As I'm reading the thread, I think there's people who without concrete evidence will never admit that the vaccines are bad for a larger percentage of the population that was originally admitted.
Doesn't matter how much percentage of heart attacks, strokes or heart issues that happen among the vaccinated you will not get anything from them.
I'm watching most of the highly vaccinated rich countries in Europe, the UK, Ireland and obviously Israel be devastated by Covid...While Africa, most of poor Asia and most of South America seem just fine since Omnicom became the main virus in August.
I say if you don't believe and you trust the FDA/NIH/CDC and Big Pharma then more power to you!
Get those shots, inject your teens, children and babies!
Obviously, they're safe because the FDA and Big Pharma have never introduced medications or vaccines that are bad or have killed people right?
Big Pharma has never lost thousands of cases and had to pay billions in fines and in lawsuit payouts...NEVER.
They have never been caught hiding data, erasing data, lying under oath OR FALSIFYING DATA...Right?
Great track record.
I suggest if you think it's safe you continue with your 4th vaccination in less than a year, because that totally makes sense.
Please please please take your vaccinations.
In 3 years, data from multiple studies will come out and then we can figure out who's right or wrong...Of course you all signed away liability with that waiver so good luck if anything does go wrong.
Africans have a much younger population. Also, hydroxychloroquine is widely used as a malaria preventative. These two factors may explain their trivial death rates from Wuhan virus.
Japan and Indonesia are getting good results from ivermectin.
China underreports their sickness rates.
Meanwhile, the West cowers and relies on experimental vaccines while banning the use and even the discussion of promising therapeutics like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Yes study in Japan https://youtu.be/E1GF0H9V_1g my family won’t even read stuff anymore my brother is an immunologist and said do what Fauci says. I’m not sure if he still believes that but I have been unfriended by may!!
At the very minimum, iver and HCQ are well tested, safe and cheap. At the maximum, they do help reduce the symptoms. Plaquenil is the natural analog of hydroxychloroquine and is recommended by Dr. Zelenko, one of the top promoters of the HCQ/zinc cocktail to treat early covid19.
Dr. Zelenko (or some of his associates) has started a vitamin company Z-Stack that sells a plaquenil pill as a preventative. I got a bottle of it.
where do you get the idea that something is "for" a certain species? that's such a nonsensical argument that it just collapses on itself immediately. If something's beneficial for a species then it's beneficial for a species. arguing THAT is retarded. ivermectin has so many human studies it makes me wonder why i'm wasting my time refuting someone who can't be bothered to use duckduckgo.
cant tell if you're joking but just in case you're not (or just in case you ARE, and anyone else who's still dumb enough to eat their own logic in this debate),
the most obvious response is "are you saying ketamine is just for animals, too?" despite the fact that there have been hundreds of trials of human use and it's now prescribed legally in Canada and a few other countries for antidepressant use as well as an anesthetic
your response might be "ya but the clinical trials n prescription shows its ok for humans"
ok well then you just ate your own tail again because ivermectin has hundreds of clinical trials and is prescribed in many countries. It's on the WHO's list of fricking ESSENTIAL MEDICINES, and they don't put ANIMAL DRUGS on the ESSENTIAL MEDICINE list.
this article was written by one of the guys who won the nobel prize for marketing ivermectin in 2015. read it. if you don't then you have no reason to be engaging in this discussion.
Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, but it has shown, in cell cultures in laboratories, the ability to destroy 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. Further, ivermectin has demonstrated its potential in clinical trials for the treatment of Covid-19 and in large-scale population studies for the prevention of Covid-19."
Again OP if you were joking that's totally cool but this info is important for all the idiots who are risking their lives because they'd rather listen to unqualified news anchors and faux-scientists whose entire career hinges on attempting to find evidence to prove a political ideology.
so you're saying that fenbenzadole is just for dogs?
Many I don’t read my posts my bad. Anyway, I knew something was fishy when my doctor had put me back on plaquenil (the h word) saying it was safe!!! My other doctors agree.
That you do have to get your eyes checks cause it can cause serious I problem you just have to go in twice a year. When the doctor told me it was safe he said added that he only worries about very frail elderly people. I’m fat enough it doesn’t bother me
Because it’s been proven to be affective, not to mention it’s not harmful. FTA is threatening physicians not to prescribe ivermectin off label, I know this because my doctor told me. This is never happened in America, many medications are used off label every day. This is a ploy to make you take the gene therapy. It’s pure evil
They got you on a Word Play...The shot itself does NOT alter your genes itself...But it goes to your liver and causes your liver to alter your genes according to the info from the mRNA in the shot.
Basically, they split hairs.
I pay a guy to punch you...You accuse me of punching you...I swear on a bible I never did and am 100% correct.
I know someone who saved his wife's life by getting her HCQ, Zinc and some antibiotics when she got Covid bad. It was the only thing that turned her around. Within 24 hrs, she was on the rebound.
I would generally agree. As for COVID-19 I am fine with my vitamin D and zinc for protection. But Ivermectine is a bacteria. It is one of these pharmaceuticals from a long time ago, invented in Japan, that is really very very safe and effective in the treatment of parasites. It has been used for many decades with very little problems. I used it for parasites.
And, without a patent, it is dirt cheap. A reason big pharma isn´t really pushing it. Vaccines are muuuch better business and the COVID-vaccines are obviously incomparably more dangerous than Ivermectine.
Not all ´pharma´ products are equal. Some, like vitamins or minerals, can actually be beneficial.
Reason it seems to work isn't because it's anti-bacterial, but because it stops the production of protease which the virus needs to bind to a cell...Here's a NIH study that explains it muuuuuuuuuuuuuch better than I would using my caveman words.
I have Sjogren’s I started having more brain fog after I got off of it. My doctor told me that was why. Then I started having more symptoms after I got off it again.
i agrée, it’s a terribly sad response but it’s also our only hope. Seems like the herd is has already leapt off the cliff and the only questions left are when will they realize it and how many unwilling victims will they manage to take with them.
Yes and my brother is a big Democrat the immunologist so he blames everything on Republicans. So I sent him both videos by him and said this man from Germany he doesn’t have any reason to lie. He still wouldn’t watch it
Part of the problem is that the numbers they used for years previous to 2021 are wrong. They only use numbers from the list on a Wikipedia page. If you take a look at the numbers from FIFA in https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/56/2/80 you will find they are missing a lot.
This is a nice post. I am sorry you are getting mobbed by all these cranks. They don't seem to understand that statistics is about inference and you are not proposing any inference here. It is perfectly legitimate to discuss an anomaly like the large number of cardiac events in football players. I have been a part of many a medical study that begins by seeing an unusual spike or cluster of events in descriptive data like the above. Especially when there are well-established pathways by which the vaccine may lead to micro-clotting it is an issue worthy of the public's attention.
I notice that these commenters are all irate but immediately start tripping over their own shoelaces when trying to do any math. and don't seem to even agree what the problem is. I don't smell a lot of actual statistical background here. Thanks for posting this interesting analysis.
Just like the election. My husband even paid to get the data so he could do his own testing. We watched what all the experts said and he complained that the reason that people don’t understand it is they have these people with Statisticians and and in general people don’t understand how important The anomalies were. He said they should’ve made the whole thing more user-friendly. Or normal People friendly. Normal people that went to school in the US.
It's a bit unfortunate you've chosen to denigrate the numerical credentials of critical commenters, whilst at the same time praising a post which posits a value for expected deaths based on a population estimate which has been misread by a factor of one thousand. That's a pretty big shoelace.
"According to FIFA data, in 2000 there were 242,000 athletes registered in the association, and in 2006 there were 265,000 athletes registered" is sourced directly from a FIFA document which in fact quotes the number of people actively involved in playing football in those years as 242,000,000 and 265,000,000. This may or may not be the most significant problem with this analysis but was worthy of note in response to a comment snarking about other people's inability to process numbers.
How is this not deemed statistically significant? Why would the overall percentage discredit the fact that we're still seeing eight deviations from the norm? That's the significant factor that is being considered, not the percentage of overall players who die from cardiac failure.
https://stephenc.substack.com/p/5-fold-increase-in-sudden-cardiac/comment/3715497 explains. In the time since, the original author of the cod-scientific article upon which this Substack is based has, quietly and without acknowledging her extraordinary error, edited the piece such that the references to "242,000" and "265,000" no longer appear in the live version (Stephen doesn't appear to have got the memo as he still uses the quote in his version), however one can use Wayback Machine to view the versions of the page which contain everything referred to in the comment linked above.
It is important to note, by the way, that this isn't "my" source; it is the author's OWN source, the extremely careless misreading of which resulted in one of the main assertions of the piece being completely incorrect.
EDIT: Comment was in reply to a poster asking where the numbers in my previous comment had been sourced, a query which has been deleted by the poster subsequent to this detailed answer being provided.
We all know, as Mark Twain said, there are 3 types of lie: lies, dammed lies and statistics. That's why Bill Gates endorsed the book "How to Lie with Statistics".
You don't have to be a statistician or even very bright to see exactly whats happening here with all these sudden heart attacks in super fit sportsmen and women.
In fact, most predictive medical statisticians (i.e. epidemiologists) have been shown to be not very good (See Niall Ferguson's track record of getting every prediction completely wrong) and not very smart....its almost like "if you fail at everything else, become an epidemiologist!"
Among the 'vaccinated' public, the biggest deterrent to admitting that these collapsing and dying situations are statistically significant is the requirement to admit that, "I was foolish and I was duped into doing this". That's because most human beings are weak, greedy, scared and gullible.
Please treat this with some skepticism as the doctor in question allegedly has a track record of some dubious claims - that said the American Heart Association have published it. If it's true though, there's your explanation and it would suggest based on the claims that sports people should probably take 2.5 months off after the shots, that's how long they claim the effect persists. The link was circulated by the inventor of mrna vaccines.
I don't like the modern world. There's too much fake information, but there's also too many coincidences to swallow, and the people we used to trust to investigate things are no longer themselves trustworthy.
That would also suggest that the side-effects have been under-reported. Sure it may be that for most people they are not physically active that the increased risk would be of a concern, but it does seem, on the face of that AHA publication, that there is some scope for further investigation
My husband told me there is some kind of information about the reason there’s more athletes dying is because if you have more muscle it affects you in a different way. But I don’t know where that is you can try his sub stack boblphd.substack.com
This study published on Nov. 8, 2021 in Circulation states the following:
"We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination".
Dr. Aseem Malhotra was just on UK news talking about how by Dr. Gundry, and a group of cardiologists in UK, have the data but won't release it due to fear of losing research funding.
This isn't a new game. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick's books: "Doctoring Data" and
"The Cholesterol Con." Catherine Jacobson-Ramin's "Crooked" (about the corrupt back surgery/treatment system). Dr. Marty Makary's books.
Well the thing is, it's meaningless unless they release the study. It can't be cited or used.
Gundry has put his name to the abstract and not the study? Strange
It's the same with anonymous doctors speaking out against the vaccine. It's basically useless for our cause because it's not verified and basically could be untrue
These people are the front line in this war. We need them to speak out despite fear otherwise it will be ongoing. Not only that they are letting more and more people die each day they don't speak out.
The paper was peer reviewed. It is my understanding that AHA has a protocol of preventing any online publication for one year and only publish it in the subscription based publication.
The peer review is part of the submission process. This is a journal policy. Research it for yourself but it is not an OPEN disclosure. Buy the journal.
In order for this to be relevant to the overall conversation in which it's being deployed, you need to list the number of these deaths who were vaccinated, the number who had contracted covid prior (including potentially an asymptomatic case), the number who had both, and the number who had neither. Unfortunately that's going to be difficult to intuit without a lot of leg work. I do commend you on the leg work you did do, however.
That assumes the root cause is the vaccine. (I might even be sympathetic to that assumption)
Another potential root cause could be loss of condition due to extended lockdowns in 2020.
My recollection of 2020 was that the football leagues were mostly not restricted from training or playing, which would seem to rule out loss of conditioning, but in any case a full root cause analysis of this anomaly is indicated.
I published this article by Yaffa here to highlight the anomaly and hopefully trigger further investigation.
It is a fact that the number of SCD/SUDs this year is significantly above the historical rate. Statistics cannot provide the root cause, and while we can have our beliefs, we should seek to support those beliefs with data
I doubt conditioning is a factor. These are athletes and would have been training during lockdown. But I think that it's certainly possible that it's not the vaccine and instead long term damage from Covid itself that causes this. OR it could be some of both. If I were to guess wildly, a Covid infection probably damages the body a lot permanently, the vaccine probably damages the body a very slight amount permanently, but a measurable amount in aggregate, and possibly in more people than others.
The myocarditis induced by the vaccine is apparently more significant and deadly than the myocarditis induced by the virus. This from Dr. peter McCullough, Board Certified Cardiologist and Internist who is closely following the data and used to recommend the vaccine to high risk groups. He no longer recommends it to any human and says the program must be shut down.
Per a few sources, the bazillions of tiny spike proteins manufactured by your cells at the behest of the injected mrna is causing microclotting, which of course, could find itself in the heart, especially with individuals who are pumping blood at a higher rate than a sedentary human. This same microclotting was happening in the lungs with covid-19 infections (also due to the spike proteins on the corona), which is why people could breathe but weren't getting enough oxygen.
If it's the "vaccines", it's the pharmaceutical industrial complex, and corporate captured gov't and media's fault.
It it's the lock-downs, it's as above.
Whichever way a mudblood tries to twist it, in order to reconcile it within their Platonian caveman view of the world, the one thing that is universally true, is that THERE ARE NO REFUNDS FOR POISONS ALREADY INSIDE THE NUCLEUS OF ONE'S CELLS 💀
Conspiracy -> from Latin, con- ("together") + spirare ("to breathe).
You are going to tolerate the use of the term “mud blood”? There can’t be a civilized mature conversation with someone using juvenile terms such as this to describe people who are vaccinated. I’m disappointed that this comment is allowed into what is supposed to be an intelligent conversation. Shame.
The majority of this comment is off topic. We can discuss the rise in incidents without having to bring in many theories on the content of the injections that are being forced on the population through coercive measures that are likely illegal under Nuremberg.
Deleted. A more pithy and on-point comment would be retained
Fighting age males, who would want to wipe out a civilizations fighting age males? On an unrelated matter, China's army consists almost entirely of " only sons" because of the brilliant "1 child policy" . Every soldier represents the last in a family line, weird. Probably unrelated.
This is not a rigorous statistical analysis in any way, and is extremely misleading. There are all kinds of holes in the methodology. Why not refer to some actual peer reviewed literature? The consideration of pre-pandemic figures is severely lacking here, along with information like whether subjects have been vaccinated and/or had the virus. The virus can cause heart problems too, of course.
I wonder if you are aware of the the difference between an anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation and a rigorous peer reviewed investigation report.
Hint: this is the "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation"
We have not yet seen the "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report"
A link provided by another commenter to a peer reviewed paper in the AHA: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 (caveats, some question the author) suggests that there is a real effect and that consequently athletes should refrain from strenuous activity for 2.5 months after the shot...
One could also start pointing at other data sources, but that all misses the point of this article, which is to stimulate people to do the actual rigorous peer reviewed research. It is a shame that globally the standard safety trials and processes were cut short for this specific treatment... the likely outcome is that we will discover much that is not great about the treatment as time evolves...
Obviously more rigorous investigation is needed, but I think you know what you're doing here. If you had any statistical integrity you'd recognise that the headline figure of this whole piece is based on incomplete, selective data.
If you have issue with the title, please address that to Yaffa. The original title was 500% which I changed to 5-fold as while technically 5-fold and 500% are the same numerical effect, the 500% wording sounds significantly bigger.
Additionally, I added a small section at the end illustrating how one could sanity check the claims. It is an exercise for the reader to decide whether the data sources cited are ones they have trust in or not.
With wikipedia, in my opinion, the greater risk is under-reporting, so the question becomes "were the years prior to 2021 under-reported" at that point we enter the reals of how to apply the BMJ estimate to the representative sample of people who would get named... already that becomes too much for ordinary people to address.
The real question this article seeks to address is "Is it just that we are noticing something that always happened or is there something significant here"
I believe this answers the question with "looks like there could be something unusual here, somebody needs to take a deeper look"
The title change is meaningless, it's semantics. It's the lack of credible data behind the headline that's the issue. Funny that you care more about the title than what's underpinning it. This research is not peer-reviewed and is not credible.
There have been hundreds of millions of doses given. If you have any genuine research into the harm they're doing then I'll happily look at it. Until then, perhaps you should stop posturing based on nothing but a feeling.
Nope, it's quite the opposite. It's up to the trials to display safety in advance, not for random people to prove the damage later. The trial destroyed the control group so in my opinion failed to prove safety following six months. Yet we have about four times "cardiac arrest" in the treatment group. And they also found a few more spare deaths (6) they forgot to mention before. And a few countries (Scandinavian, Taiwan, etc.) suspended the treatment for people under 30/17 for this very concern. And Israel recommends not to do sports for a couple of weeks after the shot. And it seems they added an extra ingredient exactly for this reason to the kids formula. But no, let's not talk about this until we have a published paper...that we had and was removed for no reason: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483988/. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical
There is abundant evidence that these shots are not properly tested, that the data was manipulated to get approval, and that hundreds of thousands have been injured. You simply have to be willing to look at the evidence that has been published. The BMJ for example just published an investigative piece when a whistleblower came to them and reported on how Pfizer has been doctoring their study results. But it's easy to go on the attack when you aren't willing to look at anything that doesn't already conform to your exisitng worldview.
Sen Ron Johnson had multiple meetings with people who had adverse reactions that they wouldn’t count and they won’t help these people!! What about FDA asking to delay releasing data??
The current rush to inoculate the covid "vaccines" displays a recklessness that can only be described as a mass hysteria.
Of course there is no highly rigorous study and the exact figures are not known.
This is because we are in a mass hysteria and we are acting upon the dogma that the problem does not exist, which is insanity.
Adverse events pile up far, far beyond any possibility to keep track even if suitable tools existed for that.
All we can do is point out statistical impossibilities outside of massive adverse consequences of the so-called vaccines, like a 5-fold increase in FIFA heart attacks.
Or a sharp increase (doubling?) in death rates.
Or a drop in life span.
This hysteria is turning into the biggest humanitarian crisis ouside of war, given that effective and inocuous early treatment has been known for more than a year.
The "vaccines" never passed the trial phase and should have been abandoned, or kept for a small minority of people at their own risk.
The 5-fold increase is based on selective, invalid, incomplete data. It's therefore worthless.
When you have an actual study, real data, that confirms your worries (hysteria, some would argue) then I'll happily consider it. At present you have nothing. Just feelings.
The mass hysteria is about inverting the burden of proof.
We are in extremely assymetric positions: You want to jab me and my children and everybody else, I don't want to jab you or anyone.
Therefore you must produce the highest standard of scientific evidence and I am rightfully opposing troubling signals. Not the other way around.
Also, every health issue happening to the jabbed must be considered an adverse effect of the jab until proven otherwise.
I insist on your being the victim of a mass hysteria because the only ther explanation os such gross absence of common sense would be shear dishonesty.
3 - based on a protein that seems to be the cause of the disease's virulence
4 - with new innovative barely tested technology that makes our own cells produce it in unknowable quantities from unknowable tissues
5 - while effective and innocuous early treatments are banned and doctors unable to practice medicine (ie prescribe them off-label)
6- while obsiously deranged masses call "science" the denial of any fact (usually be demanding extravagant degree of proof) that does not fit their unproved prejudices and coerce dissenters into silence
If you're not afraid, you have faith. Or a crystal ball.
The recklessness is flagrant.
Mass psychosis happened in the past - do you deny that ?
Wake up.
Such signals as FIFA heart issues come on top of other signals that require the immediate stopping of the mass jab until "scientific" evidence of benefits can be produced.
Also the accusation of fear (I supposed irrational) fits quite well the other side: An irrational, vastly exaggerated fear of the Covid 19 pandemy.
Again you are inverting our positions: I am not scared of it nearly enough to accept the mass inoculation of the experimental genetic barely tested "vaccines".
People must be freaked out of their mind to accept such an experiment. I'm not.
how do you feel about deaths reported to vaers since the release of the covid vaccine(s) being considerably more than all other years combined in vaers reporting history?
THERE IS NO COMPLETE DATA. That's been the problem from the beginning, here in the U.S. it's all doctored. Talk to the coroners, the morgues, the doctors and nurses who have quit their careers in the past year by the thousands. The Germans didn't know about the concentration camps either...until after the war was over and the damage was done. It's easy to manipulate the masses. Media is a powerful tool.
"Questionable" and "Incomplete" data = the need to obtain more data to carry out further analysis. It doesn't = the conclusion is wrong. What is questionable is how the main stream press don't seem to be investigating / reporting on this - one can only wonder why not.
This seems to be a conclusion of Dr. Gundry (the cardiologist who hocks herbal supplements and his exclusive olive oil) And his findings in his patients. Not sure it should be taken as gospel as of now. It definitely warrants a further investigation.
Another peer reviewed study published a few weeks ago gives further evidence:
"Following the global rollout and administration of the Pfizer Inc./BioNTech BNT162b2 and Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccines on December 17, 2020, in the United States, and of the Janssen Ad26.COV2.S product on April 1st, 2021, in an unprecedented manner, hundreds of thousands of individuals have reported adverse events (AEs) using the Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS). We used VAERS data to examine cardiac AEs, primarily myocarditis, reported following injection of the first or second dose of the COVID-19 injectable products. Myocarditis rates reported in VAERS were significantly higher in youths between the ages of 13 to 23 (p<0.0001) with ∼80% occurring in males. Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12-15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group. In addition, a 5-fold increase in myocarditis rate was observed subsequent to dose 2 as opposed to dose 1 in 15-year-old males. A total of 67% of all cases occurred with BNT162b2. Of the total myocarditis AE reports, 6 individuals died (1.1%) and of these, 2 were under 20 years of age - 1 was 13. These findings suggest a markedly higher risk for myocarditis subsequent to COVID-19 injectable product use than for other known vaccines, and this is well above known background rates for myocarditis. COVID-19 injectable products are novel and have a genetic, pathogenic mechanism of action causing uncontrolled expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells. When you combine this fact with the temporal relationship of AE occurrence and reporting, biological plausibility of cause and effect, and the fact that these data are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical data, it supports a conclusion that the COVID-19 biological products are deterministic for the myocarditis cases observed after injection".
-Rose and Mccullough, 'A Report on Myocarditis Adverse Events in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Association with COVID-19 Injectable Biological products'
Scientists before Galileo also started noticing that the sun wasn’t rotating around the earth, as they were being told by the scientific consensus at the time, which was also directed by the authorities of the time, the Roman Catholic Church. All their data was considered questionable and incomplete, unable with the tools of the time to produce a study with enough hard evidence to be valid, or hold its weight, as you say. They were imprisoned first and later executed for spreading dangerous information.
Until hundreds of years later, someone built a telescope “good enough.” Galileo then did the study. They spared him his life in exchange for exile. It wasn’t for many years later that the church finally had to give in, as the evidence mounted.
The completeness of data you demand is nearly Impossible to produce for us, as naturally the lay people screaming “Stop! It looks like you’re hurting us!” have not the tools nor training to produce said results. Those in power will be very inclined to hinder the creation and discussion of such studies, lest they be prepared to acquiesce, and admit that they too, are not actually the center of the universe.
So the fact they asked to release the data over time, years, doesn’t give up pause to think why. They were confronted with a freedom of information act case or they would have released nothing! Also, watch project veritas where the nurse? Doctor says the jab is full of ___. Then says they won’t report the case because they want to sweep it under the rug! The FBI raided their homes why? To install fear and they took there phones etc. now anyone that contacted them, reported for them in the sites of the parents are terrorists Clinton supporting FBI. She should be in prison! Had a home server really?
Are we talking about 5 times more cases exactly since the start of the “vaccinations” and of course all athletes and international sportsmen - women are vaccinated otherwise they will mot appear in Amy competition.
So the question vaccinated or not does not even exist dumbo !
Except that data will be biased as that’s across all competitive sports and not all sports are back. Football is one subset of sports that has, at the professional level, been mostly able to continue through the restrictions.
It’s not so simple to get data that is unbiased as you think
My point is that choosing one association, gathering data haphazardly, and then presenting your inferences with alarmist language is - yes - amateurish.
So do you think Wikipedia will have over-reported deaths for this year? Or do you think they have under reported deaths in all prior years?
The difference between 21 and an average of 4 to 5 is quite significant and is enough to say “somebody needs to do a more detailed study”
Or are you saying the data is so unreliable that there is nothing to see here at all?
I think you would agree that if it seems like this year is at least 21 deaths of professional footballers and two separate estimates put the expected number at between wiki:4 and BMJ:5 (which means a variance of 4 or 5 and consequently a standard deviation of 2-ish) then something that is 8 standard deviations from the mean certainty warrants further investigation
Wikipedia is not a source of reliable information and data gathering. It might pique your interest, but then anyone with any credibility will perform further investigation with data from respected sources before declaring an "epidemic" of Sudden Cardiac Death. This is high-school level work I'd expect from a 17 year old.
Why do the rely on Wikipedia? Is that reliable data? According to the study "FIFA Sudden Death Registry (FIFA-SDR): a prospective, observational study of sudden death in worldwide football from 2014 to 2018" ( Egger, F. , Scharhag, J. , Kästner, A. , Dvorák, J. , Bohm, P. , Meyer, T., 2020) there were 617 "sudden deaths" in between 2014-2018 (albeit not all because of cardiac problems). That's way more than the claimed 4,2 deaths per year. So I would take the above article with a grain of salt.
"Not all cardiac problems" renders your implication moot. The incidents specifically cite CARDIAC RELATED DEATHS -- not any extraneous deaths, nor even injuries. Moreover, with those incidents not occurring in the public eye, likely going unreported -- as is the wont of all corporate captured institutions; indeed, as is now being so starkly demonstrated by even the medical sector, of all places -- and the data here being concerned only with deaths per se (NB: [Viral] myocarditis has a CFR of 20% @ 5 years; 50% @ >10 years), citing absolute numbers, associated with all deaths, is all non-sequitur.
How many sportspeople use steroids, pain-killers, and other drugs?... Which, aside from their inherent risks, could also interact, deleteriously, with these so-called "vaccines" (lit., endogenous antibody therapies)? That's not even touching the myriad other causes of death that could account for the "617" number... BUT, that could NOT account for the sudden uptick in HEART RELATED deaths, which 'happen to' directly correlate with the "vaccine" pogroms ⚠
It goes to show that it really is true that if you pummel the lay populace with enough fear-inducing lies -- putatively, and according to the K. G. B.'s own studies, about two months' worth -- many will become near-impervious to any facts subsequently presented to them which contradict what they have been "re-wired" to believe. When you couple said psychological phenomenon with the innate human foible of ego, one is near-guaranteed to beguile the majority (plebes), hook, line, and sinker, after ~18 months of fear-mongering and Orwellian shutting-down of dissent.
'It is easier to fool somebody, than it is to convince them that they have been fooled.'
I don't know what link you were clicking, however if you think there are 262 million professional football players currently active in the world then somebody needs to update FIFA.
Stephen, let me help you with this one. The link to which the previous poster refers is in the top line, directing to the original write-up of the story on Real Time News (https://www.rtnews.co.il/?view=article&id=49&catid=22). This much-expanded version of the report states that the source of the figures of 265,000 (2006) and 242,000 (2000) registered FIFA athletes is the FIFA Big Count document: "According to FIFA data ( FIFA_BIG_COUNT.pdf ), in 2000 there were 242,000 athletes registered in the association, and in 2006 there were 265,000 athletes registered. FIFA's size has not changed significantly in twenty years, which means we have to expect about 5 deaths a year."
Clicking on the hyperlink in that article to open the FIFA Big Count document (https://www.rtnews.co.il/images/FIFA_BIG_COUNT.pdf) opens a 2006 audit of people actively involved in football worldwide, with the headline figure of 265 million (2006) up from 242 million "six years ago". Accordingly it is self-evident that the assessment in the article has erroneously understated the number of active footballers by a factor of one thousand, and therefore that any subsequent statistical analysis based on that figure - ie, the calculation of the number of expected annual fatalities - absorbs this gross error.
That the figure you have found independently for professional players is so enormously out of whack with the figure Yaffa found (but misread) in the FIFA Big Count is because they are measuring different things - the 2019 document records only paid professionals, whereas the 2006 Big Count basically records anybody who kicks a ball in any recreational setting (it is, after all, roughly 4% of the entire population of the planet). Accordingly, if you are attempting a rough calculation of expected annual deaths among those two populations, it would (at the quoted rate of 1 in 50,000) work out at 2.5 professional players and 5,240 'ball-kickers' (for want of a better term).
From the list referred to in this article, of the "21 FIFA players" who are recorded as having died in 2021, the number who would in fact fall under the designation of 'professional' given the definitions in the 2019 FIFA Report you link to is a mere 1 (a player in the Jamaican Premier League). And whilst it is literally impossible to compile an exhaustive list of those within the 262,000,000 'ball-kickers' who die in a year, for the vast majority of them will be regular punters whose passing will not be newsworthy, that this study has found 21 of them is not any sort of indication that one should expect there to be anomalously more than 5,240. All the poissons in the world are not going to make up for (a) the extraordinary error of the original author having misread the number of active football players by three entire decimal places, and (b) the seeming abandon with which the authors interchange 'footballers' and 'people who play/were playing football', two populations which are vastly different. All of which, I am afraid, fundamentally undermines the entire statistical thrust of the project and renders it entirely meaningless from all but an anecdotal point of view.
Aha! I see the problem. You cannot tell the difference between an anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation and a rigorous peer reviewed investigation report.
Hint: this is the "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation"
We have not yet seen the "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report"
A link provided by another commenter to a peer reviewed paper in the AHA: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 (caveats, some question the author) suggests that there is a real effect and that consequently athletes should refrain from strenuous activity for 2.5 months after the shot... that would seem to support that this "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation" is warranted.
As to your claims that this is "totally pointless" the whole point of this is to call for people to actually do a "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report". That is the point.
Sounds like, however, that you have your blinkers on, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree
The heinously underreported VAERS database has already recorded ~850,000+ injuries, and ~20,000+ deaths; the E. U.'s EurdaVigilance system has even higher numbers. Look up "Senator Johnson: Expert Panel into Vaccine Injuries" (Nov. 2021) -- predictably removed from YouTube; but, easily searchable.
NB: By U. S. law, if VAERS data demonstrates any correlation to trial data, in terms of adverse effects, the pertaining vaccine rollout must immediately be halted, and a phase-4 trial conducted. Of course, given that no proper trials were conducted for these nano-elixirs, it's no longer a proper inoculation program -- rather, a Jonestown style vax cult...
Good observation, but also what Evil Harry writes is true. Wikipedia seems like a reliable source of information, until you personally bump up against its system. I have lost a couple of information battles in Wikipedia in regards to politically charged issues on topics/people of whom i was deeply familiar. Try searching for "Paul Addis" on wikipedia LOL.
As I'm reading the thread, I think there's people who without concrete evidence will never admit that the vaccines are bad for a larger percentage of the population that was originally admitted.
Doesn't matter how much percentage of heart attacks, strokes or heart issues that happen among the vaccinated you will not get anything from them.
I'm watching most of the highly vaccinated rich countries in Europe, the UK, Ireland and obviously Israel be devastated by Covid...While Africa, most of poor Asia and most of South America seem just fine since Omnicom became the main virus in August.
I say if you don't believe and you trust the FDA/NIH/CDC and Big Pharma then more power to you!
Get those shots, inject your teens, children and babies!
Obviously, they're safe because the FDA and Big Pharma have never introduced medications or vaccines that are bad or have killed people right?
Big Pharma has never lost thousands of cases and had to pay billions in fines and in lawsuit payouts...NEVER.
They have never been caught hiding data, erasing data, lying under oath OR FALSIFYING DATA...Right?
Great track record.
I suggest if you think it's safe you continue with your 4th vaccination in less than a year, because that totally makes sense.
Please please please take your vaccinations.
In 3 years, data from multiple studies will come out and then we can figure out who's right or wrong...Of course you all signed away liability with that waiver so good luck if anything does go wrong.
Africans have a much younger population. Also, hydroxychloroquine is widely used as a malaria preventative. These two factors may explain their trivial death rates from Wuhan virus.
Japan and Indonesia are getting good results from ivermectin.
China underreports their sickness rates.
Meanwhile, the West cowers and relies on experimental vaccines while banning the use and even the discussion of promising therapeutics like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are your main foundation for success...The age thing helps but the meds makes the MAIN difference.
Quercetin and elderberry zinc are just as nearly as powerful!
Yes study in Japan https://youtu.be/E1GF0H9V_1g my family won’t even read stuff anymore my brother is an immunologist and said do what Fauci says. I’m not sure if he still believes that but I have been unfriended by may!!
At the very minimum, iver and HCQ are well tested, safe and cheap. At the maximum, they do help reduce the symptoms. Plaquenil is the natural analog of hydroxychloroquine and is recommended by Dr. Zelenko, one of the top promoters of the HCQ/zinc cocktail to treat early covid19.
Dr. Zelenko (or some of his associates) has started a vitamin company Z-Stack that sells a plaquenil pill as a preventative. I got a bottle of it.
Was just in Mexico...I bought a BUNCH of Ivermectin and HCQ
I take it now but I also took it for 6 years before no problems
Are you dumb? Ivermectin is for dogs. Ya'll so retarded and actually hurt yourself and others, because you think you know better.
where do you get the idea that something is "for" a certain species? that's such a nonsensical argument that it just collapses on itself immediately. If something's beneficial for a species then it's beneficial for a species. arguing THAT is retarded. ivermectin has so many human studies it makes me wonder why i'm wasting my time refuting someone who can't be bothered to use duckduckgo.
Ivermectin is for people horses and dogs bozo!
cant tell if you're joking but just in case you're not (or just in case you ARE, and anyone else who's still dumb enough to eat their own logic in this debate),
the most obvious response is "are you saying ketamine is just for animals, too?" despite the fact that there have been hundreds of trials of human use and it's now prescribed legally in Canada and a few other countries for antidepressant use as well as an anesthetic
your response might be "ya but the clinical trials n prescription shows its ok for humans"
ok well then you just ate your own tail again because ivermectin has hundreds of clinical trials and is prescribed in many countries. It's on the WHO's list of fricking ESSENTIAL MEDICINES, and they don't put ANIMAL DRUGS on the ESSENTIAL MEDICINE list.
this article was written by one of the guys who won the nobel prize for marketing ivermectin in 2015. read it. if you don't then you have no reason to be engaging in this discussion.
https://www.aier.org/article/the-fdas-war-against-the-truth-on-ivermectin/
"
Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, but it has shown, in cell cultures in laboratories, the ability to destroy 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. Further, ivermectin has demonstrated its potential in clinical trials for the treatment of Covid-19 and in large-scale population studies for the prevention of Covid-19."
Again OP if you were joking that's totally cool but this info is important for all the idiots who are risking their lives because they'd rather listen to unqualified news anchors and faux-scientists whose entire career hinges on attempting to find evidence to prove a political ideology.
so you're saying that fenbenzadole is just for dogs?
That’s how mine comes plaquenil it’s easier to spell too.
actually, quercetin. I misremembered the ingredient list :)
And why there now trying to develop a job for malaria then they can’t use hydroxychloroquine anymore
Many I don’t read my posts my bad. Anyway, I knew something was fishy when my doctor had put me back on plaquenil (the h word) saying it was safe!!! My other doctors agree.
That you do have to get your eyes checks cause it can cause serious I problem you just have to go in twice a year. When the doctor told me it was safe he said added that he only worries about very frail elderly people. I’m fat enough it doesn’t bother me
Oh boy! Why would you take another poison(HYDROXY and Ivermectin) from big pharma? 🤦♂️
No one says I don't believe in meds...Ivermectin and HCQ have 2 of the longest SAFEST records for use in the WORLD.
Due to years of testing and studies.
Billions of prescriptions have been given with little to no injuries or deaths.
In fact, Ivermectin won the 2015 Noble Prize in Medicine for it's multiple safe uses in humans.
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnd since both are past their copyright stage they are actually quite cheap so most big pharamaceuticals don't even make it too much.
NOT ENOUGH PROFIT TO BE MADE.
Because it’s been proven to be affective, not to mention it’s not harmful. FTA is threatening physicians not to prescribe ivermectin off label, I know this because my doctor told me. This is never happened in America, many medications are used off label every day. This is a ploy to make you take the gene therapy. It’s pure evil
please, enough with the gene therapy bs. show me any credible, peer reviewed link that show mRNA vaccines alter your genes.
They likely do alter genes but it's gene therapy because genetic material ie mRNA is being trojan horsed into your cells.
It's now 9/12/22 and it does in fact alter your genes:
https://rupreparing.com/news/2022/6/19/gene-therapy-study-finds-mrna-covid-vaccines-enter-liver-and-then-alter-dna
They got you on a Word Play...The shot itself does NOT alter your genes itself...But it goes to your liver and causes your liver to alter your genes according to the info from the mRNA in the shot.
Basically, they split hairs.
I pay a guy to punch you...You accuse me of punching you...I swear on a bible I never did and am 100% correct.
Although the result is the same.
Here is the peer reviewed article that confirms and demonstrates how the genes are altered. https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm
How about trillions of mRNA spike proteins clogging up every vein and organ you got!
what do you think mRNA was a precursor of dimwit its in the acronym
what are you talking about? HCQ and ivermectin are safer than ibuprofen.
I know someone who saved his wife's life by getting her HCQ, Zinc and some antibiotics when she got Covid bad. It was the only thing that turned her around. Within 24 hrs, she was on the rebound.
Who told you, that there's a cure for a fake pandemic/disease?! BIG PHARMA? LOL
I would generally agree. As for COVID-19 I am fine with my vitamin D and zinc for protection. But Ivermectine is a bacteria. It is one of these pharmaceuticals from a long time ago, invented in Japan, that is really very very safe and effective in the treatment of parasites. It has been used for many decades with very little problems. I used it for parasites.
And, without a patent, it is dirt cheap. A reason big pharma isn´t really pushing it. Vaccines are muuuch better business and the COVID-vaccines are obviously incomparably more dangerous than Ivermectine.
Not all ´pharma´ products are equal. Some, like vitamins or minerals, can actually be beneficial.
I take an elderberry/zinc/C supplement every day.
Elderberry = Great anti-oxidant!
Me to, haven’t had a sick day from work in six years.
Reason it seems to work isn't because it's anti-bacterial, but because it stops the production of protease which the virus needs to bind to a cell...Here's a NIH study that explains it muuuuuuuuuuuuuch better than I would using my caveman words.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8203399/
It’s actually a tiny bit safer than plaquenil But both are many times safer than the job
I have Sjogren’s I started having more brain fog after I got off of it. My doctor told me that was why. Then I started having more symptoms after I got off it again.
😅🤣😅🤣😅😅😅
Blindly trust governments and big pharma? Then booster up buttercups! The one problem that solves itself.
Sad reply
i agrée, it’s a terribly sad response but it’s also our only hope. Seems like the herd is has already leapt off the cliff and the only questions left are when will they realize it and how many unwilling victims will they manage to take with them.
Is this why they are creating a jab for malaria? Ruin the stats at all costs
Amen https://youtu.be/pyPjAfNNA-U watch this all the way until the end
He's awesome isn't he?
Yes and my brother is a big Democrat the immunologist so he blames everything on Republicans. So I sent him both videos by him and said this man from Germany he doesn’t have any reason to lie. He still wouldn’t watch it
What does your genius brother say now?
Indeed! Well said.
Africa doesn't test enough
You can see it in the excess deaths.
Yes and no...I agree they don't test, but I also know many of the PSR tests were so unreliable that they were useless...Some were off 70% of the time.
So why even throw that as an excuse? I could then say that what percentage of the so-call positive tests were actually false positives in the US?
Think of all the panic numbers last year, trying to scare us.
Even the WHO knew that since last year and changed how many cycles are used to test for Covid.
In other words, the PSR tests are GARBAGE and don't really matter.
https://thevaccinereaction.org/2021/02/who-issues-new-guidance-on-use-of-pcr-tests/
Part of the problem is that the numbers they used for years previous to 2021 are wrong. They only use numbers from the list on a Wikipedia page. If you take a look at the numbers from FIFA in https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/56/2/80 you will find they are missing a lot.
If any of your concerns would be true then their lawsuit would cost them trillion of dollars. You don't even know what proof is.
This is a nice post. I am sorry you are getting mobbed by all these cranks. They don't seem to understand that statistics is about inference and you are not proposing any inference here. It is perfectly legitimate to discuss an anomaly like the large number of cardiac events in football players. I have been a part of many a medical study that begins by seeing an unusual spike or cluster of events in descriptive data like the above. Especially when there are well-established pathways by which the vaccine may lead to micro-clotting it is an issue worthy of the public's attention.
I notice that these commenters are all irate but immediately start tripping over their own shoelaces when trying to do any math. and don't seem to even agree what the problem is. I don't smell a lot of actual statistical background here. Thanks for posting this interesting analysis.
Just like the election. My husband even paid to get the data so he could do his own testing. We watched what all the experts said and he complained that the reason that people don’t understand it is they have these people with Statisticians and and in general people don’t understand how important The anomalies were. He said they should’ve made the whole thing more user-friendly. Or normal People friendly. Normal people that went to school in the US.
It's a bit unfortunate you've chosen to denigrate the numerical credentials of critical commenters, whilst at the same time praising a post which posits a value for expected deaths based on a population estimate which has been misread by a factor of one thousand. That's a pretty big shoelace.
Hey Chris! Can you elaborate on this? I'd love to know what the actual numbers are, and which numbers you're referring to
"According to FIFA data, in 2000 there were 242,000 athletes registered in the association, and in 2006 there were 265,000 athletes registered" is sourced directly from a FIFA document which in fact quotes the number of people actively involved in playing football in those years as 242,000,000 and 265,000,000. This may or may not be the most significant problem with this analysis but was worthy of note in response to a comment snarking about other people's inability to process numbers.
and yet 4 per year becoming 21 per year appears to be valid data, yes?
No Tomas, I'm afraid that isn't what any statistician or scientist would call valid data either.
4/242,000,000 = .000002%
21/265,000,000 = .000008 %
Even if the numbers were accurate, that still would not be considered statistically significant
How is this not deemed statistically significant? Why would the overall percentage discredit the fact that we're still seeing eight deviations from the norm? That's the significant factor that is being considered, not the percentage of overall players who die from cardiac failure.
https://stephenc.substack.com/p/5-fold-increase-in-sudden-cardiac/comment/3715497 explains. In the time since, the original author of the cod-scientific article upon which this Substack is based has, quietly and without acknowledging her extraordinary error, edited the piece such that the references to "242,000" and "265,000" no longer appear in the live version (Stephen doesn't appear to have got the memo as he still uses the quote in his version), however one can use Wayback Machine to view the versions of the page which contain everything referred to in the comment linked above.
It is important to note, by the way, that this isn't "my" source; it is the author's OWN source, the extremely careless misreading of which resulted in one of the main assertions of the piece being completely incorrect.
EDIT: Comment was in reply to a poster asking where the numbers in my previous comment had been sourced, a query which has been deleted by the poster subsequent to this detailed answer being provided.
We all know, as Mark Twain said, there are 3 types of lie: lies, dammed lies and statistics. That's why Bill Gates endorsed the book "How to Lie with Statistics".
You don't have to be a statistician or even very bright to see exactly whats happening here with all these sudden heart attacks in super fit sportsmen and women.
In fact, most predictive medical statisticians (i.e. epidemiologists) have been shown to be not very good (See Niall Ferguson's track record of getting every prediction completely wrong) and not very smart....its almost like "if you fail at everything else, become an epidemiologist!"
https://youtu.be/du7aipgaMrY More great history
Among the 'vaccinated' public, the biggest deterrent to admitting that these collapsing and dying situations are statistically significant is the requirement to admit that, "I was foolish and I was duped into doing this". That's because most human beings are weak, greedy, scared and gullible.
And to actually realized that the government is lying and killing people
excellent article. Cheers
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712
Please treat this with some skepticism as the doctor in question allegedly has a track record of some dubious claims - that said the American Heart Association have published it. If it's true though, there's your explanation and it would suggest based on the claims that sports people should probably take 2.5 months off after the shots, that's how long they claim the effect persists. The link was circulated by the inventor of mrna vaccines.
I don't like the modern world. There's too much fake information, but there's also too many coincidences to swallow, and the people we used to trust to investigate things are no longer themselves trustworthy.
That would also suggest that the side-effects have been under-reported. Sure it may be that for most people they are not physically active that the increased risk would be of a concern, but it does seem, on the face of that AHA publication, that there is some scope for further investigation
Mass psychosis is nothing new.
Neither is propaganda.
My husband told me there is some kind of information about the reason there’s more athletes dying is because if you have more muscle it affects you in a different way. But I don’t know where that is you can try his sub stack boblphd.substack.com
The AHA has not published it, and this is merely a pre-conference abstract. It's worthless.
This study published on Nov. 8, 2021 in Circulation states the following:
"We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination".
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712
I am not a doctor but this paper seems to support that the mRNA vaccines are associated with the heart damage and/or failure seen in elite athletes.
It would appear to support the anectodal observations indicated in this post for sure
Watch the video!
This isn't actually a study , it's just an abstract. So until it's actually published and peer reviewed it's not really evidence
They're not going to publish it, for fear of the rabid lefties, removing their future funding
The AHF released the abstract of it. So the study must be there somewhere, but there is no link to it. Which I find really odd.
The pro-vax industry may not peer review it, but the study either exists or it doesn't.
Dr. Aseem Malhotra was just on UK news talking about how by Dr. Gundry, and a group of cardiologists in UK, have the data but won't release it due to fear of losing research funding.
This isn't a new game. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick's books: "Doctoring Data" and
"The Cholesterol Con." Catherine Jacobson-Ramin's "Crooked" (about the corrupt back surgery/treatment system). Dr. Marty Makary's books.
Am sure others' can add to the list.
Doctors are also threatened
Yes, Dr. Malcom Kendrick in his blog said as much. So he retreated back to the "root cause" cardiac disease issue.
Use to manage practices and the nasty tactics they would pull, especially around contract time, was sickening. But as they say "money talks."
I watched that on GB TV. Great show
Well the thing is, it's meaningless unless they release the study. It can't be cited or used.
Gundry has put his name to the abstract and not the study? Strange
It's the same with anonymous doctors speaking out against the vaccine. It's basically useless for our cause because it's not verified and basically could be untrue
These people are the front line in this war. We need them to speak out despite fear otherwise it will be ongoing. Not only that they are letting more and more people die each day they don't speak out.
The paper was peer reviewed. It is my understanding that AHA has a protocol of preventing any online publication for one year and only publish it in the subscription based publication.
I don't see any peer review next to the abstract?
You know of any copy of it with someone with a subscription?
https://www.ahajournals.org/embargo
The peer review is part of the submission process. This is a journal policy. Research it for yourself but it is not an OPEN disclosure. Buy the journal.
It doesn't mention anywhere in there that peer review is part of the submission process.
I will definitely look into buying the journal
That’s a crazy statement now since the one refuting plaquenil had to be retracted!! They are just as corrupt now!
In order for this to be relevant to the overall conversation in which it's being deployed, you need to list the number of these deaths who were vaccinated, the number who had contracted covid prior (including potentially an asymptomatic case), the number who had both, and the number who had neither. Unfortunately that's going to be difficult to intuit without a lot of leg work. I do commend you on the leg work you did do, however.
That assumes the root cause is the vaccine. (I might even be sympathetic to that assumption)
Another potential root cause could be loss of condition due to extended lockdowns in 2020.
My recollection of 2020 was that the football leagues were mostly not restricted from training or playing, which would seem to rule out loss of conditioning, but in any case a full root cause analysis of this anomaly is indicated.
I published this article by Yaffa here to highlight the anomaly and hopefully trigger further investigation.
It is a fact that the number of SCD/SUDs this year is significantly above the historical rate. Statistics cannot provide the root cause, and while we can have our beliefs, we should seek to support those beliefs with data
I doubt conditioning is a factor. These are athletes and would have been training during lockdown. But I think that it's certainly possible that it's not the vaccine and instead long term damage from Covid itself that causes this. OR it could be some of both. If I were to guess wildly, a Covid infection probably damages the body a lot permanently, the vaccine probably damages the body a very slight amount permanently, but a measurable amount in aggregate, and possibly in more people than others.
Covid is a truly goofy and weird disease.
Yep. Someone needs to do the harder work of dividing up the cases by history
The myocarditis induced by the vaccine is apparently more significant and deadly than the myocarditis induced by the virus. This from Dr. peter McCullough, Board Certified Cardiologist and Internist who is closely following the data and used to recommend the vaccine to high risk groups. He no longer recommends it to any human and says the program must be shut down.
Per a few sources, the bazillions of tiny spike proteins manufactured by your cells at the behest of the injected mrna is causing microclotting, which of course, could find itself in the heart, especially with individuals who are pumping blood at a higher rate than a sedentary human. This same microclotting was happening in the lungs with covid-19 infections (also due to the spike proteins on the corona), which is why people could breathe but weren't getting enough oxygen.
If it's the "vaccines", it's the pharmaceutical industrial complex, and corporate captured gov't and media's fault.
It it's the lock-downs, it's as above.
Whichever way a mudblood tries to twist it, in order to reconcile it within their Platonian caveman view of the world, the one thing that is universally true, is that THERE ARE NO REFUNDS FOR POISONS ALREADY INSIDE THE NUCLEUS OF ONE'S CELLS 💀
Conspiracy -> from Latin, con- ("together") + spirare ("to breathe).
I’ll let this one stay, but it’s right up at the line with one foot over. The ALL CAPS stuff is not conducive to encouraging an engaged debate
You are going to tolerate the use of the term “mud blood”? There can’t be a civilized mature conversation with someone using juvenile terms such as this to describe people who are vaccinated. I’m disappointed that this comment is allowed into what is supposed to be an intelligent conversation. Shame.
Your premisses are pure insanity, you are caught is the mass hysteria.
Wake up.
The innocuity has not been solidly established.
Even if it was, any reasonable doubt should pause the mass inoculation.
There cannot be a valid proof of innocuity on the whole population.
This absence of reaction to any signal and the inversion of caution are signs of a mass psychosis.
The majority of this comment is off topic. We can discuss the rise in incidents without having to bring in many theories on the content of the injections that are being forced on the population through coercive measures that are likely illegal under Nuremberg.
Deleted. A more pithy and on-point comment would be retained
Fighting age males, who would want to wipe out a civilizations fighting age males? On an unrelated matter, China's army consists almost entirely of " only sons" because of the brilliant "1 child policy" . Every soldier represents the last in a family line, weird. Probably unrelated.
This is not a rigorous statistical analysis in any way, and is extremely misleading. There are all kinds of holes in the methodology. Why not refer to some actual peer reviewed literature? The consideration of pre-pandemic figures is severely lacking here, along with information like whether subjects have been vaccinated and/or had the virus. The virus can cause heart problems too, of course.
Sports people were collapsing with heart problems long before Covid. Look at this 2018 study about the increasing phenomenon amongst young footballers: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/aug/08/more-young-footballers-dying-of-heart-problems-than-thought-fa-study-finds
And this study of worldwide football (2014-2018) completely disputes the numbers we see in the above analysis: https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/12/23/bjsports-2020-102368
I wonder if you are aware of the the difference between an anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation and a rigorous peer reviewed investigation report.
Hint: this is the "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation"
We have not yet seen the "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report"
A link provided by another commenter to a peer reviewed paper in the AHA: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 (caveats, some question the author) suggests that there is a real effect and that consequently athletes should refrain from strenuous activity for 2.5 months after the shot...
One could also start pointing at other data sources, but that all misses the point of this article, which is to stimulate people to do the actual rigorous peer reviewed research. It is a shame that globally the standard safety trials and processes were cut short for this specific treatment... the likely outcome is that we will discover much that is not great about the treatment as time evolves...
Obviously more rigorous investigation is needed, but I think you know what you're doing here. If you had any statistical integrity you'd recognise that the headline figure of this whole piece is based on incomplete, selective data.
If you have issue with the title, please address that to Yaffa. The original title was 500% which I changed to 5-fold as while technically 5-fold and 500% are the same numerical effect, the 500% wording sounds significantly bigger.
Additionally, I added a small section at the end illustrating how one could sanity check the claims. It is an exercise for the reader to decide whether the data sources cited are ones they have trust in or not.
With wikipedia, in my opinion, the greater risk is under-reporting, so the question becomes "were the years prior to 2021 under-reported" at that point we enter the reals of how to apply the BMJ estimate to the representative sample of people who would get named... already that becomes too much for ordinary people to address.
The real question this article seeks to address is "Is it just that we are noticing something that always happened or is there something significant here"
I believe this answers the question with "looks like there could be something unusual here, somebody needs to take a deeper look"
Rather cowardly that you can't even stand by the title of your blog.
Guest post. I suggested the name get changed from 500% to 5-fold, she agreed... up to the original author to update if she wants to
The title change is meaningless, it's semantics. It's the lack of credible data behind the headline that's the issue. Funny that you care more about the title than what's underpinning it. This research is not peer-reviewed and is not credible.
Said the troll.
If you were reasonable you'd demand a stop to the inoculations until a rigorous investigation is produced.
It's on you not on us.
First do no harm.
We do not have to produce a rigorous study to stop the mass inoculation.
You have to produce one to justify it.
There have been hundreds of millions of doses given. If you have any genuine research into the harm they're doing then I'll happily look at it. Until then, perhaps you should stop posturing based on nothing but a feeling.
Nope, it's quite the opposite. It's up to the trials to display safety in advance, not for random people to prove the damage later. The trial destroyed the control group so in my opinion failed to prove safety following six months. Yet we have about four times "cardiac arrest" in the treatment group. And they also found a few more spare deaths (6) they forgot to mention before. And a few countries (Scandinavian, Taiwan, etc.) suspended the treatment for people under 30/17 for this very concern. And Israel recommends not to do sports for a couple of weeks after the shot. And it seems they added an extra ingredient exactly for this reason to the kids formula. But no, let's not talk about this until we have a published paper...that we had and was removed for no reason: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483988/. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/more-people-died-in-the-key-clinical
Found the first article using the wayback machine for anyone interested in reading it: https://web.archive.org/web/20211002192421/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483988/
Bahhhh
There is abundant evidence that these shots are not properly tested, that the data was manipulated to get approval, and that hundreds of thousands have been injured. You simply have to be willing to look at the evidence that has been published. The BMJ for example just published an investigative piece when a whistleblower came to them and reported on how Pfizer has been doctoring their study results. But it's easy to go on the attack when you aren't willing to look at anything that doesn't already conform to your exisitng worldview.
Sen Ron Johnson had multiple meetings with people who had adverse reactions that they wouldn’t count and they won’t help these people!! What about FDA asking to delay releasing data??
The current rush to inoculate the covid "vaccines" displays a recklessness that can only be described as a mass hysteria.
Of course there is no highly rigorous study and the exact figures are not known.
This is because we are in a mass hysteria and we are acting upon the dogma that the problem does not exist, which is insanity.
Adverse events pile up far, far beyond any possibility to keep track even if suitable tools existed for that.
All we can do is point out statistical impossibilities outside of massive adverse consequences of the so-called vaccines, like a 5-fold increase in FIFA heart attacks.
Or a sharp increase (doubling?) in death rates.
Or a drop in life span.
This hysteria is turning into the biggest humanitarian crisis ouside of war, given that effective and inocuous early treatment has been known for more than a year.
The "vaccines" never passed the trial phase and should have been abandoned, or kept for a small minority of people at their own risk.
The 5-fold increase is based on selective, invalid, incomplete data. It's therefore worthless.
When you have an actual study, real data, that confirms your worries (hysteria, some would argue) then I'll happily consider it. At present you have nothing. Just feelings.
The mass hysteria is about inverting the burden of proof.
We are in extremely assymetric positions: You want to jab me and my children and everybody else, I don't want to jab you or anyone.
Therefore you must produce the highest standard of scientific evidence and I am rightfully opposing troubling signals. Not the other way around.
Also, every health issue happening to the jabbed must be considered an adverse effect of the jab until proven otherwise.
I insist on your being the victim of a mass hysteria because the only ther explanation os such gross absence of common sense would be shear dishonesty.
I don't care whether you jab your children or not. It's a free world and I'd never be in favour of mandatory vaccinations.
It's you that's demonstrating hysteria. You seem scared of the vaccine.
I may be putting my faith in science, but it's certainly not hysterical.
Faith in science ? Strange formulation.
Not sure the word means what you think.
Of course I'm scared of this mass vaccination
1 - of people who never needed it.
2 - in a pandemy
3 - based on a protein that seems to be the cause of the disease's virulence
4 - with new innovative barely tested technology that makes our own cells produce it in unknowable quantities from unknowable tissues
5 - while effective and innocuous early treatments are banned and doctors unable to practice medicine (ie prescribe them off-label)
6- while obsiously deranged masses call "science" the denial of any fact (usually be demanding extravagant degree of proof) that does not fit their unproved prejudices and coerce dissenters into silence
If you're not afraid, you have faith. Or a crystal ball.
The recklessness is flagrant.
Mass psychosis happened in the past - do you deny that ?
Wake up.
Such signals as FIFA heart issues come on top of other signals that require the immediate stopping of the mass jab until "scientific" evidence of benefits can be produced.
Also the accusation of fear (I supposed irrational) fits quite well the other side: An irrational, vastly exaggerated fear of the Covid 19 pandemy.
Again you are inverting our positions: I am not scared of it nearly enough to accept the mass inoculation of the experimental genetic barely tested "vaccines".
People must be freaked out of their mind to accept such an experiment. I'm not.
how do you feel about deaths reported to vaers since the release of the covid vaccine(s) being considerably more than all other years combined in vaers reporting history?
You know very well this product never should be called a “vaccine”
IT is nothing else than a therapy .
Møre precisely a genetic alteration or modification,
Nothing else
How much money do you get per vaccine administered
THERE IS NO COMPLETE DATA. That's been the problem from the beginning, here in the U.S. it's all doctored. Talk to the coroners, the morgues, the doctors and nurses who have quit their careers in the past year by the thousands. The Germans didn't know about the concentration camps either...until after the war was over and the damage was done. It's easy to manipulate the masses. Media is a powerful tool.
Listen to journeyman video get back to me and dr Campbell
If they would release the data!!
Yeah right, did you notice the 5fold increase on the chart?
First thing I noticed was that the chart was based on questionable and incomplete data.
"Questionable" and "Incomplete" data = the need to obtain more data to carry out further analysis. It doesn't = the conclusion is wrong. What is questionable is how the main stream press don't seem to be investigating / reporting on this - one can only wonder why not.
That's not how science works. If the data is questionable and incomplete then the conclusion holds no weight whatsoever. It's invalid.
I welcome and await further study, but there's no evidence of it here. There's not even much evidence of logical thought.
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 seems relevant
This seems to be a conclusion of Dr. Gundry (the cardiologist who hocks herbal supplements and his exclusive olive oil) And his findings in his patients. Not sure it should be taken as gospel as of now. It definitely warrants a further investigation.
Another peer reviewed study published a few weeks ago gives further evidence:
"Following the global rollout and administration of the Pfizer Inc./BioNTech BNT162b2 and Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccines on December 17, 2020, in the United States, and of the Janssen Ad26.COV2.S product on April 1st, 2021, in an unprecedented manner, hundreds of thousands of individuals have reported adverse events (AEs) using the Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS). We used VAERS data to examine cardiac AEs, primarily myocarditis, reported following injection of the first or second dose of the COVID-19 injectable products. Myocarditis rates reported in VAERS were significantly higher in youths between the ages of 13 to 23 (p<0.0001) with ∼80% occurring in males. Within 8 weeks of the public offering of COVID-19 products to the 12-15-year-old age group, we found 19 times the expected number of myocarditis cases in the vaccination volunteers over background myocarditis rates for this age group. In addition, a 5-fold increase in myocarditis rate was observed subsequent to dose 2 as opposed to dose 1 in 15-year-old males. A total of 67% of all cases occurred with BNT162b2. Of the total myocarditis AE reports, 6 individuals died (1.1%) and of these, 2 were under 20 years of age - 1 was 13. These findings suggest a markedly higher risk for myocarditis subsequent to COVID-19 injectable product use than for other known vaccines, and this is well above known background rates for myocarditis. COVID-19 injectable products are novel and have a genetic, pathogenic mechanism of action causing uncontrolled expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells. When you combine this fact with the temporal relationship of AE occurrence and reporting, biological plausibility of cause and effect, and the fact that these data are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical data, it supports a conclusion that the COVID-19 biological products are deterministic for the myocarditis cases observed after injection".
-Rose and Mccullough, 'A Report on Myocarditis Adverse Events in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Association with COVID-19 Injectable Biological products'
Scientists before Galileo also started noticing that the sun wasn’t rotating around the earth, as they were being told by the scientific consensus at the time, which was also directed by the authorities of the time, the Roman Catholic Church. All their data was considered questionable and incomplete, unable with the tools of the time to produce a study with enough hard evidence to be valid, or hold its weight, as you say. They were imprisoned first and later executed for spreading dangerous information.
Until hundreds of years later, someone built a telescope “good enough.” Galileo then did the study. They spared him his life in exchange for exile. It wasn’t for many years later that the church finally had to give in, as the evidence mounted.
The completeness of data you demand is nearly Impossible to produce for us, as naturally the lay people screaming “Stop! It looks like you’re hurting us!” have not the tools nor training to produce said results. Those in power will be very inclined to hinder the creation and discussion of such studies, lest they be prepared to acquiesce, and admit that they too, are not actually the center of the universe.
So the fact they asked to release the data over time, years, doesn’t give up pause to think why. They were confronted with a freedom of information act case or they would have released nothing! Also, watch project veritas where the nurse? Doctor says the jab is full of ___. Then says they won’t report the case because they want to sweep it under the rug! The FBI raided their homes why? To install fear and they took there phones etc. now anyone that contacted them, reported for them in the sites of the parents are terrorists Clinton supporting FBI. She should be in prison! Had a home server really?
Deleted and tried to destroy evidence FBI corrupt!
So if they won’t release data how can we present it and why won’t they release it???
Are we talking about 5 times more cases exactly since the start of the “vaccinations” and of course all athletes and international sportsmen - women are vaccinated otherwise they will mot appear in Amy competition.
So the question vaccinated or not does not even exist dumbo !
The number of deaths from SCD and SUD in FIFA registered players between 2014 and 2018 is 617. Please refer to https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2020/12/23/bjsports-2020-102368
When it comes to data collection and statistical analysis, this is truly amateur hour.
When it comes to constructive criticism, this is an exemplary demonstration of amateur hour.
This kind of data is easily searchable from sources that are far more comprehensive and respected than Wikipedia, for God's sake. You might want to start here - https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/articles/2016/06/28/07/06/sports-participation-and-sudden-cardiac-arrest. From the American College of Cardiology -
"In the United States, there are approximately 100 to 150 sudden cardiac deaths (SCD) during competitive sports each year."
Except that data will be biased as that’s across all competitive sports and not all sports are back. Football is one subset of sports that has, at the professional level, been mostly able to continue through the restrictions.
It’s not so simple to get data that is unbiased as you think
My point is that choosing one association, gathering data haphazardly, and then presenting your inferences with alarmist language is - yes - amateurish.
So do you think Wikipedia will have over-reported deaths for this year? Or do you think they have under reported deaths in all prior years?
The difference between 21 and an average of 4 to 5 is quite significant and is enough to say “somebody needs to do a more detailed study”
Or are you saying the data is so unreliable that there is nothing to see here at all?
I think you would agree that if it seems like this year is at least 21 deaths of professional footballers and two separate estimates put the expected number at between wiki:4 and BMJ:5 (which means a variance of 4 or 5 and consequently a standard deviation of 2-ish) then something that is 8 standard deviations from the mean certainty warrants further investigation
Wikipedia is not a source of reliable information and data gathering. It might pique your interest, but then anyone with any credibility will perform further investigation with data from respected sources before declaring an "epidemic" of Sudden Cardiac Death. This is high-school level work I'd expect from a 17 year old.
Have you seen what the governments and media have done over the past 20 months. Judged by your metric a lot of what they’ve done is amateurish.
Have you noticed that we are in the middle of a mass inoculation of a highly risky "vaccine"?
Failure to pay attention to signals such as the one which is pointed out here is reckless at a time when children are being inoculated.
It it turns out to be a disaster, you will have missed an opportunity to demand at least a pause.
Why do the rely on Wikipedia? Is that reliable data? According to the study "FIFA Sudden Death Registry (FIFA-SDR): a prospective, observational study of sudden death in worldwide football from 2014 to 2018" ( Egger, F. , Scharhag, J. , Kästner, A. , Dvorák, J. , Bohm, P. , Meyer, T., 2020) there were 617 "sudden deaths" in between 2014-2018 (albeit not all because of cardiac problems). That's way more than the claimed 4,2 deaths per year. So I would take the above article with a grain of salt.
"Not all cardiac problems" renders your implication moot. The incidents specifically cite CARDIAC RELATED DEATHS -- not any extraneous deaths, nor even injuries. Moreover, with those incidents not occurring in the public eye, likely going unreported -- as is the wont of all corporate captured institutions; indeed, as is now being so starkly demonstrated by even the medical sector, of all places -- and the data here being concerned only with deaths per se (NB: [Viral] myocarditis has a CFR of 20% @ 5 years; 50% @ >10 years), citing absolute numbers, associated with all deaths, is all non-sequitur.
How many sportspeople use steroids, pain-killers, and other drugs?... Which, aside from their inherent risks, could also interact, deleteriously, with these so-called "vaccines" (lit., endogenous antibody therapies)? That's not even touching the myriad other causes of death that could account for the "617" number... BUT, that could NOT account for the sudden uptick in HEART RELATED deaths, which 'happen to' directly correlate with the "vaccine" pogroms ⚠
It goes to show that it really is true that if you pummel the lay populace with enough fear-inducing lies -- putatively, and according to the K. G. B.'s own studies, about two months' worth -- many will become near-impervious to any facts subsequently presented to them which contradict what they have been "re-wired" to believe. When you couple said psychological phenomenon with the innate human foible of ego, one is near-guaranteed to beguile the majority (plebes), hook, line, and sinker, after ~18 months of fear-mongering and Orwellian shutting-down of dissent.
'It is easier to fool somebody, than it is to convince them that they have been fooled.'
~ Mark Twain
The FIFA link you sent says 262 MILLIONS not THOUSANDS, which then will make 5300 death expected with (already fragile) calculation
Good luck finding 5300 deaths.
please remove you article or at least correct it and show that it is total bullshit
I don't know what link you were clicking, however if you think there are 262 million professional football players currently active in the world then somebody needs to update FIFA.
Here's a FIFA 2019 report that I found (which I think Yaffa had missed) https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/a59132e138824c1c/original/jlr5corccbsef4n4brde.pdf this says that there were 128,983 professional players in 2019... I think you would agree that 5300 out of 128,983 is a significant percentage.
I have asked Yaffa to see if there are corrections needed
Then explain your 242 and 265 in your article ;)
And you will get it.
Stephen, let me help you with this one. The link to which the previous poster refers is in the top line, directing to the original write-up of the story on Real Time News (https://www.rtnews.co.il/?view=article&id=49&catid=22). This much-expanded version of the report states that the source of the figures of 265,000 (2006) and 242,000 (2000) registered FIFA athletes is the FIFA Big Count document: "According to FIFA data ( FIFA_BIG_COUNT.pdf ), in 2000 there were 242,000 athletes registered in the association, and in 2006 there were 265,000 athletes registered. FIFA's size has not changed significantly in twenty years, which means we have to expect about 5 deaths a year."
Clicking on the hyperlink in that article to open the FIFA Big Count document (https://www.rtnews.co.il/images/FIFA_BIG_COUNT.pdf) opens a 2006 audit of people actively involved in football worldwide, with the headline figure of 265 million (2006) up from 242 million "six years ago". Accordingly it is self-evident that the assessment in the article has erroneously understated the number of active footballers by a factor of one thousand, and therefore that any subsequent statistical analysis based on that figure - ie, the calculation of the number of expected annual fatalities - absorbs this gross error.
That the figure you have found independently for professional players is so enormously out of whack with the figure Yaffa found (but misread) in the FIFA Big Count is because they are measuring different things - the 2019 document records only paid professionals, whereas the 2006 Big Count basically records anybody who kicks a ball in any recreational setting (it is, after all, roughly 4% of the entire population of the planet). Accordingly, if you are attempting a rough calculation of expected annual deaths among those two populations, it would (at the quoted rate of 1 in 50,000) work out at 2.5 professional players and 5,240 'ball-kickers' (for want of a better term).
From the list referred to in this article, of the "21 FIFA players" who are recorded as having died in 2021, the number who would in fact fall under the designation of 'professional' given the definitions in the 2019 FIFA Report you link to is a mere 1 (a player in the Jamaican Premier League). And whilst it is literally impossible to compile an exhaustive list of those within the 262,000,000 'ball-kickers' who die in a year, for the vast majority of them will be regular punters whose passing will not be newsworthy, that this study has found 21 of them is not any sort of indication that one should expect there to be anomalously more than 5,240. All the poissons in the world are not going to make up for (a) the extraordinary error of the original author having misread the number of active football players by three entire decimal places, and (b) the seeming abandon with which the authors interchange 'footballers' and 'people who play/were playing football', two populations which are vastly different. All of which, I am afraid, fundamentally undermines the entire statistical thrust of the project and renders it entirely meaningless from all but an anecdotal point of view.
Exactly
It's totally pointless and it's clearly not a correct study.
Aha! I see the problem. You cannot tell the difference between an anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation and a rigorous peer reviewed investigation report.
Hint: this is the "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation"
We have not yet seen the "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report"
A link provided by another commenter to a peer reviewed paper in the AHA: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/abs/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712 (caveats, some question the author) suggests that there is a real effect and that consequently athletes should refrain from strenuous activity for 2.5 months after the shot... that would seem to support that this "anecdotal report that covers more than one case and is calling for further and more rigorous investigation" is warranted.
As to your claims that this is "totally pointless" the whole point of this is to call for people to actually do a "rigorous peer reviewed investigation report". That is the point.
Sounds like, however, that you have your blinkers on, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree
Are you getting me?
The abstract you point IS LITERRALY WITH AN EXPRESSION OF CONCERN
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001051
The guy who did it is a notorious liar who sells books. The score test is only used by nathuropathes and not cardiologist.
You anecdotal report is FALSE even BY YOUR numbers. It says the opposite. Please stop spreading lies
Did Yaffa ever get back to you to advise whether there were any errors in her material?
Not yet
OK. Do keep us posted
I think she's ghosting you bruh.
Nah we’ve been chatting out of band. She’s working on an update
The heinously underreported VAERS database has already recorded ~850,000+ injuries, and ~20,000+ deaths; the E. U.'s EurdaVigilance system has even higher numbers. Look up "Senator Johnson: Expert Panel into Vaccine Injuries" (Nov. 2021) -- predictably removed from YouTube; but, easily searchable.
NB: By U. S. law, if VAERS data demonstrates any correlation to trial data, in terms of adverse effects, the pertaining vaccine rollout must immediately be halted, and a phase-4 trial conducted. Of course, given that no proper trials were conducted for these nano-elixirs, it's no longer a proper inoculation program -- rather, a Jonestown style vax cult...
¯\_💀_/¯
*with your (already fragile) calculation
please mention now the forbidden words. Every symptom clots and Myocarditis are side effects of the so called MRNA Injections
I'm seeing 14 deaths in the Wikipedia page linked. There are 10-11 deaths in 2016 and 2017. Why is the 5x gap not showing here?
Because it's the socialist Wikipedia. It's not there to provide facts.
Good observation, but also what Evil Harry writes is true. Wikipedia seems like a reliable source of information, until you personally bump up against its system. I have lost a couple of information battles in Wikipedia in regards to politically charged issues on topics/people of whom i was deeply familiar. Try searching for "Paul Addis" on wikipedia LOL.