age demo mortality always appears stochastic due to the small numbers. I just don't see that you can relate that to anything. There's something going on, but what seems pretty nebulous.
If it is something nefarious about the vaccine (and I agree that's not really a correct term) why would this only show up in the 15-44 demo? An increase like this can't be due to cardiac events; that would show up big time in other data since cardiac events in this demo are rare. It seems pretty weird that the elevation has continued through today. As booster takeup has declined (as people have realized the vaccines do next to nothing), one wonders why the numbers are still elevated though.
Again, I'm not arguing with you about the vaccine itself. Sweden's strategy appears to have been correct. The vaccine does not stop transmission. Basically everything we were sold a bill of goods in late 2020; it's not snake oil, but it's not what they promised either. For what it's worth, the 25-44 CDC data (from my link above) shows the same pattern, so whatever you're seeing isn't localized. But there are a lot of conspiracy theories floating around, and in a time of plummeting institutional trust across the Western world, I think us armchair data nerds need to be careful about feeding those.
BTW: Well thought out and reasoned. You've largely convinced me that I wasn't seeing something in the data previously. I'm not sure you're right about the cause, but I agree you've got something real and somewhat weird here.
I totally agree with you. I think the issue we're both dealing with is context. When I wrote this we had family members that literally wouldn't see us because we weren't vaccinated. I wasn't trying to argue the vaccines were a tool of the devil boiling us from the insides, I was trying to illustrate how an infinitely rational person (and everyone who knows me knows I'm rational) could very easily make the decision to skip this experiment in "warp-speed" drug testing/approvals.
In the current context, where most everyone agrees the vaccines are a net zero, at best, I realize it hits a little different.
That said, one of the points IS to illustrate how broken our medical system is. Prior to 2016 there is ZERO chance this drug is approved. I cant even fathom getting a drug approved based on a trial where total hospitalizations and total deaths were worse in the treatment arm AND the drug's pretend efficacy declined so rapidly before the end of the insanely short trial they were already arguing that "boosters" would be needed to regain initial dose efficacy. The whole thing literally reads like a bad joke.
And that part I do think is important. Everyone screams about RTC's, and it's impossible to "prove" the vaccines have increased all-cause mortality and they're right - there's no way I could make that claim. But believing that Pfizer run RTC's are, in any way, related to what we think of as RTC's, is also a joke. My simple analysis of trend line data vs introduction of new factors, and comparisons across segmentation in country's that report it accurately (the UK used to have great data before the story got so bad they had to pull it - follow donwolt on Twitter for great analysis of the UK data) is infinitely more defensible then a "RTC" for a drug where no testing was done of the actual participants in the trial.
And I don't mean this as an insult, but I can guess your age from your commentary. The biggest thing the comments section of The Free Press is helping us shake out is how much more institutional trust was born into prior generations and how much it has COMLETLEY evaporated for much of the Millennial (and more recent) generations. You, likely, had a number of what felt like positive institutional moments in your life - the end of the Cold War being huge in that regard. I did not. My entire life has been institutional failure after institutional failure. There is ZERO benefit of the doubt, and, at this point, it's probably even worse than that and I automatically assume the worse, because that's what our institutions in the US have earned.
As a quick aside - there's nothing I like more than when people scream that what's wrong with the US is because of "capitalism." We are "capitalist" in that every economy every anywhere is capitalist, but modern US market dynamics are closer to full scale socialism than maybe any macro-economy ever with the exception of modern day China. And the medical industry is the best example. There is not a single aspect of the medical industry that isn't centrally planned. The loans to get kids through college/med-school, the grants to perform research, the grants to prepare trials, the MASSIVE regulation around insurance, I could go on and on. We don't have a free market, and because we don't have a free market OF COURSE the money we spend on health care continues to sky rocker while the quality continues to crater. That's what happens when there's no impetus to match supply and demand. We supply what's fun and and easy and the government will pay for and completely ignore demand all together.
Anyway, sorry for the diatribe, but Big Pharma, and the state, frankly, are in the "Tyson Zone" for me. There's nothing you could tell me they did that on purpose, or data they ignored, or mistakes they made, that I'd dismiss out of hand. Because that's what they've earned.
Read the article. I cite every bit of data I reference. I also just literally pointed to euromomo where the macro data on all cause mortality changes , across EU reporting entities, lives.
The goal isn’t to convince you I’m right - or, as other commentators have suggested, that I’m not a horrible evil person who is personally responsible for every person on earth’s death - it’s just to illustrate the thought process of people who may have a different perspective.
As note, prior to 2020, the CDC took more than 2 full years to close the books on all cause mortality summaries. You can go find the summary analysis and look at when they were published and the year they covered. The US does not have any form of central reporting database - we aren’t universally connected to healthcare systems or local/state mortality database and we exclude all non-citizens from our reporting, a larger and larger part of the total population living in, and dying in, the US each year. US data is, at best, worthless, and at worse purposefully manipulated.
Sounds like you should move. And I mean this honestly. I moved during the pandemic because I believe in the importance of democracy. My old community genuinely believed schools should be closed, so they closed them. My perspective isn’t more important than theirs so their democratic decision to close schools should be honored. So I moved somewhere where the schools were open , somewhere that shared my values and perspective. I wasn’t right and my old community wasn’t wrong - I did what was right for me and those who shared my perspective, and we democratically decided the school should be open, and they did what was right for them and those who shared that perspective, and democratically decided their schools should be closed.
You want totalitarianism in the face of a virus you think might be dangerous you should move to somewhere where people agree with you. That’s the beauty of freedom - you can have what you desire… and so can I.
Actually moving to a community where schools were reopened -- that was right, not just an opinion. And lo and behold, the CDC's own guidance from summer 2020 on said exactly that -- no reason to keep schools closed. But the teachers' unions and the illiterate media had other ideas, as did the politicians beholden to them.
What an absurd comment. Did you know that a Pfizer exec just appeared before the European Union and stated the vaccine was never even tested to see if it prevented transmission before the rollout? So all those suspicious, “selfish“ people were right to be skeptical. I haven’t heard Rachel Maddow apologize yet. Or Sean Penn, a preening douchebag who said unvaxxed should be jailed. Or portly Michael Moore. Maybe a diet would have been more effective for him than 5 shots. Also, mandating a liability-free novel medical product seems unfair to the consumer (but hey, the companies made billions), especially in view of the fact that Pfizer previously paid 2.3 billion in fines for fraud, the highest Pharma fine ever at the time. A social contract should not be solely weighted to benefit corporations as this one was.
If they were more honest they would have changed their policies and recommendations as new information came in. They didn’t. That’s why we can’t trust them. Is not because they tried and were imperfect. It’s because they tried and didn’t change course when they were past the initial “must do something” stage.
COVID was always here to stay, like almost all communicable diseases, especially one so contagious. You'd need a vaccine at the level of effectiveness of the polio or smallpox shots (perfectly sterilizing) to reach a different situation.
Given the real but limited effectiveness of the vaccines, prevention of severe illness and death, and slowing the spread, were always the only realistic goals. Like the flu, this one was destined to spread until everyone had some natural immunity. This is what the real public health experts were saying from the beginning. The media and politicians tried to bulldoze them.
Wow. It wasn’t ever going to go away. It was always here forever. I am very aware that it is painful to see one’s own experts’ faults. Doesn’t mean it’s not true.
This is an exceedingly misleading and inaccurate presentation and interpretation of this data.
If you want to tell yourself this, fine, believe what you want. But it's not supported by the evidence, which does not remotely show or say what you claim.
Paul-- If you know that it is inaccurate please cite sources that say otherwise. I have no opinion either way but I do think if you make a bold statement, follow it up with a link so we can be informed. Just my two cents.
(In all seriousness, the greatest achievement in the history of kleptocratic shysterdom was how all of the unvaccinated people who died were actually people who just got vaccinated but the vaccine doesn’t really start working for a few weeks so you’re considered unvaccinated…….when you just got vaccinated.
😂😂😂😂
The vaccine has electrolytes. It’s what plants crave.)
This detail is about the grossest untruth about the whole pandemic. It’s so egregious and calculating but also insanely effective to hijack the narrative in their favour.
Yes, the whole “ causation” red herring started there.  Strictly speakIng, under the current CDC and NIH  approaches to vaccines, even smoking would not cause cancer either because: 1.not all smokers get cancer and 2.many non-smokers also get cancer. Initial correlation makes it more likely to see some causation but follow up is needed. When authorities refuse to actually follow up, to understand the modality of the Disease (eg autopsies etc) it’s not fair to argue that “there are no follow up studies proving causation”. 
Good article but “cards on the table,” I don’t have an ounce of confidence left in our health authorities. I love the part where the FDA has commissioned Pfizer—currently banking billions from the shots—to look into a safety issue. Strangely, it has not heard back yet! Meanwhile, the shots continue, and those who have been raising questions are continuously vilified as anti-science. You know what strikes me as anti-science? Hiring a company making billions to do its own safety studies. That is just pathetic.
I completely agree with the lack of accountability on this as well as the US being an outlier on pretty much all things related to Covid and children.
But one question that I haven't heard addressed is, how do we know these incidences of Myocarditis are due to the vaccines and not contracting Covid itself?
Myocarditis can occur from contracting the virus too (as well as other viruses) and these cardiac issues may be due to Covid circulating so widely now vs at the start of the pandemic when we were all on lockdown. I remember when reports of Myocarditis came out in 2020. (I had a 5 month old baby at the time, so was really paying attention to reports concerning young children). It's true that almost all of them recovered fully, so I agree that the risk to young kids is extremely low, but I don't understand how we distinguish between the 2 possible causes, especially since young kids who get Covid often don't even know that they got it and these reactions typically come after the virus is no longer detectable on tests. Am I missing something here?
The message is clear from Dr. Bhattacharya and these two doctors: the Covid booster has been very effective in preventing death and serious illness in the elderly and in those with underlying conditions, but it’s not necessary for younger healthier people.
Because of skepticism regarding government policies like lockdown and facemasks, people are turning to unscientific, unverified, anecdotal at best, Substack quacks who fuel the flames with crazy talk for their, conspiracy-believing subscribers. But these doctors have poured cold water on the outrageous claims about serious adverse effects, sudden death, etc.
And yet, there will be many who read these highly credible doctors’ comments and with a wave of their hand dismiss them as “being in on it“. To them I ask, do you also think the moon landing was staged?
Good point.
I first lost confidence in our health authorities over the promotion of Gender Ideology and "necessary life saving affirmative medicine" (drugs and mutilation) for children. There's tons of money to be made by pharma and doctors by making lifetime patients. It is now "abuse" to keep kids away from this. Who profits? Not the child who will wake up broken some day.
This is why I pay close attention to data from Europe, Israel, et al. Also, take a look at the FDA and CDC's web sites. There are often remarkable discrepancies between public statements of senior people at both places and the content of the web sites. The latter has been reviewed and edited, usually multiple times, and is presumably more reliable. The red meat handed out to the media is almost always less reliable.
I saw Chris Hayes last night opining on how everyone needs to run out immediately and get the booster. No mention of European countries de-recommending it for under 50. He is really just a corporate shill at this point.
You're just a conspiracy theorist. What would companies making billions have to gain from being less than truth full or covering their eyes and ears and saying they don't see anything. Aside from all the times they have been caught and fined for doing the exact same thing and killing thousands, and the fact that governments are funneling money to them at a rate never before seen in history I can't think of any incentive for these truly altruistic organizations to lie. Pharmaceutical companies are the only companies filled with saints, not like all other greedy capitalists who are solely responsible for inflation and poverty.
Lol
Yes, Pfizer has blood on its hands for sure.
I knew Pfizer lied through its teeth when shortly after the November 2020 election (rather than before) it announced that the vaccine was ready to be released. This was political and criminal.
That’s like the SEC asking Madoff if he is doing anything illegal in 2006.
Which it did for awhile.
Pence has 'em too. I think they all have them. They got mixed up with the love letters from their mistresses and were taken home :)
Think part/much of the issue is overclassification of gubmint docs
I think they all have them.too.
All Presidents for sure do.
Or asking Joe Biden’s lawyers if there are any classified documents in Joe’s house. :)
Euromomo data tracks mortality across reporting EU entities. Just look at the mortality trends for people under 65. Covid correlates to zero real increase in all cause mortality. Something changes in Jan of ‘21. Something REALLY changes in mid ‘22. “Correlation isn’t causation” but it’s very difficult to have causality WITHOUT correlation , so blaming covid is VERY difficult. So where else should we look…?
A simple glance at Pfizer’s trial data shows a very easily observable difference in all-cause mortality and specifically heart related causes between the treatment and control groups. Certainly enough that in any even semi-reasonable time they would have asked for more and longer research. That they didn’t almost certainly illustrates they knew the outcome but were being pressured to take the drug live regardless.
The question isn’t “why are people who actually looked at the data concerned,” it’s “why aren’t more people looking at the data and asking questions.”
I broke this all down in absurd detail on my personal choice not to get vaccinated detailed on my substack. If you just want to understand how many of us got where we are, give it a read. It may not change your mind, but it will at least provide insight into a counter perspective
I'm looking at your own data from your substack:
https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps
There's a spike in early 2020 in all cause mortality. It tapers off through the year, mostly due to lack of human contact, which -- you're right about this -- was a terrible idea. Then you get another spike in winter 2021 -- BEFORE the vaccine is rolled out! then again a tapering into spring. The summer spike could be due to a dropping away of precautions or it could be due to vaccine side effects. There is no way to tell.
CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
Your data and CDC's basically match each other. And neither supports the idea that there has been a broad increase in al-cause mortality in parallel with the COVID vaccine rollout.
Sound analysis.
The vaccine causation question is also directly addressed in the British mortality data. It breaks down everything for vaccinated vs not.
So, you see the overall trends observed here, including that younger people's mortality was significantly impacted by factors other than COVID. We can speculate as to the causes - maybe lockdowns were bad for folks' health as they stopped exercising and got out of shape; maybe reopening was deadly as folks came out of lockdowns somewhat loopy and less careful and so had a horrible period with auto accidents and similarly risky daily activities.
What is clear is the vaccination is not a cause of mortality among the young, at all. In every scenario folks raise in these comments and posts, when you look at vaccinated vs unvaccinated young people, it's never the case that the vaccinated are dying and the unvaccinated aren't - that, as folks proudly imply here, younger people who would otherwise be healthy are dying when they're vaccinated and living when they're not.
The entire premise of this post - to legitimate that there could be something to the #DyingSuddenly concerns, is hogwash. It's just validating the usual gangs who routinely get riled up about wrong things because they're bad at assessing threats and risks - the scared, misinformed, overly suspicious, oppositional, dim, innumerate, overly believing of anecdotes, overly believing of local "trends" (basically old-school evening news watchers), plus the cranks, contrarians, fraudsters, and evildoers.
I like Weiss' publication in many ways. But its comment section, and too many of its posts, are popular because they provide unwarranted and misleading succor and validation to these groups.
I see no reason to feed BS to other groups just because they like it (again, a reason I'll often like this publication; it's clear eyed about this tendency in other groups not like themselves). I don't think it's helpful or good to do so here either.
Look at the 15-44 age range in Euromomo... The trendline was still trending down, despite covid, through most of 2020 (or, at the worst, was flat). Outside of 1 week, from January '21 (available "vaccines") all the way through late spring of '22 mortality exceeds the baseline. You can take this as far back as it goes and we've never seen a sustained increase like that. It stayed elevated for so long it actually changes the baseline. We are now seeing the largest spike, by orders of magnitude, that we've ever seen in that age range, currently taking place.
I'm not blaming the "vaccine," nor do I do so in my article. I claim, as I claimed above, that it's very hard to have causation WITHOUT correlation, so correlating all-cause mortality increases to covid is near-impossible. I also highlight that Pfizer's own data showed more all-cause mortality in the treatment arm than the placebo, and that the size of the increase, while not statistically relevant, certainly warrants greater analysis, especially when it's repeated at a population level. Because Pfizer included almost no one of actual threat age for the virus in their trial it's impossible to compare the data for ages over 65.
For the 45-64 age range, who knows. We see a spike, very short lived, in 2020 when covid was apparently killing everyone (that somehow lasted only 3 weeks), and then normal mortality until the following winter. So mutations, or restrictions on medical care and personal freedom, or lack of sunlight and exercise, or the introduction of an insanely poorly tested "vaccine," or who knows, killed a bunch of people, and since then the trends look more or less the same pre-"vaccine" and post-"vaccine," with an odd spike in the summer of '22 (not seen in '20 or '21) corresponding with booster campaigns.
If this is what "success" looks like, I'd hate to see what failure looks like...
I think you're reading a lot into graphs. You'd need to run regression on this raw data to know whether your theory about flat prime demo mortality is correct. I agree with your take that the actual data (blue line) it looks like there is a slight increase throughout 2020 and early 2021 (less touching of the baseline) and a spike in late 2021. It's hard, since prime age demo mortality always appears stochastic due to the small numbers. I just don't see that you can relate that to anything. There's something going on, but what seems pretty nebulous.
If it is something nefarious about the vaccine (and I agree that's not really a correct term) why would this only show up in the 15-44 demo? An increase like this can't be due to cardiac events; that would show up big time in other data since cardiac events in this demo are rare. It seems pretty weird that the elevation has continued through today. As booster takeup has declined (as people have realized the vaccines do next to nothing), one wonders why the numbers are still elevated though.
Again, I'm not arguing with you about the vaccine itself. Sweden's strategy appears to have been correct. The vaccine does not stop transmission. Basically everything we were sold a bill of goods in late 2020; it's not snake oil, but it's not what they promised either. For what it's worth, the 25-44 CDC data (from my link above) shows the same pattern, so whatever you're seeing isn't localized. But there are a lot of conspiracy theories floating around, and in a time of plummeting institutional trust across the Western world, I think us armchair data nerds need to be careful about feeding those.
BTW: Well thought out and reasoned. You've largely convinced me that I wasn't seeing something in the data previously. I'm not sure you're right about the cause, but I agree you've got something real and somewhat weird here.
I totally agree with you. I think the issue we're both dealing with is context. When I wrote this we had family members that literally wouldn't see us because we weren't vaccinated. I wasn't trying to argue the vaccines were a tool of the devil boiling us from the insides, I was trying to illustrate how an infinitely rational person (and everyone who knows me knows I'm rational) could very easily make the decision to skip this experiment in "warp-speed" drug testing/approvals.
In the current context, where most everyone agrees the vaccines are a net zero, at best, I realize it hits a little different.
That said, one of the points IS to illustrate how broken our medical system is. Prior to 2016 there is ZERO chance this drug is approved. I cant even fathom getting a drug approved based on a trial where total hospitalizations and total deaths were worse in the treatment arm AND the drug's pretend efficacy declined so rapidly before the end of the insanely short trial they were already arguing that "boosters" would be needed to regain initial dose efficacy. The whole thing literally reads like a bad joke.
And that part I do think is important. Everyone screams about RTC's, and it's impossible to "prove" the vaccines have increased all-cause mortality and they're right - there's no way I could make that claim. But believing that Pfizer run RTC's are, in any way, related to what we think of as RTC's, is also a joke. My simple analysis of trend line data vs introduction of new factors, and comparisons across segmentation in country's that report it accurately (the UK used to have great data before the story got so bad they had to pull it - follow donwolt on Twitter for great analysis of the UK data) is infinitely more defensible then a "RTC" for a drug where no testing was done of the actual participants in the trial.
And I don't mean this as an insult, but I can guess your age from your commentary. The biggest thing the comments section of The Free Press is helping us shake out is how much more institutional trust was born into prior generations and how much it has COMLETLEY evaporated for much of the Millennial (and more recent) generations. You, likely, had a number of what felt like positive institutional moments in your life - the end of the Cold War being huge in that regard. I did not. My entire life has been institutional failure after institutional failure. There is ZERO benefit of the doubt, and, at this point, it's probably even worse than that and I automatically assume the worse, because that's what our institutions in the US have earned.
As a quick aside - there's nothing I like more than when people scream that what's wrong with the US is because of "capitalism." We are "capitalist" in that every economy every anywhere is capitalist, but modern US market dynamics are closer to full scale socialism than maybe any macro-economy ever with the exception of modern day China. And the medical industry is the best example. There is not a single aspect of the medical industry that isn't centrally planned. The loans to get kids through college/med-school, the grants to perform research, the grants to prepare trials, the MASSIVE regulation around insurance, I could go on and on. We don't have a free market, and because we don't have a free market OF COURSE the money we spend on health care continues to sky rocker while the quality continues to crater. That's what happens when there's no impetus to match supply and demand. We supply what's fun and and easy and the government will pay for and completely ignore demand all together.
Anyway, sorry for the diatribe, but Big Pharma, and the state, frankly, are in the "Tyson Zone" for me. There's nothing you could tell me they did that on purpose, or data they ignored, or mistakes they made, that I'd dismiss out of hand. Because that's what they've earned.
Where's the data? Because I'm looking at CDC data and it doesn't show this at all.
Read the article. I cite every bit of data I reference. I also just literally pointed to euromomo where the macro data on all cause mortality changes , across EU reporting entities, lives.
The goal isn’t to convince you I’m right - or, as other commentators have suggested, that I’m not a horrible evil person who is personally responsible for every person on earth’s death - it’s just to illustrate the thought process of people who may have a different perspective.
As note, prior to 2020, the CDC took more than 2 full years to close the books on all cause mortality summaries. You can go find the summary analysis and look at when they were published and the year they covered. The US does not have any form of central reporting database - we aren’t universally connected to healthcare systems or local/state mortality database and we exclude all non-citizens from our reporting, a larger and larger part of the total population living in, and dying in, the US each year. US data is, at best, worthless, and at worse purposefully manipulated.
Sounds like you should move. And I mean this honestly. I moved during the pandemic because I believe in the importance of democracy. My old community genuinely believed schools should be closed, so they closed them. My perspective isn’t more important than theirs so their democratic decision to close schools should be honored. So I moved somewhere where the schools were open , somewhere that shared my values and perspective. I wasn’t right and my old community wasn’t wrong - I did what was right for me and those who shared my perspective, and we democratically decided the school should be open, and they did what was right for them and those who shared that perspective, and democratically decided their schools should be closed.
You want totalitarianism in the face of a virus you think might be dangerous you should move to somewhere where people agree with you. That’s the beauty of freedom - you can have what you desire… and so can I.
Actually moving to a community where schools were reopened -- that was right, not just an opinion. And lo and behold, the CDC's own guidance from summer 2020 on said exactly that -- no reason to keep schools closed. But the teachers' unions and the illiterate media had other ideas, as did the politicians beholden to them.
What an absurd comment. Did you know that a Pfizer exec just appeared before the European Union and stated the vaccine was never even tested to see if it prevented transmission before the rollout? So all those suspicious, “selfish“ people were right to be skeptical. I haven’t heard Rachel Maddow apologize yet. Or Sean Penn, a preening douchebag who said unvaxxed should be jailed. Or portly Michael Moore. Maybe a diet would have been more effective for him than 5 shots. Also, mandating a liability-free novel medical product seems unfair to the consumer (but hey, the companies made billions), especially in view of the fact that Pfizer previously paid 2.3 billion in fines for fraud, the highest Pharma fine ever at the time. A social contract should not be solely weighted to benefit corporations as this one was.
If they were more honest they would have changed their policies and recommendations as new information came in. They didn’t. That’s why we can’t trust them. Is not because they tried and were imperfect. It’s because they tried and didn’t change course when they were past the initial “must do something” stage.
COVID was always here to stay, like almost all communicable diseases, especially one so contagious. You'd need a vaccine at the level of effectiveness of the polio or smallpox shots (perfectly sterilizing) to reach a different situation.
Given the real but limited effectiveness of the vaccines, prevention of severe illness and death, and slowing the spread, were always the only realistic goals. Like the flu, this one was destined to spread until everyone had some natural immunity. This is what the real public health experts were saying from the beginning. The media and politicians tried to bulldoze them.
Wow. It wasn’t ever going to go away. It was always here forever. I am very aware that it is painful to see one’s own experts’ faults. Doesn’t mean it’s not true.
This is an exceedingly misleading and inaccurate presentation and interpretation of this data.
If you want to tell yourself this, fine, believe what you want. But it's not supported by the evidence, which does not remotely show or say what you claim.
This article cited sources and elaborated actions that have been taken. You just shout “liar”.
Paul speak English not Fauci.
That is way too many words to say nothing. Try harder.
Paul-- If you know that it is inaccurate please cite sources that say otherwise. I have no opinion either way but I do think if you make a bold statement, follow it up with a link so we can be informed. Just my two cents.
Paul. Are you going to elaborate??
*authoritative voice
“This is CNN”
(In all seriousness, the greatest achievement in the history of kleptocratic shysterdom was how all of the unvaccinated people who died were actually people who just got vaccinated but the vaccine doesn’t really start working for a few weeks so you’re considered unvaccinated…….when you just got vaccinated.
😂😂😂😂
The vaccine has electrolytes. It’s what plants crave.)
This detail is about the grossest untruth about the whole pandemic. It’s so egregious and calculating but also insanely effective to hijack the narrative in their favour.
What are you referring to, Paul. Specifically?
You can keep taking all the annual boosters you want. But me I’m out of this 🐂💩bogus experiment
What is misleading and inaccurate? Data please.
Trust the tobacco companies.
That’s exactly what this looks like
Yes, the whole “ causation” red herring started there.  Strictly speakIng, under the current CDC and NIH  approaches to vaccines, even smoking would not cause cancer either because: 1.not all smokers get cancer and 2.many non-smokers also get cancer. Initial correlation makes it more likely to see some causation but follow up is needed. When authorities refuse to actually follow up, to understand the modality of the Disease (eg autopsies etc) it’s not fair to argue that “there are no follow up studies proving causation”. 
Exactly, classic fox guarding the henhouse analogy.