just that my expectation was that a given lot would be spread over a relatively small geographic area
This is one question that Horowitz put to Dr. Ruby. He said that he has gotten reports from the field in his audience that some counties have reported very little or even no AEs while other counties had huge numbers. In fact, some listeners have said they personally know multiple people who have either gotten severe AEs or have died.
Meanwhile, and I know this is anecdotal, I know hundreds of people in my circle of friends, colleagues, gym work-out buddies, and family, none of whom have had a hint of an AE except my elderly mother who got her jabs at the very outset of the vaxxing campaign so she is an outlier.
So I tend to think that hot lots can end up in one community while the ones with say, low or no active ingredients go into another community. Could it be that the pharma companies are running their own control group?
I suspect that politicians and heads of executive departments get the saline shots and are added to the control group database.
/tinfoil hat
----------
It's a tough galaxy. If you want to survive, you've gotta know where your towel is.
Here's something I found interesting. I took your Moderna numbers and plotted their actual distribution, i.e., the AE count in a lot versus the number of lots with that AE count.
Initially it looks like what you would expect. Most of the lots have a small AE count with a few outliers, your hot lots, way out in the tail. It follows a nice power law that I fit as an exponential.
It seems reasonable at first and then you realize it isn't. Not for a manufactured medicine. This goes back to your point. If the spike proteins were manufactured and delivered directly in the shot there would be tight standards and every lot would be identical.
It's similar to how the manufacturing process of resistors distorts their distribution of accuary according to the printed accuracy, i.e., +/- 0.1%, +/- 1.0%, +/- 5.0%, etc. The most accurate has the expected bell shape. The next accurate has a U shaped distribution with peaks around the +/- 1.0% because the most accurate were measured and taken out of the process to be packaged. And it continues. So the manufacturing process imprints on the product's distribution.
Here we would expect a nominally small number of AE's, say up to 10, and then it would stop entirely. Kind of a step shape.
What we see here looks like the distribution you'd get from an uncontrolled natural process. Most of the lots are around their lower number of AE's, but there is a fairly long tail of the hot lots that should not be there.
It's just another way of looking at the same data but it has the same effect. Something is wrong.
I did a little more work - data pull this morning - showing the date of the shot (lot date) and the maker and the number of deaths for each. This is the raw data so I did zero corrections to dates - some of the are obvious.
Yet I do see that January, Feb, Mar, and April 2021 have a higher incidence of deaths , then after that it appears to drop somewhat... Maybe tweaking?
Sure, the bad lots were distributed evenly amongst states. But what we dont know is if the bad lots were perhaps targeting particular regions. Would be trivial to route the bad lots to certain problematic cities.
----------
"Every time we on TF talk about God and gays, God frees a banker and gives him a bonus." --me "Your farts are interstate commerce and if they want to stick a muffler up your ass they will do it." --B
Maybe they got zero or diluted active ingredient? What a sh&t show.
Sorry about your having to deal with Docs all the time! :) The way I understand it, once the manufacturers get FDA approval for these "vaccines" they are NOT allowed to 'tweak' the formula. That would call for a whole new testing/approval process at the very least.
They also are NOT allowed to just give you saline instead. Not saying they don't do it for VIP people (FJB), just saying I believe that's a felony level offense.
FDA website link about the recent change to the Pfizer product. (for 5-11yo). (Down near the bottom it says they've authorized the change.) https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-an....
Someone *please* correct me if I'm wrong!
----------
"Threats are illogical. And payment is usually expensive." - Sarek of Vulcan
Jansen uses a different technique to get the RNA into the victim's cells, but do they use the same technique as Pfizer and Moderna to create the RNA payload in the first place?
J&J delivers DNA to our cell nucleus, from there the RNA is created, spit out of the nucleus and from that point the spike protein creation process is the same.
this is how it works:
----------
The unexamined life is not worth living.-Socrates The only stable state is the one in which all men are equal before the law.-Aristotle Liberty exists now in the spaces government has not yet ch
"...the EUA for the Moderna vaccine got around the issues raised in this article by treating the entire Moderna formulation as a traditional vaccine, which it is not, as traditional vaccines do not utilize mRNA for inducing immunity, and their safety and efficacy depend on several criteria that are entirely different from those of the more novel mRNA."
In addition to our most generous host here, thank you to everyone else that has helped provide information on the processes used that many of us never have a need to consider.
It is an honor to be privy to the thoughts of so many individuals that look beyond what is presented and create added incentives for the rest of us to do the same.
----------
Were never going to learn how safe the vaccine is unless we start giving it, and thats just the way it goes. Dr. Eric Rubin, Harvard University
FWIW, Way back in March I happened upon a facebook posting from a former coworker who was bragging about receiving his second jab (not the same one I mentioned in an earlier posting). He took a screenshot of his vax card. I immediately copied down the manufacturer and lot number (moderna) before someone told him to take it down immediately (criminals like me might copy down the information). Indeed I originally did this with the intention of creating (which I later did) my own faux CDC card, given the insanity with which we are repeatedly exposed. Now I have my own card which I have no intention of using, but my curiosity was piqued by TG's article today.
According to TG, the shot fatality is 34. Now, to be fair, this guy is a Type I diabetic, around 35 years old, gay, and extremely thin, so perhaps it made a certain degree of sense for him to get the jab. I don't know and I don't judge. My view is, if you want the jab, go ahead and get it. Just don't dictate what others must do.
I take no joy in watching people opt to play Russian Roulette. My mind flashes back to that excellent 1970s movie, The Deer Hunter, in which my then heartthrob Christopher Walken literally sweats bullets whenever his turn comes up. For whatever reason, we have been chosen to bear witness to this insanity in real life, in living color if you will.
We have been divided and placed at each others throats over this nonsense. Whoever crawls out of this Battle Royale relatively unscathed "wins", whatever the hell that means.
And I would GLADLY take any year from the '70s in place of the shit show we are currently suffering through now. Sure, there was plenty of pain to go around, but also a hell of a lot of joy. Anything beautiful and awe inspiring is being destroyed by these rat bastards in charge. F*ck them all to Hell!
Lastly, thanks to Eleua. I watched Bolshevik Revolution Darkness Descends on Bitchute. Totally worth the time. I remember doing research about the history of WW 2 way back in high school. I recall mentioning to the class, led by a very wise, old nun, that I was unaware that the Soviet Union was on OUR side during the war. It was the first time I'd ever seen that woman absolutely speechless. I remember thinking: What kind of nerve did I hit that shut her up so quickly?She was one of the most influential teachers I have ever had, yet this one topic silenced her immediately.
Strange that I would revisit the topic so much later in life. As is the case with so many things, we only become wise when we question or challenge our own assumptions.
----------
Time may be a great healer, but it's a lousy beautician.-Dorothy Parker
Boys don't make passes at girls with fat asses.-slightly modified DP
It would be interesting to look at distribution of death/injury by days post vaccination, for both high and low-injury lots. I wonder if the distribution of AEs for low-injury lots is random (implying the vaccine was not causal), while the high-injury lots show high rates of AEs shortly after vaccination (implying causality).
If the spike proteins were manufactured and delivered directly in the shot there would be tight standards and every lot would be identical.
It will be interesting to see if the Novovax vaccine exhibits the same behavior since it is designed to deliver the spike proteins directly as you indicate. If it ever gets released (and now I am wondering what the real reason is that it is being delayed) and does not exhibit the same behavior then Pfizer, Moderna, and J&J are toast.
While QC certainly sounds reasonable, I wouldn't want to rule out the deliberate, coordinated ongoing tweaking of something in the recipe and/or production process. They're openly doing the same as it applies to their drive to jab 5-12yr olds...
Is this some kind of patch to the program, hoping they can "fix" the known myocarditis bug?
Spitballing here.. but is it possible that the timing of these "hot" jabs also coincided with the mounting evidence of waning efficacy over time, earlier this year? Perhaps a collective consensus (or rather, collusion) amongst the supposed experts and manufacturers to make some uniform adjustment in something to do with the delivery mechanism in order to make it more potent and therefore hopefully effective for a longer period of time? Or just see which worked best... kind of a limited beta test. As KD has previously shown, they clearly set the initial antibody targets to a wildly high number in order to juice the the near term efficacy rates in order to kick this all off, so they're willing to play games. As other have mentioned, they'll do what they need to make the sale, then address any problems later. They clearly want to approach this whole DNA/RNA based stuff through the lens of we're just computers and they're the programmers... but they want us to believe it's conventional medicine.
Major issues with several independent companies using sorta-similar processes, with many international companies having the same results. Seems like all of those countries, save one, used the same information provided to them on how to 'get ahead' of this 'epidemic.'
Interesting that that one country probably doesn't have remotely the same outcomes that we're seeing.
I wonder who provided all that information to all those countries. (cough, Fauci)
If you doubt that they're experimenting on how to kill off the vast majority of human beings, you need look again.
Sometimes boxcars look like hypodermic needles.
----------
When everything appears to be going in one direction, take a long, hard look in the opposite direction.
Lots of people are looking at this as a dosage issue, or a contamination issue.
I'm almost certain it's neither. It's an issue of our ability to grow RNA in a tank in HUGE quantities.
Replication errors are real... I have a feeling that's what we're seeing here, and it's going to be almost impossible to test for in any quality control scenario because you simply can't test all of a tank of product, you can only take a sample.
----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.
ONe more spin - this is by state on the left - manufacturer on the top - deaths based off of data pulled today. clicking on it should make the pic larger.
Rose did an analysis of death/injury by days after vaccination, implying causality..
Note that was from MAY 2021 She has updated her research since then and importantly one of her research articles was yanked without explanation or notice. (One she wrote with Dr. Peter McCollough)
Thanks for that, that's what I had asked for earlier. On the upside, it doesn't appear they tried to target any particular states (IE: Red vs Blue). On the down side, the number of deaths for KY are wildly close to CA/TX and that's a much smaller state by population and size.
----------
Don't take anyone's word for it; do your own research
Isn't this kind of good news, at least in terms of putting a ceiling on the potential rise in cardiac and blood issues? If those are only caused by bad lots, and those lots only make up 10% of the doses, then that would limit those problems to 10% of the vaccinated at most. Though it's still possible that ALL of the lots cause subclinical damage, and these aberrant lots just cause problems to manifest more immediately in some percentage of people. And if level of active ingredient is indeed the variable then that adds weight to the theory that further doses will yield exponentially higher AE rates. This also doesn't reduce the odds of a VEI event; the UK's S-vs-N antibody data applies to everyone who got it, so the OAS isn't lot dependent.
It's a screaming safety signal either way. I'm just thinking about how this affects the odds of a 'dark winter' scenario.
VARES is as reliable and useful as the integrity of input. Who knows the actual under reporting.
Yet, the VaxFasists will say that people like you and me are gaming VAERS by making up AEs and entering them into the system just to make the vax look bad.
Now what I had heard is that filing false reports is a violation of federal code but I had not heard that there were no penalties for breaking this law as KD mentions in his post. Likewise, I had understood that it was required that a doctor or a rep thereof were required to file reports to VAERS as were the drug companies. But maybe that is a rumor.
----------
It's a tough galaxy. If you want to survive, you've gotta know where your towel is.
RSS available