COVID Vaccine Archives - Covid Castaways

Home » COVID Vaccine

BBC Lies In Article About Excess Deaths In UK

February 5, 2023July 31, 2023
by Devin Russell

BBC Lies In Article About Excess Deaths In UK

Oh mon Dieu! Another mainstream media news outlet lying or misleading regarding pandemic related topics and stories. Some other examples are listed after the end of this piece. We might be beyond the trust but verify point and to the don’t trust and verify point. Which brings us to the article that’s the topic of this piece. Link below:

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64209221

The title of this article is “Excess deaths in 2022 among worst in 50 years” – by Robert Cuffe & Rachel Schraer. Interesting and important topic I think. Naturally, first they put their attention on COVID.

“More than 650,000 deaths were registered in the UK in 2022 – 9% more than 2019. … Covid is still killing people, but is involved in fewer deaths now than at the start of the pandemic. Roughly 38,000 deaths involved Covid in 2022 compared with more than 95,000 in 2020. We are still seeing more deaths overall than would be expected based on recent history. The difference in 2022 – compared with 2020 and 2021 – is that Covid deaths were one of several factors, rather than the main explanation for this excess.”

It’s alarming COVID deaths, the main cause of excess deaths in 2020, is down a lot in the United Kingdom, but excess deaths remain high. COVID involved deaths are not the majority cause of excess deaths anymore. Of course, this brings us to something hotly debated. That is are all COVID deaths being recorded, due to lack of testing, poor testing, etc., and/or are COVID deaths being overcalculated when people who had COVID may have died from something else, or largely due to something else. Probably a some of both. Either way deaths related to COVID in 2020 are surely even higher than stated, at least due to lack of any testing early on in 2020 making the decrease in COVID deaths in 2022 likely even more steep. Like I said though, there are many factors that make this hard, if not impossible, to analyze. Plus there is a possibility people with severe COVID are dying months later from complications and those aren’t being counted as COVID deaths. This might occur less as we go, from 2020 on, as the variants become less severe and there are treatment options and better patient care. Again, there are many variables. Maybe reinfection after reinfection is a damage increasing problem that swings it the other way. With that all said, there are certainly other factors, so let’s see if the BBC can figure it all out.

“A number of doctors are blaming the wider crisis in the NHS. At the start of 2022, death rates were looking like they’d returned to pre-pandemic levels. It wasn’t until June that excess deaths really started to rise – just as the number of people waiting for hours on trolleys in English hospitals hit levels normally seen in winter. On 1 January 2023, the president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine suggested the crisis in urgent care could be causing “300-500 deaths a week.” It is not a figure recognised by NHS England, but it’s roughly what you get if you multiply the number of people waiting long periods in A&E with the extra risk of dying estimated to come with those long waits (of between five and 12 hours). It is possible to debate the precise numbers, but it’s not controversial to say that your chances are worse if you wait longer for treatment, be that waiting for an ambulance to get to you, being stuck in an ambulance outside a hospital or in A&E. And we are seeing record waits in each of those areas. In November (2022), for example, it took 48 minutes on average for an ambulance in England to respond to a suspected heart attack or stroke, compared to a target of 18 minutes.”

One interesting word choice, before I delve in, is the journalists saying it took 48 minutes on average compared to a “target” of 18 minutes. The target is unimportant in this discussion of excess deaths. The average pre-pandemic, and through the pandemic response times, are the important statistics for excess deaths, because if 48 minutes was the average prior to the pandemic than it wouldn’t be a factor in excess deaths at all. Sneaky word play that I didn’t catch the first time I read it. … But I digress, like usual.

Also, remember later on how they thought it was fine to speculate on the amount of people dying due to waiting for urgent care based on one person’s quotation, but it’s not ok to speculate on possible COVID Vaccine harm. Certainly though this is a factor. The estimate used would account for 36,842 extra deaths from 1/1/21-5/31/22, you’ll see later why I used this time period. That’s if the wait times in hospitals were the same as June 2022 throughout that whole time, which they weren’t, using the highest estimate given in the above paragraph. The lower estimate, which is probably closer to accurate since the ERs weren’t packed that entire time period, is 22,105. As you will read later, this would only be a portion of the excess death + the deaths still occurring even though there are less COVID deaths than in 2020.

“Some of the excess may be people whose deaths were hastened by the after-effects of a Covid infection. A number of studies have found people are more likely to have heart problems and strokes in the weeks and months after catching Covid, and some of these may not end up being linked to the virus when the death is registered. As well as the impact on the heart of the virus itself, some of this may be contributed to by the fact many people didn’t come in for screenings and non-urgent treatment during the peak of the pandemic, storing up trouble for the future.”

Here they bring up what I mentioned earlier, which is a fair point as well. People are having damage, especially in the severe cases, but COVID Long Haulers certainly as well. Perhaps persistent viral infection is ongoing, just sayin’. Clotting issues might not be occurring or found until weeks or months later, if they are even located via tests at all. In COVID Long Haul there is an odd progression that many experience. You can go from neurological symptoms, to clotting problems, to GI issues, etc. up and down and all over for months to years. At the same time, people are having these problems for other reasons. Many in my family can attest to that, as well as my Aunt, who had stroke due to her 1 COVID Vaccination. These similar issues that happen are perhaps spike protein related and can often be scapegoated as COVID due to the similarity of the issues, the difficulty in testing for a vaccine injury, and the unwillingness to even consider vaccine injuries, due to many factors.

“We can see that the number of people starting treatment for blood pressure or with statins – which can help prevent future heart attacks – plunged during the pandemic and, a year later still hadn’t recovered. The largest jump in excess deaths was seen in men aged 50-64, most commonly caused by heart problems.”

Another point made here is that less people sought treatment for their blood pressure which may have caused heart attacks. That dip in seeking treatment had largely recovered by mid-2021, but not completely. Perhaps a portion of the sick people who would seek statins, or other medicines for their blood pressure, had already died from COVID. This would thus lower this number of people in the current and near future for a reason other than just less people seeking treatment who needed it. Obviously, COVID severely affected those with comorbidities, such as this, much more than others. Again, there are so many variables. … The data they link is not easily totaled, but there does seem to be an increase in cardiovascular disease from the link and from this citation (with some similar rationale as to why that happened).₁ The cited article was published 11/2/22. It stated there were 30,000 excess deaths involving heart disease since the beginning of the pandemic. Nevertheless, this is not definitively telling us the cause of why there is an increase in cardiovascular disease or accounting for all the excess deaths.

Now for the juicy, COMPLETELY INCORRECT part of this BBC Article that I’ve been patiently waiting to shred.

No evidence of vaccine effect

“The rise in cardiac problems has been pointed to by some online as evidence that Covid vaccines are driving the rise in deaths, but this conclusion is not supported by the data. One type of Covid vaccine has been linked to a small rise in cases of heart inflammation and scarring (pericarditis and myocarditis). But this particular vaccine side-effect was mainly seen in boys and young men, while the excess deaths are highest in older men – aged 50 or more. And these cases are too rare – and mostly not fatal – to account for the excess in deaths. Finally, figures up to June 2022 looking at deaths from all causes show unvaccinated people were more likely to die than vaccinated people. While this data on its own can’t tell us it’s the vaccine protecting people from dying – there are too many complicating factors – if vaccines were driving excess deaths we would expect this to be the other way around.”

And off we go! First the title. I assume they’re saying there is no evidence that the vaccine is a cause of excess deaths since the topic of the article is excess deaths in UK. … I’m not even going to tackle the data comment because I think the data isn’t very good when it comes to vaccine injuries most of the time. Analyzing all the red flags, of which there are many, is more useful to me, at least as an individual, until there is actually a fair, honest, and open discussion. How would we have accurate data most of the time if you can’t test for vaccine injuries and it’s the 5th rail of topics? Also, what we think is safe now is not what we think is safe in a number of years (see Vioxx, which took 5 years to discover at least 10,000s had been killed due to the drug, and a whole host of other drugs and other vaccines that have been removed from the market). It takes time to see and figure out. The putrid booster rates in various countries might tell you something though, while people line up for that Flu Vaccine still in greater numbers (at least in the USA).

Secondly, if the vaccines aren’t an issue why is England now suggesting no one under 50, unless for very very specific reasons, take the COVID Vaccine?₂ Why suggest that if it’s either not safe or not effective, or both? Even if it’s safe and not incredibly effective, but helps some, there shouldn’t be a problem recommending it as it won’t cause much harm, right? You’d think. Last I checked, the pandemic is very much not over, so that’s not the reason for the pullback.

Next they say the blatantly false thing that the statistics they cite prove wrong! “Finally, figures up to June 2022 looking at deaths from all causes show unvaccinated people were more likely to die than vaccinated people. … if vaccines were driving excess deaths we would expect this to be the other way around.” WHAT?! I actually say what out loud every time I read that part. Here’s the data directly from their source listed in the paragraph above, which is the NHS (National Health Service), from the latest data set at the time of this post, 1/1/21-5/31/22, table 3 entitled “Whole period age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status for all cause deaths, deaths involving COVID-19 and deaths not involving COVID-19, per 100,000 person-years, England, deaths occurring between 1 January 2021 and 31 May 2022“:

All Cause Deaths for Unvaccinated = 109,891
All Cause Deaths for the Ever Vaccinated = 531,118 (4.83x more than Unvaccinated)
COVID Involved Deaths for Unvaccinated = 38,285 (1.06x more than Ever Vaccinated)
COVID Involved Deaths for Ever Vaccinated = 36,175

As you can clearly see, the ever vaccinated died 4.83x more in this time period from all causes than the unvaccinated. The article states the opposite. If they meant from COVID Involved Deaths, they would be right, and they could even infer the vaccine probably helped cause less COVID Involved Deaths, at least at some point, but they didn’t say that. Plus that wouldn’t make sense in the context of the article. They may have just been trying to be deceitful hoping people wouldn’t realize, but guess what? I look everything up, especially when something is said that makes no logical sense. What makes things even worse is this:

Current UK Population = 68,821,020
Total Population in UK with at least 1 Dose = 53,813,491₃
Ever Vaccinated in UK = 78.2%
Unvaccinated in UK = 21.8%
3.59x more Ever Vaccinated in UK than Unvaccinated
4.83x more All Cause Deaths in Ever Vaccinated in UK than Unvaccinated

More deaths in Ever Vaccinated in UK than what there should be. That’s not great. Especially when you can make a safe assumption that those vaccinated are probably taking COVID more seriously in general, in other ways, than the unvaccinated. Plus it seems the COVID Vaccines from this data have protected people from dying of COVID (and possibly even more from severe disease), making it even more suspicious as to why the all cause deaths for the vaccinated are higher than the unvaccinated. BUT of course with most everything related to COVID and the COVID Vaccines, it’s complicated. One reason that would skew this is that more younger people in the UK are unvaccinated and are less likely to die from anything, COVID as well.

Still there are 42,000+ more deaths in 2022 than in 2020 in the UK, while there are 57,000 less COVID Involved Deaths in 2022 than in 2020.₄ That total brings us to around 100,000 deaths that shouldn’t be occurring in 2022, but are. Even with the potential causes and estimates listed in the article, there are 10s of thousands of deaths occurring that are difficult to nail down as to why. Those with initial severe COVID dying later on is a factor, such as those put on a ventilator. Perhaps though, the vaccine should be taken seriously as a potential cause for once, and not dismissed by the media, while lying about the data … since it is the other way around Robert Cuffe & Rachel Schraer. Does this mean you’ll write a correction in your article and change your stances? I won’t hold my breath for that.

MORE MEDIA DISHONESTY EXAMPLES

We have seen this many times. For example, with news reports on COVID Long Haulers who had actually improved from their conditions then took a COVID Vaccine, got horrific symptoms which led to them committing suicide. What’s the narrative of these stories? They committed suicide due to Long COVID. Their intense vaccine reactions not even mentioned typically. One of those articles I’m referring to was written for the New Yorker by a Physician.₅ He was told that one of subjects of the article had an intense vaccine reaction that gave her tremors, insomnia, etc. that led to her suicide. He chose to omit it from his extremely lengthy article. A doctor and journalist no less!

A BBC journalist, a different one than that wrote the article that will be discussed below, notified Facebook that people were using a carrot emoji to talk about vaccine injuries, because you have to talk in code on Facebook or you get censored and kicked off the platform. She contributed to vaccine injury groups getting shut down, thus eliminating an important space for the vaccine injured to discuss their injuries and get information and help.₆

An NBC reporter gaslit a 12 year old vaccine injured girl, paralyzed using a feeding tube, because the journalist was more concerned with criticisms of the COVID Vaccines than a child who is irreparably harmed due to them.₇ The ends justify the means I suppose? Not in my mind.

SOURCES:

30,000 Excess Heart Related Deaths in UK During Pandemic – https://www.bhf.org.uk/what-we-do/news-from-the-bhf/news-archive/2022/november/extreme-heart-care-disruption-linked-to-excess-deaths-involving-heart-disease
Booster Restricted For Under 50 in UK – https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64496025
Number of Those in UK Vaccinated – https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
Total Deaths by Year in UK – https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsintheukfrom1990to2020
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/27/the-struggle-to-define-long-covid
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62877597
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/vaccine-misinformation-poised-spike-covid-shots-kids-roll-rcna4360

TAGS: COVID Vaccine, Excess Deaths, Fact Check, Media Lies

COVID Vaccine

Why Aren’t People Getting That Next COVID Shot?

January 17, 2023July 31, 2023
by Devin Russell

Why Aren’t People Getting That Next COVID Shot?

Why aren’t people getting that next COVID Shot? Seems like a valid question. One people should want an answer to or to try to figure out. Others may not want the question asked for what it might potentially reveal. Let’s dig into some statistics first and then get into some red flags 🚩. As of Jan 16, 2023:

There have been more than 13.107 billion COVID Vaccines administered 1.64x the world’s current population of 8.011 billion.
2.537 billion people worldwide are completely unvaccinated for COVI, which is 31.67%.
In highly vaccinated countries, all that have 50% or more of their population taking at least 1 COVID Shot, 1.394 billion are unvaccinated (21.64%).
37.24% of the world is either COVID unvaccinated or has not completed their primary series to be fully vaccinated. 27.47% of the highly vaccinated countries are unvaccinated or have not completed their primary series.

🚩 Red flag #1 is that 445 million + people worldwide have had 1 shot, but chose not to get fully vaccinated. One might say, well maybe people in certain countries were unable to get that 2nd dose. This is why I separated out the highly vaccinated countries from ones that may not have great access to the vaccines. In those highly vaccinated countries, which makes up 80.4% of the world’s population, 375 million + chose to get 1 shot and within a matter of weeks decided they would not get their 2nd shot to become fully vaccinated. This in spite of surely knowing they needed 2, with most vaccine options, to be fully vaccinated in order to keep their jobs, go out, live, and not be pariahs, etc. In the United States it was certainly made clear. Despite that, at this point 39 million + people in the USA have had 1 shot and are not fully vaccinated, more than 2 years after the COVID Vaccination process began.

We should all be asking why, deliberating about why, and trying to find out why. It’s kind of important. Any one who says it isn’t, probably has an inkling the answer might be bad news for their opinions. Those types of persons seem to care more about their beliefs than people, reason, or truth, so let’s not cater to them.

🚩 Red flag #2. 78.36% of highly vaccinated countries’ populations have taken 1 shot. 72.53% are fully vaccinated. But only 53.43%, of countries that I found reporting on (13 countries, straight average of countries not population adjusted), have taken 3 shots or more. Only 34.88% of those in the United States have taken 3 or more shots and their vaccination process starting in December of 2020. This is more than 2 years now. If they’re so safe and effective wouldn’t people be clamoring to take another dose?

Even if you waited a year from the date of 1/17/22, or earlier, if that was within time period when you became fully vaccinated, 212.83 million people in the USA should have had a booster by now, as it was recommended you get one every year (possibly more in a year at this point).₁ Of course, people do die so how much could that affect things? Well in 2021, the deadliest year in the U.S. ever, 3.4 million people died.₂ Even if all those people died in between getting 1 COVID Shot and their 2nd COVID Shot that would leave 10s of millions of Americans that should have had a COVID Booster by now. More than 90 million. What’s the deal?

🚩 Red flag #3. More Flu Vaccines have been distributed this season (2022-2023) than people who have taken the 3rd shot for COVID. I say distributed because that’s how the CDC keeps stats on Flu Vaccines. It seems as the vast majority get used. Distribution occurs gradually from before Flu Season into Flu Season. 170.71 million Flu Vaccines have been distributed in the United States this Flu Season.₃ 116 million + people have taken at least 1 COVID Booster (3 shots or more) in the U.S..₄ 54 million + more Flu Vaccines have been distributed for a much less serious disease than people who have taken at least 1 COVID Booster for a much more dangerous illness. See anything wrong here? Shouldn’t it be the reverse?

In the mindsets of people the Flu Vaccine isn’t terribly effective. In a poll published 2022, 41% of people don’t think Flu Shots work very well.₅ The point being if someone thought effectiveness is the main reason more are getting Flu Shots than COVID Shots now, that might not add up as a large portion of the population already doesn’t believe Flu Shots are effective, but keep getting them (Flu Vaccines distributed are down slightly from this point last year from 173.34 million to 170.71 million).

Some people argue people don’t know about the COVID Boosters. Perhaps the few people living in the woods where the Unabomber lived are unaware, but the rest of us in the United States are under a constant barrage regarding COVID Vaccines that being commercials, the news, social media, our health agencies and government, our doctors, etc. etc.. This seems like a pretty irrational reason for the low uptake.

Laziness is sometimes used as the excuse. Perhaps you could say that regarding a COVID Booster, even though people keep getting their Flu Vaccines yearly. Problem is, were 39 million + Americans too lazy to get fully vaccinated? They were capable enough of getting 1 shot. They surely knew they needed 2nd shot, at least for Moderna and Pfizer, in order to get full immunity, full living rights, or to keep their jobs. Not really buying this argument either.

“Misinformation” is also claimed to be a reason for COVID Vaccine uptake decreases. Let’s face it, there is some real misinformation and disinformation going around on both sides of the debate. Problem is some things labeled misinformation aren’t actually pieces of misinformation. But I digress. This is quite possibly part of the factor. Yet we still have the same problem as the laziness argument. 39 million Americans got 1 dose of an mRNA Vaccine and in a matter of a few weeks tops, the time period you’re supposed to wait to get the 2nd shot, changed their minds about wanting to be fully vaccinated. This is early on in the vaccination process when there were less rumors floating around. So what they heard the “misinformation” in that short time period between 1st and 2nd shot? Not likely. This can’t really reasonably explain a large portion of that 39 million.

That brings us to side effects as a possible reason. In that same poll mentioned above, 39% are concerned about the Flu Vaccine’s side effects. Could this be partly due to the loud conversation around the COVID Vaccine’s side effects? That seems plausible. It also seems plausible that COVID Vaccine Injuries are a large part as to why people are not getting that next COVID Vaccine, which is occurring all over the world and not just the USA. They are the reason people I know are not getting more, I can say that. There are almost 1.5 million adverse events and 33,591 deaths on VAERS reported due to the COVID Vaccines (surely an under reporting, even the NIH would say so).₆ Perhaps these people not getting another shot should be surveyed so we know why they stopped getting more COVID Vaccines? Could give us some very useful insight. Is that too reasonable and logical to ask for?

You can see screenshots of the chart of highly vaccinated countries here with a link to the full spreadsheet of the data below (just click the images to make bigger and scroll through.)₇

Tell me what else you think it could be. Is there anything else that makes rational sense besides too many injuries?

CITATIONS

Number of people in United States fully vaccinated by date. — https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations
3.4 million deaths in USA in 2021 — https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/health/#:~:text=COVID%2D19%20%26%20Health-,Preliminary%20data%20shows%20that%203.4%20million%20people%20died%20in%202021,accounted%20for%2050%25%20of%20deaths.&text=Centers%20for%20Disease%20Control%20and%20Prevention.
Flu Vaccine weekly distrubtion for last 3 Flu Seasons — https://www.cdc.gov/flu/fluvaxview/dashboard/vaccination-doses-distributed.html
Number in USA that have taken at least 1 COVID Booster — https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/pharmacy/states-ranked-by-booster-rates.html
Flu Vaccine Poll — https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/04/fewer-americans-plan-to-get-a-flu-shot-this-season-2022.html
VAERS Statistics — https://openvaers.com/
Highly vaccinated countries COVID Vaccine spreadsheet (Shots 1-5 data + Bivalent booster) — https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s5X2EvHSxCk8FptDwsZkwqVhatXkHRhsDDY8-GwToyI/edit?usp=sharing

TAGS: COVID Vaccine

COVID Vaccine

Moderna vs. Pfizer – VAERS

July 30, 2022February 25, 2023
by Devin Russell

Moderna vs. Pfizer – VAERS

Before a Covid Vaxxx sympathizer jumps out of the bushes to yell at me in an ole timey voice “you can’t use VAERS it’s self-reported data” let’s just nip that in the bud right away. You can’t cavalierly ignore VAERS in this instance and I’ll explain why.

This article is delving into Moderna vs. Pfizer VAERS Covid Vaccine Injury reports (& I’ve added Johnson & Johnson at the end). Since it’s such a large number of reports, wonder why, the amount of the Covid Vaccine Injury VAERS reports not related to the Covid Vaccines, but mistakenly reported, has no bearing because the ratio of true Covid Vaccine Injuries between manufacturers should stay basically the same. UT OH!

There is a major mathematical problem that you will see below and I believe I know why it’s occurring. This is really vital as this is not easy to brush off and it seems like more evidence suggesting a certain something is bad news bears. Math time first, my favorite and a vaxxx apologist’s least favorite since they’ve clearly stopped thinking:

Total VAERS Reports (2021) – 790,874
Covid-19 VAERS Reports (2021) – 735,662 (93% of all reports)
Unknown VAERS Reports (2021) – 31,533 (4%, which perhaps brings Covid-19 VAERS reports up to 97% of the reports, probably at least to 96%)
Moderna Covid VAERS Reports (2021) – 339,319
Pfizer Covid VAERS Reports (2021) – 330,792

There have been 51.7% more Pfizer shots administered than Moderna of December 30, 2021 (the Covid Vaccination Campaign started 12/2020) which is 293.86 million Pfizer doses vs. 193.65 million Moderna doses. (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-vaccine-doses-by-manufacturer?country=~USA) BUT for some reason there are 2.5% more Moderna VAERS Covid Vaccine Injury reports in 2021, or 8,527 more reports.

There were 330,792 Pfizer VAERS Covid Vaccine Injury reports, and let’s pretend Moderna shots caused the same amount of injuries (as a ratio to shots administered). There should be 217,988 Moderna VAERS Covid Vaccine Injury reports. 112,804 LESS than Pfizer. Instead there are 8,527 MORE. Why?

The most obvious reason is that mRNA Moderna doses are stronger vaccine doses than the mRNA Pfizer ones. Moderna shots are 100 micrograms (50 microgram boosters) and Pfizer’s are 30 micrograms. What is exactly occurring with an mRNA vaccine one might ask? Well the proteins made with mRNA instructions activate the immune system, teaching it to see the spike protein as foreign. The body then creates antibodies.

Moderna’s vaccine generates more than double the antibodies seen for Pfizer’s vaccine (closer to triple). (https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210901/moderna-vaccine-creates-more-antibodies-than-pfizer-vaccine-study) Furthermore, “at 14–119 days after the second dose, anti-spike ‘protein’ IgG levels were higher among controls fully vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine compared with those who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine among persons aged 18–64 years (median = 612 versus 340; p = 0.018) and ≥65 years (median = 792 versus 152; p<0.001). At ≥120 days, anti-spike IgG levels were also higher among controls fully vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine compared with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine among persons aged 18–64 years (median = 267 versus 106; p = 0.006) and ≥65 years (median = 266 versus 57; p = 0.003).” (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7049a2.htm) Also, Moderna protects longer than Pfizer and has higher efficacy. This seems all great until you remember more people get injured by the Moderna Covid Vaccines by ratio, according to VAERS (and if you look at restrictions and recommendations SEVERAL countries have put on Moderma Covid Vaccines, which we really haven’t seen with Pfizer), than those who take the Pfizer Covid Vaccines. The answer I think lies above. Anti-spike IgG levels are higher in those vaccinated with Moderna and so are antibody levels. This makes sense seeing as how Moderna is more than 3x the strength of Pfizer.

What am I suggesting? More spike protein, more problems. This data certainly seems to back that theory up. If not that, then what’s the reason Moderna Vaccines are injuring more people? mRNA degrades rapidly, so we are told, so it doesn’t seem to be that. Could it be the antibodies themselves? Doesn’t seem likely based on what we know about the injured and how their antibodies wane, but they remain sick despite that (Covid Long Haulers the same). My eyes are brought back to the spike protein, which is where more people’s eyes should be. If you have a better theory on what’s going on with Moderna vs. Pfizer VAERS data I’d love to hear it.

–

Correction (8/1/22): There have been 51.7% more Pfizer shots administered than Moderna of December 30, 2021, not 52.8% like previously stated. Additional data was added to the mix and this percentage has bee changed now to reflect that.

Addition (8/1/22): Johnson & Johnson Covid Vaccines accounted for 63,989 VAERS reports in 2021. 17,613,846 doses of J&J were administered by the end of 2021. The J&J vaccines use a different technology than Moderna & Pfizer, so I originally left them out, but when I discovered their VAERS report rate compared to Moderna & Pfizer, I felt compelled to add this. It’s not pretty. The Elephant Man is better looking. By the end of 2021, 193.65 million Moderna doses were given in the United States and there were 339,319 Covid Vaccine Moderna VAERS reports. Let’s pretend the same amount of J&J shots were provided as Moderna and see how many VAERS reports should have been generated. 703,507 VAERS reports if J&J & Moderna each were administered at 193.65 million doses! That would be 2.07x more reports per shot than Moderna! No wonder it got the axe. And don’t forget, VAERS represents an under reporting.

COVID Vaccine

VAERS Data: COVID Vaccines vs. Other Vaccines

May 4, 2022July 30, 2023
by Devin Russell

VAERS Data: COVID Vaccines vs. Other Vaccines

Comparing COVID Vaccines to other vaccines has been a motivation for me as I’ve questioned the general notion of their equality in safety. It’s a difficult thing to analyze though. Anyone who pretends otherwise is probably not being fair-minded. I decided to find out how many vaccinations were administered for COVID-19 compared to all other vaccinations combined since 1990, when VAERS was created, and how the vaccine injuries reported to VAERS stack up. Note, this is not necessarily the best way to analyze the safety of COVID Vaccines vs other vaccines (not that there are many great ways based on the data available), but I do think doing this analyzation raises some valid questions and points out some red flags 🚩. Before I go into my findings, let me first explain VAERS and it’s intended purpose.

“The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S.-licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of adverse events (possible side effects) after a person has received a vaccination. Anyone can report an adverse event to VAERS. … VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences to CDC and FDA. VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine. This way, VAERS can provide CDC and FDA with valuable information that additional work and evaluation is necessary to further assess a possible safety concern.” Some of the purposes of VAERS include:

Detect new, unusual, or rare vaccine adverse events;
Monitor increases in known adverse events;
Identify potential patient risk factors for particular types of adverse events;
Assess the safety of newly licensed vaccines;
Determine and address possible reporting clusters (e.g., suspected localized [temporally or geographically] or product-/batch-/lot-specific adverse event reporting);
Recognize persistent safe-use problems and administration errors;
Provide a national safety monitoring system that extends to the entire general population for response to public health emergencies, such as a large-scale pandemic influenza vaccination program.

https://vaers.hhs.gov/about.html

Submitted reports to VAERS are checked by experts, including: doctors, pharmacists, and statisticians. The more serious adverse events are given further scrutiny. VAERS initially detected a dangerous intestinal obstruction linked to RotaShield, a rotavirus vaccine that was withdrawn from the market by the manufacturer. From the years of 2011-2014, VAERS collected an average of 30,000 reports each year of vaccine adverse events.

It was a painstaking process to gather and calculate the number of vaccines given in the United States by type since 1990. It was a harder task than expected. You’d think this data would be readily available, but it’s never that easy is it?

What I found was that from 1990-2021 approximately 5.63 billion non-COVID Vaccine doses have been administered (probably a few hundred million more than that, but can’t find all the data). 569 million Sars-Cov-2 Vaccinations have been administered in less than a year and a half (up to 4/16/22). It’s safe to say there have been at least 10 times more non-COVID Vaccines administered than COVID Vaccinations since 1990 (32-33 years). You can see the data here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rpQ3wZnKDDusDA4U5U7Ek5W3RRGOrZ6s5wAC7C5tdwI/edit?usp=sharing

As of April 15, 2022 there have been 2,108,012 total adverse events reported to VAERS since 1990. 1,237,645 of those adverse events have been reported due to the COVID Vaccinations. 36,724 total reported deaths to VAERS and 27,349 are reported in relation to the COVID Vaccines.

https://openvaers.com/, https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/datasets.html?

Let’s do some math, since I love math. 58.7% of the adverse events reported to VAERS are for the COVID Vaccinations (1.42x more than other vaccinations). 64.8% of the hospitalizations listed on VAERS are for the COVID Vaccinations (1.84x more). 74.5% of the deaths reported to VAERS are for the COVID Vaccinations (2.92 x more). Don’t forget there have been at least 10x the number of non-COVID Vaccinations administered the last 32+ years, so multiply all these numbers by 10 and you get … 14.2x more likely to report an adverse event for the COVID Vaccines, 18.4x more likely to report a hospitalization for the COVID Vaccines, and 29.2x more likely to report a death after the COVID Vaccinations compared to all other types combined. These figures are actually higher than this and growing by the day.

Of course we are not supposed to use VAERS outside of its intended purpose, BUT this seems like a red flag 🚩in the very least. It’s kind of hard to see this data and think absolutely nothing of it. Those would be some serious mental gymnastics you would have to do to not believe this data should be scrutinized any further.

VAERS is supposed to be a signaling system, so what is going on here? I know many who have been seriously injured by the COVID Vaccines, some have reported their problems, and have received phone calls from “VAERS” asking for their medical records (sometimes they ask the same individual more than once, which doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence). What are they doing with this information? Not in theory or the utopian world. What is actually taking place with COVID Vaccine Injury data and these medical records? How are they going to make a medical connection to a COVID Vaccine in the vast majority of cases since there is no easy way to test for a vaccine injury? 29.2x more reports of deaths than all other vaccines combined seems like a safety signal (it’s still egregiously lopsided even if you just analyze the past couple of years of vaccinations, when VAERS was even more easily accessible due to technology advancements since in 1990). Maybe I’m wrong to look at this as an obvious safety signal … or maybe our system is failing us at the worst time. It’s hard to fathom a situation where they are not overwhelmed with injury reports. There have been more adverse events reported to VAERS the last year and a half, than the 31 years prior. Lots of questions here that need answers. I wish the mainstream media would dig deeper to find out what’s going on behind the scenes. COVID Vaccine Injuries are not trivial. COVID health related matters matter more than COVID Vaccine Injuries that can be just as serious. That’s a sad reality.

We know VAERS has been used in the past many times, even for the COVID Vaccines. The Johnson & Johnson COVID Vaccine, which makes up only 3.2% of vaccinations given in the USA, was paused briefly. The “CDC and FDA issued a pause of the Janssen vaccine April 12–23, 2021, after 6 cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), a serious condition that involves blood clots in the brain, were identified in VAERS.” Only 6 cases preceded the halt … what are they doing about 27,349 deaths reported (which is SURELY an under reporting, as stated in “Safety monitoring in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)”, “…, reporting rates for specific adverse events that approach the background rates might indicate a safety problem due to the known underreporting of adverse events to VAERS.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4632204/)? There have been more than 6 confirmed cases of COVID Vaccine deaths, just for your information.

The questions I have in my mind only increased while writing this piece. The data looks bad, the optics look bad, and the way some things are taken seriously and others seem to be brushed aside, looks bad as well. Those analyzing the VAERS data officially need to be placed under a microscope because what’s occurring, or not occuring, from the outside looks quite inadequate.

COVID Vaccine

When Athletes & The Famous Get Their COVID Vaccines…

March 22, 2022August 9, 2023
by Devin Russell

When Athletes & The Famous Get Their COVID Vaccines 💉

I have curated a list of when famous people, athletes, politicians, etc. got their COVID Vaccines and what occurred of note afterwards. Link to the spreadsheet is below. It will constantly be updated.

110 on the list, 21 are deceased, … and counting. — more additionally have undetermined vaccination statuses, but may be COVID Vaccine Injured on a seperate tab. 19 of those are deceased. Many more to look into.

If you have anyone you want to add or see anything incorrect, please email me at covidcastaways@gmail.com, or post a message below. (Updated 8/9/23 – 2:05 pm EST)

Can you think of one vaccine injured athlete or famous person your entire life prior to 2021?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Mq-ypP1HI59SaROGqzQr_sYmkKdYZ7Te9d88qxDNOnU/edit?usp=sharing

COVID Vaccine

“Trust The Science” – Manipulative & Moronic

March 14, 2022July 30, 2023
by Devin Russell

“Trust The Science” – Manipulative & Moronic

“Trust the science” … if ever a more manipulative and moronic, I enjoy alliteration, phrase has been spouted from every possible mountain top recently. It’s usually said in relation to the COVID Vaccines. The phrase standing on its own sounds quite reasonable. What you don’t believe in “science?” Are you anti-science? What a fool you must be! This is what lends to the manipulative aspect of the phrase. Not that we should ignore science and data, but we should see it for what it is, and what issues there may be with it, after it’s analyzed deeper. We should not ignore the reality occurring all around us because of past trials, data (that may be or is weak), and so called “science.” Plus we should realize what we think we know now may not be true. If people learned anything from history, they would know better.

Trust the science to me sounds more like, trust what I’m telling you and don’t think about it any further. Trust the authorities and credentialed in charge, you aren’t smart enough to analyze this and have an opinion. Trust the data and pretend like “there are lies, damned lies, and statistics” isn’t an accurate quotation. Trust that studies have always held up to the same level of safety when the drug/product is more widely used in public. Trust that people are infallible and never have ulterior motivations. Trust that the those in the government will always act in the best interest of the people. Trust that nothing has been distorted in a way to show what whomever is overseeing things wants to show. Trust that we will not learn anything more in the future. Trust that the science is settled, despite how many times the scientific community has been incorrect or hasn’t been aware of a safety issue in the past (or has been and flat out ignored it).

If people uttering “trust the science” weren’t so ignorant of history, or just disingenuous about it in a manipulative way, they would know how moronic it is to say that. Here is a history lesson for these ignorant people:

DDT (Pesticide): Available for public use in USA in 1945. In October 1945, National Geographic ran a feature on the “world of tomorrow.” They declared health and medicine would be vastly improved thanks to sterilizing lamps, penicillin, and, of course, DDT. In 1957 The New York Times reported an unsuccessful struggle to restrict DDT use in Nassau County, NY. In 1962, the book Silent Spring argued that pesticides, including DDT, were poisoning both wildlife and the environment and were endangering human health. DDT became a prime target of the growing anti-chemical and anti-pesticide movements, and in 1967 a group of scientists and lawyers founded Environmental Defense (later Environmental Defense Fund, EDF) with the specific goal of enacting a ban on DDT. In response to an EDF suit, the U.S. District Court of Appeals in 1971 ordered the EPA to begin the de-registration procedure for DDT. After an initial six-month review process, William Ruckelshaus, the EPA’s first Administrator, rejected an immediate suspension of DDT’s registration, citing studies from the EPA’s internal staff stating that DDT was not an imminent danger. However, these findings were criticized, as they were performed mostly by economic entomologists inherited from the United States Department of Agriculture, who many environmentalists felt were biased towards agribusiness and understated concerns about human health and wildlife. In the summer of 1972, Ruckelshaus announced the cancellation of most uses of DDT. Again, this caused controversy. Immediately after the announcement, both the EDF and the DDT manufacturers filed suit against EPA. The Agricultural Industry sought to overturn the ban, while the EDF wanted a comprehensive ban. The cases were consolidated, and in 1973 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the EPA had acted properly in banning DDT. During the late 1970s, the EPA also began banning organochlorines, pesticides that were chemically similar to DDT. These included aldrin, dieldrin, chlordane, heptachlor, texaphene, and mirex.

It took 28 YEARS to get a likely cancerous and harmful chemical “banned” thanks to governmental and big agriculture objections while the media helped promote the pesticide as something that would be beneficial to your health. Sound familiar??? It sounds like the script has already been written for the COVID Vaccines. … “Trust the science,” I’m sure people clamored, as they sprayed DDT in their house and on their children.

Cigarettes: Here we go again. Cigarettes became popular and mass produced around the time of the Civil War (1864 or so). In the 1930s-50s, in order to advertise for cigarettes, advertisers used the catchphrase ‘doctors recommend!’ In the 1930s, tobacco companies had an army of doctors ready to debunk you as a quack for even suggesting something as benign as a cigarette could give you cancer. The cigarette companies even paid doctors to appear in advertisements to reassure people that smoking is something doctors encourage. In 1956, a Surgeon General’s scientific study group determined that there was a causal relationship between excessive cigarette smoking and lung cancer. It wasn’t until January 11, 1964 that the public was given the true story via a definitive report linking smoking with lung cancer. The Terry Report claimed: ‘In comparison with nonsmokers, average male smokers of cigarettes have approximately a 9-to-10-fold risk of developing lung cancer and heavy smokers at least a 20-fold risk.’ The report held cigarette smoking responsible for a 70 percent increase in the mortality rate of smokers over nonsmokers. Smoking was officially named as the most important cause of chronic bronchitis, also pointing to a link between smoking and emphysema, and smoking and coronary heart disease. Not to even go into the nicotine addiction saga.

That was more than 92 YEARS to admit cigarettes were cancer causing for those wondering!

Vioxx (former Merck NSAID): This is a doozy! Approved by FDA in May of 1999 after efficacy and safety tested in clinical trials. There were 9 studies of 13,400 people when, or soon thereafter, Vioxx was approved. More than 80 million people were prescribed the drug at some time after approval. In September 2004, Merck voluntarily withdrew Rofecoxib (Vioxx) from the market because of concerns about increased risk of heart attack and stroke associated with long-term, high-dosage use. Merck withdrew the drug after disclosures that it withheld information about Rofecoxib’s risks from doctors and patients for over five years, allegedly resulting in between 88,000 and 140,000 cases of serious heart disease (38,000+ died). Before it was withdrawn Merck had $2.5 billion in sales the year before. You mean a profit motivation influenced the science? HUH?! It gets worse.

In December of 1999 the government, DSMB (Data & Safety Monitoring Board) Chairman Michael Weinblatt knew about heart problems related to Vioxx. In February of 2000, Mr. Weinblatt fills out a financial disclosure form that he and his wife own $72,975 of Merck stock. Weinblatt agrees to a new consulting contract with Merck. “We are delighted that you have agreed to serve as a member of the VIOXX Multidisciplinary Advisory Board,” Merck writes in an invitation to Weinblatt to attend his first advisory board meeting. Weinblatt signs the new contract on March 6. It involves 12 days of work over two years, at the rate of $5,000 per day. Hmmm nahhh that’s not a conflict. This all seems fine to me! On the up and up! BUT it gets worse.

The VIGOR (safety data) paper to the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) for publication submitted by Merck only included only 17 of the 20 heart attacks Vioxx patients had (that’s 15% not included for those counting). You mean they distorted the data? I doubt that’s happened in any other circumstance … oh yeah it has with Maddie de Garay, Brianne Dressen, etc. and the COVID Vaccine trials (see former blog post).

They said it was safe and used it for 5 years, but it wasn’t that safe! Imagine being a parroting idiot back then saying “trust the science,” Vioxx doesn’t cause heart attacks, you’re a crazy conspiracy theorist, while people taking the drug die of heart attacks? It’s almost like long-term injury data and what we see occur out in nature is important or something. Go figure.

Swine Flu Vaccine: In 1976, there was a Swine Flu outbreak. A Swine Flu Vaccine was quickly created, but it unfortunately caused likely hundreds of cases of GBS (Guillain-Barre Syndrome) and led to 25-32 deaths (of course there could have been more that just couldn’t be linked to the vax). Unlike what we are seeing now from the media, a week into beginning the Swine Flu Vaccinations the papers had begun reporting troubling news from vaccine clinics in Pittsburgh: three apparently unexplained deaths due to heart attacks. But it was just one of many problems that plagued the “swine flu affair of 1976”, when a US president decided to rush a vaccine to the entire American population based on ill-founded science and political imprudence.

Lawsuits, side-effects, and negative media coverage followed, and the events dented confidence in public health for years to come. What happened might even have laid the foundations for the ‘mistaken’ anti-vax views and distrust in public health that would spread decades later.

In February of 1976, several soldiers at Fort Dix fell ill with a new Swine Flu. By October they were rolling out vaccines. The Swine Flu Vaccination program lasted about 2 months before it was suspended. For Fineberg, “the fundamental strategic blunder” was announcing a mass vaccination programme so early. It was premature, and locked politicians into a very visible commitment. 1 person died from the Swine Flu (which seemed to occur with the initial outbreak in February 1976) and there were only about 200 cases.

Never let them tell you all vaccines are always safe and successful. This was before the VAERS system, which has under reportings as is, so I can’t imagine how many vaccine injuries and deaths were missed.
Earth Center of the Universe: Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, and Newton all believed the sun was the center of the universe and not the earth. The consensus said otherwise. It took more than a century for heliocentrism to become accepted even after all of these scientific geniuses said it was so. Even if you’re smarter than everyone in the room, it’s difficult to change the group thinkers and powers that be from a consensus belief.
More Drugs, Vaccines, and other things that caused harm (time on market before recalled or pulled): Accutane (27 Years), Asbestos (Not completely banned in USA, one of the few developed countries that hasn’t completely banned it), BioThrax – Anthrax Vaccine (Still Kicking), Bextra (4 Years), Cylert (35 Years), Duract (1 Year), Ergamisol (11 Years), LYMERix -Lyme Disease Vaccine (4 Years), Meridia (13 Years), Raptiva (6 Years), Rezulin (3 Years), Rotashield (1 Year+), Seldane (13 Years), etc. etc. etc. Nevermind bringing up the opioid epidemic.

Do the “trust the science” echoers still use most of this stuff? Many of these things were deemed safe via initial scientific consensus, BUT perhaps they learned more over time and decided these things weren’t actually safe. See how that works?

With time you can learn that things you thought were true, or safe, are not. Being so sure of yourself can make you very ignorant, especially if you’ve never considered and analyzed the alternative to your opinions (which most people seemingly have not). A lot of data related to COVID and the COVID Vaccines is tenuous at best for various reasons. Much of it is hard to collect. COVID Vaccine Injury data is some of the hardest to gather (even if “they” actually tried hard to gather it). What’s scientific about distorted data, omitted data, or horribly collected data? Not too much. Analyzation matters A LOT in these cases.

Trust the science is really a manipulative and moronic phrase if you understand anything about the medical industry and history. No one really has a reason or benefit to admit COVID Vaccine Injuries, certainly not the government, big pharma, the media, social media, doctors, or people in general, unless you are the vaccine injured person or are a family member of one (a family member that happens to not be gaslighting the injured person that is). It seems the powers that be would rather not know about the COVID Vaccine Injuries because what’s the benefit now that the push has long been in motion? The government can be sued, big pharma has profit motivations, and your doctor can be sued or can be ostracized for taking an unpopular position, that someone had a COVID Vaccine Injury, and potentially lose their livelihood for speaking up for these harmed individuals.

Think about that for a second if you’re so sure of yourself and how safe the COVID Vaccines “have” to be. The scientific consensus deeming something safe hasn’t held water many times in the past. Everything is safe, until you find out it’s not. Sometimes that takes time and sometimes that takes time and a lot of noise to get to a tipping point. There are plenty of glaring red flags out there pointing to the COVID Vaccines being more harmful than suggested, plus what your eyes, ears, and brain should be telling you about what’s happening right in front of your face and all around. I don’t trust those that constantly utter “trust the science” because I’m aware of history and I know they’re probably trying to manipulate. Don’t be content and think nothing more about it because of these people. Analyze deeper. Time will not be kind to these “trust the science” exclaimers.

(I had all the sources listed, but WordPress ate them. Also, had to rewrite my entire summary. Everything was taken by reputable articles or sources. I will try to find sources and post at a later time.)

COVID Vaccine

COVID Vaccine Trials: Adverse Reactions, Data Distortion, & Media…

November 28, 2021July 30, 2023
by Devin Russell

COVID Vaccine Trials: Adverse Reactions, Data Distortion, & Media Censorship

“Omissions are a form of censorship.”

On November 2, 2021, Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, held a COVID Vaccine Injury panel which featured a plethora of experts and people discussing their injuries, or experiences with the COVID Vaccines. Senator Johnson is a controversial figure, but he seems to be one of the few, possibly the only, representative that cares about the COVID Vaccine Injured and cares about COVID Vaccine safety. He gives people a platform to talk about their experiences with the COVID Vaccines, and the trials, that they would otherwise struggle to get. That’s very important as COVID Vaccine Injuries are occurring and they can be quite severe, even resulting in death. One might think the mainstream media would be interested in covering these stories provided during the panel, but they were more motivated to attempt to discredit them, as you will see later.

Two of the people on the panel were COVID Vaccine Injured in their perspective trials. They are, currently 13 year old, Maddie de Garay (who was with her mother Stephanie), and Brianne Dressen. They’re not anti-vaxxers. Stephanie volunteered her daughter, Maddie, and son for the Pfizer trial and Brianne Dressen, whose husband is a chemist, volunteered for the AstraZeneca trial. These are people that are pro-vax, but realize the safety data for the COVID Vaccines specifically, should be brought into question based on what they, and others, have experienced. They are also advocating for acknowledgment and treatment for the injured.

Brandy Zadrozny tries to paint Maddie and her mother in another way. She’s a reporter for NBC News. Brandy wrote a piece, which would be hard to construe in any other way than as a gaslighting piece, partly on 13 year old Maddie de Garay on November 3, 2021. The date of Brandy’s piece is no coincidence compared to when the panel took place, the day prior. In the article she tries to tie people who have COVID Vaccine Injuries to anti-vaxxers. There’s an obvious little problem in suggesting people who voluntarily took the COVID Vaccines, especially in a trial, are anti-vax. People who are anti-vax would not be seen in the same zip code as a COVID Vaccine trial and probably wouldn’t take the voluntary vaccines at all. Before Brandy Zadrozny wrote her article, she spoke with Trevor Fitzgibbon, who handled Maddie’s COVID Vaccine Injury panel press release, to ask him questions. Trevor relayed those questions from Brandy to Stephanie de Garay.

Maddie de Garay & mother Stephanie de Garay at Senator Johnson’s COVID Vaccine Injury Panel 11/2/21

Here are the questions that were asked by Brandy and the answers provided by Stephanie de Garay: 1. Have Maddie’s parents officially found out whether she was in the vaccine group or the placebo group? A. Yes, Vaccine., 2. Where are they in the process of Pfizer’s investigation? Last I saw was that they are still investigating. A. As far as we are aware, they are not investigating. They reported the injury as abdominal pain., 3. Pro Vaccine advocates are concerned that Maddie’s Ad (she had an ad that was approved to run during a SNL commercial break, but was cut last minute, https://odysee.com/@VSRF:d/maddieaddenied:3?r=2M9u5KF2usQwTWCxABmwYSnk3fawY4V1) is the kind of graphic, unverified video that anti-vaccine advocates use to undermine confidence in the COVID Vaccine and all childhood vaccines (‘I don’t get why people lump all vaccines together, especially when the COVID Vaccines have unique characteristics that would make their injury profiles quite different than others.’). Want to give you a chance to respond. A. We should care about the minority of individuals that will be injured by the COVID-19 vaccine. It is unfortunate that “pro vaccine advocates” feel the need to dismiss those injured by the vaccines in order to promote vaccines. The promotion of vaccines is already rampant — what we need is to recognize the harms they can cause so we can develop treatments for these harms and that is what drives the need for ads like the one being run about Maddie. and 4. Do any of her medical records state her multiple conditions are CAUSED by the vaccine? Some of the things I’ve read have noted the timing correlation, but not a diagnosis of causation. (‘The ole, you got paralyzed soon after the COVID Vaccine as a healthy 12 year old girl, causation doesn’t equal correlation trick. That’s a bold stance Cotton!’) A. The medical records for each encounter the day after and for weeks after vaccination reflect the vaccine as the cause of injury.

Let’s recap … which may not go well for Brandy. Before she wrote her NBC News article, Brandy was able to see the panel, had Maddie de Garay’s press release for the panel (here is the full release https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eGKZvUI-ZIk4S8Wy8dYhlFRmr4YLePlH/edit) at her disposal, also received the above answers to her questions, and had these medical records below. Yet, she still wrote what you’re about to read.

Text

Description automatically generated

Text, letter

Description automatically generated

Below is an excerpt from Brandy’s article “COVID vaccines for children are coming. So is misinformation.”

“Vaccine advocates are pointing to a recent example spreading quickly on social media as a harbinger for the kind of graphic misinformation that they fear most.

The video, first posted to a fringe anti-vaccine website and then spread through mainstream sites including YouTube and Facebook, is only 30 seconds long, but devastating. In a carousel of vignettes, a young girl with a beaming smile digs in the dirt, dances on her front lawn and celebrates over cake with her family. It then cuts to a closeup shot of the girl’s face as she cries out in pain, her head wrapped in bandages and a tube through her nose. Later, three adults hoist her limp body into a wheelchair, then it quickly cuts to her hospital gown, an intravenous line in her hand and ends, lingering on a video of her legs as she shakes uncontrollably.

The cause of the girl’s condition is unclear. Her mother said on a panel held Tuesday in Washington, D.C., hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., that she was injured by a COVID vaccine administered as part of a Pfizer trial at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital. (Johnson has been widely criticized for spreading misleading claims about the vaccines.) The family’s lawyer, Aaron Siri — who also represents the country’s largest anti-vaccine organization, the Informed Consent Action Network — claims the doctors investigating the case misdiagnosed her myriad injuries as unrelated to the vaccine then downplayed them as abdominal pain. In the meantime, anti-vaccine activists have made the girl a poster child for their cause.

The mother of the girl and the group behind the ad have not provided any evidence that the girl was diagnosed as harmed by a COVID-19 vaccine.”

That seems to be an “interesting” take on Brandy’s part, based on the facts. As you can see she attempted a couple of obvious tactics that maybe a few a little light on the IQ fell for. 1. She called someone’s own story about their COVID Vaccine Injury, a 13 year old girl mind you, misinformation and stated there is no evidence of it (despite the evidence of it). As if Brandy is like Facebook’s Algorithm and has no ability to reason, automatically discrediting or censoring anything negative said about the COVID Vaccines. I thought reason is what separated the humans from the rest. 2. Zadrozny tried to tie Maddie and her mother to anti-vaxxers by saying the lawyer representing them is an anti-vaccine, wink wink. NO ONE anti-vax signs both their children up for a vaccine trial. What a ridiculous attempt to tie the two together that was blatantly transparent. Perhaps the lawyer is used to representing the vaccine injured and that’s the reason he was hired … because he knows what to do … because Maddie is COVID Vaccine injured like is stated in her medical records. 3. The worst one. Brandy lied. She said Stephanie de Garay provided no proof Maddie was diagnosed as harmed by a COVID-19 Vaccine. She did provide proof. It was in the press release. Brandy chose to ignore it. Unfortunately for this “reporter” … she’s been downgraded to the quotation marks now …. clinical diagnosis is a diagnosis and Maddie de Garay has that. The key parts of the press release were highlighted and everything. It was clear as day, a 3rd grader’s delight and an NBC News reporter’s worst nightmare apparently. I guess it’s simple enough to just ignore what you want in order to protect the narrative you believe in at all costs. Even at the cost of throwing a 13 year old under the bus while not being honest about COVID Vaccine Injuries that are occuring.

You can see this upstanding journalist’s gaslighting piece on a COVID Vaccine Injured paralyzed 13 year old girl with a feeding tube below. You are advised to not eat food or drink anything at the same time as reading this. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/vaccine-misinformation-poised-spike-covid-shots-kids-roll-rcna4360

But I digress. Let’s go back to Maddie and Brianne (and others) who had their data distorted or left out altogether in their COVID Vaccine trials. Maddie de Garay, a 12 year old girl at the time, participated in a Pfizer COVID Vaccine Trial. Unfortunately, she is now paralyzed, using a feeding tube, and has constant pain in her stomach, back, and neck because of her COVID Vaccinations. Her side effects to this day, 9 months later after her 2nd dose of the Pfizer Vaccine, are still listed as functional abdominal pain aka a stomach ache, despite her mother Stephanie’s plea for it to be changed. Part of the problem seems to be that the app used in trial to track side effects. It only allowed for Maddie to record solicited adverse events like fever, injection site pain, anaphylaxis, etc., but many of the more severe side effects were not listed as choices. Additionally, there was no write in option for other side effects and you could only report side effects for 7 days after each shot. It’s almost as if they didn’t want to know. Vaccine injuries can start weeks to a few months after the shot. Why are they only tracking for 7 days? Makes ZERO sense if they truly want accurate safety data. One of the main reasons for a trial in the first place! In order to report an adverse event not listed in the app, one of the two options you have is to call the study doctor.

In the EUA amendment, and NEJM article, Maddie’s injury is listed as functional abdominal pain, even though her principal investigator was the lead author of the NEJM article (fully aware of her paralyzation and other injuries). By the data collection cutoff for the trial, Maddie had experienced 35 adverse events. Pfizer, nor the FDA, nor the CDC has ever reached out to Maddie or Stephanie. Seems like the big story here is the distortion of trial safety data.

A slide from Stephanie de Garay’s presentation during Senator Johnson’s panel

About a year ago, Brianne Dressen gladly signed up to be in the AstraZeneca (AZ) COVID Vaccine Clinical Trial. “I never had any issue with any vaccine” she said. AZ agreed to pay any medical expense as the result of any medical injury from the trial. A year later and she’s seen the grand sum of $590. She has had to refinance her home to pay for the more than $300,000 in medical bills. Bree quickly fell ill with major neurological issues that have lasted for many months after the first dose. She lost the use of her legs and was diagnosed with MS. Top officials at NIH has told her her reaction is an immune mediated response to the spike protein. Dressen wasn’t allowed to get second dose and was dropped from the trial, her data excluded, and access to trial app deleted. Before the app was deleted, she experienced many of the same things Maddie did above with her app. There was no way to track most serious side effects from the app and nowhere to write in side effects. The final report says the individuals that didn’t get the second dose chose to forgo getting it. Brianne claims that’s incorrect, as she was removed from the trial. Either way, why doesn’t her adverse reaction data matter? Do we not care who was harmed from the first dose of the vaccine and how they were harmed when it comes to the safety of them? This seems like a major flaw in the trials. People receiving these shots would care. They deserve their proper informed consent, which they aren’t receiving. Brianne hasn’t heard from officials in regards to the trial in 10 months and all that critical safety data is now lost.

Janet Woodcock, acting Commissioner of the FDA, and Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the FDA, have been asked, begged, and pleaded with repeatedly to acknowledge these severe reactions. They’ve declined. “They know about the issues with the clinical trials, they know about the deaths, they know about the lack of follow up on VAERS, they know about the injuries to children, they know about Maddie, they know about the mandates put on the injured, they know about the suicides as the results of month’s long suffering, they know about the aggressive censorship, they know about the media censorship, they know about the scientific censorship … THEY KNOW ALL OF IT, and they have for months” says Brianne Dressen. Peter Marks was seen in a video interview commenting on what’s the worst that could happen to children getting the COVID Vaccines (12-15 year olds). The worst he had to say was there was some Myocarditis in males that was typically not severe. You would think, at a minimum, the worst that could happen is paralyzation, based on what happened to Maddie de Garay, whom Peter Marks knows about. Guess that slipped his mind. I’m sure it was an honest mistake. You can watch what he said verbatim below.

Peter Marks speaking about the worst that can happen with the COVID Vaccine for 12-15 year olds, no mention of Maddie de Garay’s paralyzation

Towards the end of Bree’s speech on the panel, she reads a tear jerking letter her friend wrote her before they committed suicide because of their COVID Vaccine Injury. It was heartbreaking to hear, but unfortunately, not surprising as I know of others who committed suicide from COVID Vaccine Injuries.

Brianne Dressen at the hospital because of her COVID Vaccine Injury

–

https://rumble.com/vokrf7-sen.-johnson-expert-panel-on-federal-vaccine-mandates.html *start at 2:29 for Maddie and then Brianne, but the rest of the panel is really important to watch too. Including Ernesto Ramirez, who lost his 16 year old son five days after his COVID Pfizer Vaccine to an enlarged heart while he was playing basketball with friends.*

The organizations that should protect us, aren’t protecting us. Big pharma seems to only care about their own profit motivations, the government won’t help those screaming out for help, social media platforms will censor those talking about their own COVID Vaccine Injuries claiming reality is misinformation, and the media will flip whatever on its head and gaslight a child in order to promote their narrative & protect their revenue sources saying that COVID Vaccines are quite safe without taking everything into consideration or investigating further. Not to sound too dramatic, but that is pretty scary and downright evil. Brianne Dressen had a Facebook group of 5,000 COVID Vaccine Injured. Her one mistake was letting it get too big. Facebook found them and destroyed the group. They lost contact with many people in crisis when they were shut down, disbanded. People contemplating suicide that saught the support of others who were in their position and believed in them, because so many doctors and people in their lives do not. These groups are sometimes the only lifeline for the COVID Vaccine Injured, who as you can see get gaslit at every turn.

It’s a shame what happened to Maddie, Stephanie, Brianne, Ernesto, and others, because of the COVID Vaccines. They’re very brave to speak out, especially while ill or grieving, when everyone in a position of power seems to be against them. People need to know their stories. People need to know how people and organizations are actively trying to suppress these COVID Vaccine Injuries. People need to push back against this very un-American censorship, the lies, and distortions. We need to try to get a better and fairer assessment of the safety profile of the COVID Vaccines and get acknowledgement for the injured and treatment for their COVID Vaccine Injuries.