Whilst we endeavor to make our products toxic (1,291 side effects), we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied about their efficacy and safety.
We cannot guarantee that your gene 144 won’t be deleted, your X / Y Chromosome won’t be inverted, your gene 69-70 won’t be deleted or mutated, that you may experience loss-of-function due to protein folding, that your gene E1, E3, E4 won’t be deleted, that you won’t receive shots full of magnetic graphene oxides, nano-biosensors and self-integrated bio-circuits (motherboards, transistors, routers, antennas, etc…).
We do not guarantee that you won’t be MAC Addressed as per Clown Schwab’s instructions (COVID -19 is a rare but narrow window of opportunity to rethink, reinvent, reset our world), that your Cancer Fighting CD8 T Cells won’t be suppressed.
“Let's be clear, the future is not just happening; the future is built by us, a powerful community here in this room. We have the means to impose the state of the world (Clown Schwab, Davos 2022)”.
By using our products you agree that you automatically become legally a trans-human and therefore our property since you are GM-modified using our patented MmRNAs (CERTIORARI 12–398).
Trans-humans do not enjoy any human or other rights of a state and this applies worldwide. Our patents are under US jurisdiction and law, where they were registered.
Any reliance you place on our products is therefore strictly at your own risk.
That's a CDC fabrication, Murderna and Schizer didn't promise anything!
In fact, the VP of Schizer is admitting live to Senator Johnson that there is no established relationship between quackcine induced antibodies and infection, disease, transmission or death prevention/ reduction.
I'd better believe in Schizer (bio-weapons manufacturer) than in the Center for Death and Corruption (CDC).
Sen. Ron Johnson: Plandemic Politics & America’s Covid Cartel.
Schizer Vice President admits live that there is no established relationship between quackcine induced antibodies (proven non-neutralizing!) and infection, disease, transmission or death prevention/ reduction.
Safe & Defective (Immunization) = Scientific Fraud of the Century!!!.
As we outline quite well what is killing many millions...makes one question what is being dine “under the rug” to do the same...food products, diet sodas, or many other items engineered to make us unhealthy and NOT healthy...or to make more cancers which now Big Pharma pushes the very expensive chemo agents with dubious results. Why with so much effort and MONEY applied against it breast cancer mortality has remained near the same from 20 yrs ago? Money that went to detection via mammograms has been reduced by decreasing recommended prevention/early ID. What truly is expanding such lesions into younger and younger women..obesity, genes, foods, alcohol, smoking...one thing for sure the expansion of vaccine mandates will soon be the high mark for oncologists...no wonder so many are quiet about the vaccine pro-cancer influences.
alancarronline.com Or a simple DIY technique - Stop for 3 days. Once you've done that it's easy to stop for 3 weeks. Once you've done that it's easy to stop for 3 months. Once you've done that you've already removed almost all traces of nicotine and will have no more cravings.
The trick is to not have a single puff. One single puff will refill your nicotine receptors and put you back to day 0, so within 2 hours you'll want more.
Without any puffs, at all, after 3 days the urges are much weaker, easy to handle. You won't believe how easy it gets, after just 3 days of cold turkey. Urges will come, but you can resist. The 1st day and 2nd morning are the worst. After 3 weeks you'll know you can do it, but you will keep getting the occasional (weak) urge, resist and by the end of the 3 months you won't want a cigarette.
Again, don't have one single puff. That's the trick that actually makes it easy. Don't try to 'cut down' or 'reduce' or 'wean', just STOP. You can 'reduce' for the next 20 years and still have the exact same urges, but stop and the urges are already fading away by day 3.
3 things that really help:
1. Knowing the urges fall away at an ever-decreasing rate (3, then 3 then 3)
2. Really facing the fact that smoking is not your friend. A friend doesn't constantly cost you money, burn holes in clothes and furniture, drag your outside, ruin your health and then kill you. That's not a friend; that's a parasite.
While I am sadly quite confident that your conclusion is correct, a word of caution against strong, not scientifically adequate statements such as: "It is clear that the Vaccinations are killing people, by the millions. This cannot be denied."
This kind of wording will always be used against our attempts to bring awareness to the tragic consequences of the jabbing campaign.
Also, your graph says "Morality and Vaccination Rates in the U.S."
Prof. Christof Kuhbandner from Regensburg, Germany, has done a very similar analysis:
While Kuhbandner looked at Excess Deaths, I looked at All-Cause-Mortality, and then showed how variations in the All-Cause-Mortality are correlated with variations in the Vax Rate.
Unfortunately this is only in German, the graphs speak for themselves to some extent though, wherein "Übersterblichkeit" means "excess mortality" and "Anzahl Erstimpfungen" means "number of first vaccination doses".
For the initial population-wide roll-out period from March to May 2021, r=0.95, but of course the fact-checkers saved the day and determined that this is just a spurious correlation and that's all there is to it.
Of course variation in excess mortality still does not necessarily correspond to variation in all cause mortality, but I'd still consider this a closely related finding.
I prefer to deal with All-Cause-Mortality because I view that as Data. Excess Mortality is somewhat more of a "number" than Data, since now there is an (to me) unknown model involved. On the other-other hand, the model used for Excess Mortality is probably a smooth function and might not be too bad, but it's not pristine Data.
I largely agree. The more recent Kuhbandner paper uses what I would regard as quite serious actuarian methods to calculate the excess mortality, but it remains a "rubber figure" in a sense and thus is prone to hand-waving tactics employed by those with their heads in the sand. All-cause mortality indeed is the only non-manipulable and non-debatable variable we can use in these kinds of analyses. Which means we have to live with confounders galore.
Yes. All Cause Mortality Rate is DATA: a number coming directly from a measurement, as opposed to numbers, coming from Models. We can create a model to show ANYTHING. Science is comparing DATA with models, not believing in models.
What is your phd in? I would like to see someone go through the european countries and correlate the vaxx rate with the excess mortality rates (peaks for sure, and perhaps present). I keep hearing they correlate but it seems to just be asserted rather than shown with detailed data.
Hopefully in the camp of Galileo, rather than the camp of physicists today at the universities who have become Purveyors of Narratives, believing in their Models, rather than real scientists who believe in DATA.
Tim, did you use PIC mortality as per the link you referenced in the notes or really all-cause as you state in some other comments? How did you get a rate, just divide that number by the population?
And then what? You took a rolling 52-week mortality, every 4 weeks and compared that to what as the vax rate, cumulative population vaccinated at a point 1 to 17 weeks prior to that mortality rate?
I took the weekly number of deaths. Plain and simple. How many people died.
That is DATA: a number resulting from measurements. I don't do "numbers", things coming from models. Not normalized to population. Just how many people died per week.
i.e., how many death certificates were counted for people dying that week.
It takes a few months for this number to stabilize.
And then I took the numbers for the daily vaccination numbers, summed them by week, and correlated a years worth of death per week numbers with vaxes per week numbers.
And then I did the same correlation study shifting the death numbers by a week later, and then a week later, and then a week later until there were no longer any data where the two data sets had a full 52 weeks of data.
And, then I repeated that whole study: starting 4, 8, 12, etc. weeks later.
Disclaimer of Liability ™
Whilst we endeavor to make our products toxic (1,291 side effects), we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied about their efficacy and safety.
We cannot guarantee that your gene 144 won’t be deleted, your X / Y Chromosome won’t be inverted, your gene 69-70 won’t be deleted or mutated, that you may experience loss-of-function due to protein folding, that your gene E1, E3, E4 won’t be deleted, that you won’t receive shots full of magnetic graphene oxides, nano-biosensors and self-integrated bio-circuits (motherboards, transistors, routers, antennas, etc…).
We do not guarantee that you won’t be MAC Addressed as per Clown Schwab’s instructions (COVID -19 is a rare but narrow window of opportunity to rethink, reinvent, reset our world), that your Cancer Fighting CD8 T Cells won’t be suppressed.
“Let's be clear, the future is not just happening; the future is built by us, a powerful community here in this room. We have the means to impose the state of the world (Clown Schwab, Davos 2022)”.
By using our products you agree that you automatically become legally a trans-human and therefore our property since you are GM-modified using our patented MmRNAs (CERTIORARI 12–398).
Trans-humans do not enjoy any human or other rights of a state and this applies worldwide. Our patents are under US jurisdiction and law, where they were registered.
Any reliance you place on our products is therefore strictly at your own risk.
We care,
CEOs Murderna & Schizer.
...
Dr. Red Pill Fact Checker: They make sh$t!
o Schizer (1minute video)
https://librti.com/page/view-video?id=1438
o Murderna (1minute video)
https://librti.com/page/view-video?id=1515
o Micro-Tech in COMIRNATY Quackcine – New Zealand D SOS
https://nzdsos.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Presentation-Microtech.pdf
o How to Detect your MAC Address (e.g: “Pfizer borg 00:00:5e:00:53:af”)
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/are-you-or-someone-around-you-chipped-how-to-find-out/
o Micro-Tech Patents (50) – Charles Lieber – Caught!
https://drtrozzi.org/2021/12/30/nanotech-expert-charles-lieber-first-high-level-covid-criminal-convicted/
o Covid-19 Quackcines Worldwide Democide - 1,291 Side Effects – Schizer Approval Document Reveals
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/pfizer-doc-5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf#page=30
o Suppression of Cancer Fighting CD8 T Cells - 100% of People Tested pre and post Covid-injections.
https://drtrozzi.org/2022/04/06/global-cancer-rates-exploding-post-vaccines-being-covered-up/
o “MmRNA Vaccine Approval” was a Farce. Deaths and Injuries are Real and Intentional
https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/intent-to-harm
And I thought I was supposed to be the Funny Guy !
I do need to correct one thing you said .... they do in fact make claims of safety and efficacy:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html
That's a CDC fabrication, Murderna and Schizer didn't promise anything!
In fact, the VP of Schizer is admitting live to Senator Johnson that there is no established relationship between quackcine induced antibodies and infection, disease, transmission or death prevention/ reduction.
I'd better believe in Schizer (bio-weapons manufacturer) than in the Center for Death and Corruption (CDC).
Sen. Ron Johnson: Plandemic Politics & America’s Covid Cartel.
Schizer Vice President admits live that there is no established relationship between quackcine induced antibodies (proven non-neutralizing!) and infection, disease, transmission or death prevention/ reduction.
Safe & Defective (Immunization) = Scientific Fraud of the Century!!!.
https://thehighwire.com/videos/sen-ron-johnson-pandemic-politics-americas-covid-cartel/
I've been posting the "Disclaimer of Liability" online since December 2021!
As we outline quite well what is killing many millions...makes one question what is being dine “under the rug” to do the same...food products, diet sodas, or many other items engineered to make us unhealthy and NOT healthy...or to make more cancers which now Big Pharma pushes the very expensive chemo agents with dubious results. Why with so much effort and MONEY applied against it breast cancer mortality has remained near the same from 20 yrs ago? Money that went to detection via mammograms has been reduced by decreasing recommended prevention/early ID. What truly is expanding such lesions into younger and younger women..obesity, genes, foods, alcohol, smoking...one thing for sure the expansion of vaccine mandates will soon be the high mark for oncologists...no wonder so many are quiet about the vaccine pro-cancer influences.
Yes ... health is our responsibility ... I'm presently working on my drinking and smoking ! (Shows how smart I am ... drinking and smoking ...).
I can help you stop smoking.
alancarronline.com Or a simple DIY technique - Stop for 3 days. Once you've done that it's easy to stop for 3 weeks. Once you've done that it's easy to stop for 3 months. Once you've done that you've already removed almost all traces of nicotine and will have no more cravings.
The trick is to not have a single puff. One single puff will refill your nicotine receptors and put you back to day 0, so within 2 hours you'll want more.
Without any puffs, at all, after 3 days the urges are much weaker, easy to handle. You won't believe how easy it gets, after just 3 days of cold turkey. Urges will come, but you can resist. The 1st day and 2nd morning are the worst. After 3 weeks you'll know you can do it, but you will keep getting the occasional (weak) urge, resist and by the end of the 3 months you won't want a cigarette.
Again, don't have one single puff. That's the trick that actually makes it easy. Don't try to 'cut down' or 'reduce' or 'wean', just STOP. You can 'reduce' for the next 20 years and still have the exact same urges, but stop and the urges are already fading away by day 3.
3 things that really help:
1. Knowing the urges fall away at an ever-decreasing rate (3, then 3 then 3)
2. Really facing the fact that smoking is not your friend. A friend doesn't constantly cost you money, burn holes in clothes and furniture, drag your outside, ruin your health and then kill you. That's not a friend; that's a parasite.
3. YOUR reason goes here.
You need to supply #3.
Thanks -- I had cut down to 5 or 6 per day -- and could already see the benefits ...
But I also see, YES, that one intermittent smoke doesn't satisfy the craving, it rather creates the next one ...
You know what the problem with Immediate Gratification is don't you?
It takes too long!
AWESOME research and article! Well done! Thanks for being a truther and for being on the right side of history!
Thank you. Off my perhaps 100's of publications, this is one of my favorites!
While I am sadly quite confident that your conclusion is correct, a word of caution against strong, not scientifically adequate statements such as: "It is clear that the Vaccinations are killing people, by the millions. This cannot be denied."
This kind of wording will always be used against our attempts to bring awareness to the tragic consequences of the jabbing campaign.
Also, your graph says "Morality and Vaccination Rates in the U.S."
Prof. Christof Kuhbandner from Regensburg, Germany, has done a very similar analysis:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362777743_Excess_mortality_in_Germany_2020-2022
Thanks. Toned down my conclusion a bit ....
While Kuhbandner looked at Excess Deaths, I looked at All-Cause-Mortality, and then showed how variations in the All-Cause-Mortality are correlated with variations in the Vax Rate.
So sorry, wrong link. I meant this one:
https://osf.io/5gu8a
Unfortunately this is only in German, the graphs speak for themselves to some extent though, wherein "Übersterblichkeit" means "excess mortality" and "Anzahl Erstimpfungen" means "number of first vaccination doses".
For the initial population-wide roll-out period from March to May 2021, r=0.95, but of course the fact-checkers saved the day and determined that this is just a spurious correlation and that's all there is to it.
See here:
https://twitter.com/USMortality/status/1484909753428070404
Of course variation in excess mortality still does not necessarily correspond to variation in all cause mortality, but I'd still consider this a closely related finding.
I prefer to deal with All-Cause-Mortality because I view that as Data. Excess Mortality is somewhat more of a "number" than Data, since now there is an (to me) unknown model involved. On the other-other hand, the model used for Excess Mortality is probably a smooth function and might not be too bad, but it's not pristine Data.
I largely agree. The more recent Kuhbandner paper uses what I would regard as quite serious actuarian methods to calculate the excess mortality, but it remains a "rubber figure" in a sense and thus is prone to hand-waving tactics employed by those with their heads in the sand. All-cause mortality indeed is the only non-manipulable and non-debatable variable we can use in these kinds of analyses. Which means we have to live with confounders galore.
Yes. All Cause Mortality Rate is DATA: a number coming directly from a measurement, as opposed to numbers, coming from Models. We can create a model to show ANYTHING. Science is comparing DATA with models, not believing in models.
Nice ! Thanks !
The paper has everything in the Tweet and much more.
Correlations you can see with your lying eyes !
I'd love to have the raw data to calculate correlation functions !
His paper must list the sources of the Data he's plotting ...
Perhaps I could play with running his paper through a translator program ... never tried that ... YET !
Found him on the web -- a psychology professor.
I'll try to contact him, thanks !
Here's his paper in .pdf form in English:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362777743_Excess_mortality_in_Germany_2020-2022/link/62fe63f3aa4b1206fabd1586/download
Did you know that there are some people in Europe that don't understand Plain English EVEN IF SPOKEN VERY LOUDLY !!!!!
What is your phd in? I would like to see someone go through the european countries and correlate the vaxx rate with the excess mortality rates (peaks for sure, and perhaps present). I keep hearing they correlate but it seems to just be asserted rather than shown with detailed data.
I'm embarrassed to say, Physics.
Hopefully in the camp of Galileo, rather than the camp of physicists today at the universities who have become Purveyors of Narratives, believing in their Models, rather than real scientists who believe in DATA.
I performed this same analysis for Data from the U.K. and found the same results.
Also, see the Comment from Momo where he references researchers in Germany who did a similar analysis.
What about the 27 week maximum you found some time ago?
Tim, did you use PIC mortality as per the link you referenced in the notes or really all-cause as you state in some other comments? How did you get a rate, just divide that number by the population?
And then what? You took a rolling 52-week mortality, every 4 weeks and compared that to what as the vax rate, cumulative population vaccinated at a point 1 to 17 weeks prior to that mortality rate?
I took the weekly number of deaths. Plain and simple. How many people died.
That is DATA: a number resulting from measurements. I don't do "numbers", things coming from models. Not normalized to population. Just how many people died per week.
i.e., how many death certificates were counted for people dying that week.
It takes a few months for this number to stabilize.
And then I took the numbers for the daily vaccination numbers, summed them by week, and correlated a years worth of death per week numbers with vaxes per week numbers.
And then I did the same correlation study shifting the death numbers by a week later, and then a week later, and then a week later until there were no longer any data where the two data sets had a full 52 weeks of data.
And, then I repeated that whole study: starting 4, 8, 12, etc. weeks later.
Does that make sense ?
If you want, I could E-M you my spreadsheet ...
But I'd prefer that someone repeat this analysis from scratch ...
I've done more work since this publication and will be publishing another.
The analysis is done, I will take some time to write it up and "publish" it.