Home

The Bait & Switch of Vaccine Deaths With COVID-19 Mortalities

3 Comments

In perhaps the most controversial post I’ve ever made on this blog, I can now confirm that official data shows that the first and second waves of alleged Covid deaths correspond with the roll out of this year’s WHO-approved flu vaccines.

Evidence from the WHO’s own records shows that the shots are known to kill 5 out of every 1,324 healthy adults, as well as causing 344 to have medically attended adverse events.

It therefore appears obvious that the manufacturers of the scamdemic played a classic bait and switch move, in order to create plausible deniability for this year’s deaths from flu vaccines and to guarantee a whole lot more fatalities from the Covid jabs, which they intend to inject us all with in 2021.

The Genocidal Switcheroo

Damning evidence from the WHO in my possession implicitly states that the current batch of UK flu shots is expected to kill 377 of every 100,000 healthy adults, between 18 and 65.

However, that mortality rate would obviously increase substantially for the elderly and sick, who were the largest UK demographic to receive it by 26/03/2020 [8.5 m of the 14 m vaccinated by that date].

In such circumstances, out of the 14 million vaccinated with the flu shot during the first 12 weeks of 2020, at least 52,780 would have been expected to suffer fatal adverse events from the vaccines administered.

That being the case, the government needed the Coronavirus Act 2020 to suspend autopsies, which obviously could have established the predominant cause of death was the flu vaccines, rather than the government lurgy that has never even been proven to exist.

Grim Mortality Prediction

If this incredibly serious allegation of bait and switch has substance, I can now predict with relative and grim certainty, that in the event 30 million healthy adults receive one of the WHO-approved flu vaccines in the UK, 113,100 would be expected to die within 22 days of the injection.

Which the government would obviously claim is merely the latest surge of lurgy deaths, as the second flu shot season draws to an end, along with the worst year in living memory, during which no vaccine deaths have been recorded, to the very best of my knowledge.

Whilst only time will tell whether that grim prediction comes true [and I sincerely hope that it doesn’t], the best way to unequivocally prove that COVID deaths are in fact vaccine mortalities is to perform autopsies on the bodies of the dead.

Fatal Coincidence

Nevertheless, we already know that the end of the first flu shot season this year was 26/03 – the day they passed the Coronavirus Act 2020. A fatal coincidence, if ever there was one.

The mortality spike that followed the initial lockdown from 23/03/2020, was, it logically follows, due to the surge of adverse events from 14 million vaccinations, over the first 12 weeks of the year.

Quite simply, the more people who took the vaccine each week, the more people died and were falsely recorded as Covid deaths, which actually began in January and not March, according to official data.

In other words, they started falsifying the cause of death as being Covid in the same month this year’s first round of flu shots began.

Which is why the suspension of autopsies prescribed by the 2020 Act was integral to the perpetuation of the scamdemic and the creation of the genocidal government policy which continues unabated.

Mass Sterilisation Agenda   READ MORE HERE

Universal Coverage Means Less Care

1 Comment

Contributor & author: Jane M. Orient, M.D., Executive Director of Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS)

Interview – Contact Dr. Orient directly at (520) 323-3110 or by email at janeorientmd@gmail.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When the money is gone, treatment is canceled. There will be fewer beds, fewer CT scanners, fewer drugs, and fewer doctors. But all will be fair. No rationing by price, just by waiting lines, political pull—and death. There will be no medical bills to pay after a service, if you get any service. Only taxes in advance, service or no service.

That’s why the universal care advocates count enrollees, not the number of services, and constantly harp on “excessive” treatment, even while planning to make patients wait months for an appointment.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

May 16th, 2017

The reported success of the Affordable Care Act (ACA or ObamaCare) is based on enrollment numbers. Millions more have “coverage.” Similarly, the predicted disasters from repeal have to do with loss of coverage. Tens of thousands of deaths will allegedly follow. Activists urge shipping repeal victims’ ashes to Congress—possibly illegal and certainly disrespectful of the loved one’s remains, which will end up in a trash dump.

Where are the statistics about the number of heart operations done on babies born with birth defects, the latest poster children? How about the number of babies saved by this surgery, and the number allowed to die without an attempt at surgery—before and after ACA? I haven’t seen them. Note that an insurance plan doesn’t do the operation. A doctor does. The insurer can, however, try to block it

Also missing are figures on the number of courses of cancer chemotherapy given, or not given, or the time from diagnosis to death in cancer patients before and after ACA. Five-year survival of cancer patients in the U.S. is generally better than in countries that have universal coverage, or the type of plan progressives want to import. Again, the insurance plan isn’t medicine. You can get medicine without insurance, and if you have insurance it might refuse to pay.

There are selected comparisons of change in mortality rates in states that did or did not expand Medicaid (such as New York vs. Pennsylvania). On the other hand, mortality did not decrease in one state (Oregon). These estimates—guesstimates really, are based on the weakest type of data, and the differences may have nothing to do with Medicaid. Maybe it was better AIDS treatments. We hope that the FDA does not use evidence this poor to evaluate drugs.

But what effect did ObamaCare have on overall U.S. mortality?

Between 2014 and 2015, U.S. mortality rates increased for the first time in decades. This primarily affected less-educated whites. Is ObamaCare the cause? There are many factors involved, drug abuse probably being the most important. But I suspect that if repeal had happened in 2012 or 2013, it would have been blamed.

More

Ineffectiveness and Dangers of Flu Shots

1 Comment

topbanner

Global Research, October 5, 2009
by Stephen Lendman

“In September 2008, the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine reported that the Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Alberta concluded as follows from “clinical, laboratory, and functional data” collected on 1,813 adults “with community-acquired pneumonia admitted to six hospitals outside of influenza season” in Alberta:

“mortality benefits of influenza vaccination” are “overestimated” even though the population inoculated increased from 15% in 1980 to 65% in 2008.

In the October 2006 British Medical Journal, Dr. Tom Jefferson wrote about “Influenza vaccination: policy versus evidence” and concluded:

“Evidence from systematic reviews shows that inactivated vaccines have little or no effect on the effects measured. (In addition), Little comparative evidence exists on the safety of these vaccines….The optimistic and confident tone of some predictions of viral circulation and the impact of inactivated vaccines, which are at odds with the evidence, is striking. The reasons are probably complex and may involve a messy blend of truth and conflicts of interest making it difficult to separate factual disputes from value disputes.”

In other words, influenza vaccination programs are ineffective and worthless. They’re also dangerous.”

READ MORE

%d bloggers like this: