110 Comments

Look at that table again, specifically, the females column. Notice anything interesting??

Ages 40-49: --- Dose1: 6.9 --- Dose2: 3.8

Ages 50-59: --- Dose1: 10.2 -- Dose2: 11.5

Ages 60-69: --- Dose1: 2.8 --- Dose2: 5.2

So, women undergoing menopause, when their testosterone levels are at the highest relative to their estrogen levels for their entire lives (and in flux)... have higher levels of this adverse reaction than outside of that time-frame.... If there's ANY signal that demonstrates a vaccine cause, this one is ironclad. Men clearly have a bigger problem with these heart problems with the vaccines, and women have it worse when their testosterone levels are high... Sex-selected or biochemical selected adverse events mean the medicine is to blame, not randomness, or injection method, or anything else.

Expand full comment

This is because testosterone drives up levels of a protein called TMPRSS2. TMPRSS2 cleaves the spike protein to initiate membrane fusion. So more TMPRSS2 the more S1 spike sub-units floating around. Well it turns out S1 spike subunits cause heart problems in mice. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.20.448993v1

Expand full comment

And it must be why the FLCCC group of docs now recommends two androgen-blockers for hospitalized Covid patients, whether they are men or women. Women who have PCOS for instance, have higher testosterone levels relative to their estrogen levels, than women without PCOS. Drs Marik and Kory recommend blocking androgens for better outcomes in the patients sick enough to need hospital care.

Expand full comment

Fascinating observation!

Expand full comment

And, notice, That is the ONLY age bracket where men's and women's risk are about equal for this adverse event.

Expand full comment

From the many vax injured videos I've seen, women are suffering from seizures and neurological problems much more than heart inflammation/enlargement. I don't see a big focus on that. Perhaps because it doesn't lead to ICU or hospitalizations? Women are impacted differently than men. Again, not disregarding your observation but adding a different perspective.

Expand full comment

If you go to the vigiaccess World Health Organization site, on the first page, check the box, and that pops you into the site, then in the search bar, type exactly this: Covid-19 vaccine That will get you into the window where you can see adverse events reported by type, number, by geographic distribution, by age, by sex. Look how many more women seem to have been injured than men. It was quite a lot. I know of several women who have had neurological complications and they are god-awful… partial paralysis, uncontrollable movement disorders, trouble with speech, etc. Check it out. The list of maladies reported with these products is nearly endless. The UK Yellow Card system and the Eurovigilance systems are quite the eye-openers, too. Cheers.

Expand full comment

Good catch! It would be great to send your observation and conclusion to Dr. Peter McCullough!

Expand full comment

I find the discussion shocking. Any time I would mention VAERS, I would get a reply "VAERS is so unreliable". But the authorities are not looking into VAERS at all!!!

I actually took time to look into VAERS myself, for just my state. I wanted to see if I could spot fake, antivaxxer-generated entries.

I could not find any such entries. Most were clearly medical personnel generated, some were reports like "my brother died two days after his second dose, his doctor would not report him to VAERS"

Expand full comment

- "You can't use VAERS like that, those numbers are unreliable and meaningless!"

- "Then what system do you use to monitor safety issues?"

- "VAERS"

Expand full comment

That basically sums up COVID arguments across the board for me since the beginning-

be it social distancing, masks, lockdown, vaccines, passports, boosters. It an endless loop of inconsistent, inadequate and unprovable, nonscience....I mean nonsense.#SFOI

Expand full comment

A gentleman on the Covexit podcast that analyzes data said generally about 80% of VAERS reports are medical professionals. But still VASTLY underreported.

Expand full comment

We had someone die in our family in Houston. 2 days after their booster. That was three months ago and still the hospital/Dr has yet to file the report after repeated requests.

Expand full comment

I've heard it said that physicians entering a report into VAERs have to enter their license information and affirm that it is false or they risk losing their license (something to that affect, apologies if that is too vague but I heard that on a podcast from one of the doctors affiliated with FLCCC. I tried searching for this information but it is not easy to find). So I really don't think VAERs is being spammed. If anything it is under-reporting. But the signal is there that there are issues with the vaccines.

Expand full comment

Affirm it is not false** Sorry not enough coffee

Expand full comment

yeah "VARS is so unreliable" is basically a theory that "anti-vaxxers" would sabotage vaccine adverse reactions data for fun and fill it with unreliable crap. I'm having an hard time believing this frankly.

Expand full comment

Try to enter a false report into VAERS and see how far you get.

This pours cold water on the 'spammed with fakers' theory.

Expand full comment

also worth sharing context like this letter from an er doc: https://www.sirillp.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Letter-Regarding-Covid-19-Vaccine-Injuries-Dr-Patricia-Lee.pdf

Expand full comment

Damn. I had not seen this. SO many severe cases for only one doc.

Expand full comment

yeah - I hope it gets a LOT more attention

Expand full comment

Wow. Reading through the list of vax injuries in both documents makes me livid. "Safe and effective" my arse.

Expand full comment

indeed. someone on a thread I'm on was documenting her recent battle w transverse myelitis... but made no connection with vacc.

Expand full comment

Dr. McCullough keeps talking about the Medicare database which is not a voluntary/patient-filled database. Their data is reliable but no journalist inquires about it. The goal is to hide all the vax injuries and keep pushing these jabs onto our children.

Expand full comment

One of my sisters' platelets went soaring to 765 within the month after the VA gave her the JJ garbage, and after 35 years of low platelets.. She had to report that herself to VAERS.. And I had to tell her about the VAERS system. The VA docs are overwhelmed and goofy now under Senile Joe. They didn't care.

Expand full comment

I heard it takes about 30 minutes to fill in one VAERS report which is why so few nurses want to take the time to do it. It certainly defeats the purpose of having a reporting system if the authorities have decided they are going to discount it entirely. I think I heard of one other reporting system that only doctors can use- I can’t remember the name- is there a way for us to analyze that data? Any other reporting systems otherwise?

Expand full comment

From what I read, they don't get paid for it, meaning, their time is managed to the minute and they aren't allocated time for it, so they have to do it after work, on their own time. Think that's going to reduce reports maybe a little???

I've heard them talk about how they can't get all the documentation done in the time allotted as it is.

Expand full comment

Yellow Card is the name of a similar system in the U.K., if I remember correctly.

Expand full comment

On VAERS. If VAERS is as unreliable/useless as these people claim, why do we even have it? Let's just shut VAERS down and save the money.

Expand full comment

Please don't say that. We're lucky to have it.

I am absolutely certain that the political appointees would love to shut it down. I have no evidence, but I'm absolutely certain that, in fact, they have tried. I believe that it didn't happen only because enough of the professionals said they would complain *very* noisily if it happened. If so, there are real heroes at CDC - even though the place has generally been a shithole.

Expand full comment

Oh to be clear I don't support shutting down VAERS. I'm pointing out that what these anti-VAERS people are saying is really an argument that we shouldn't have an adverse event reporting system at all.

Expand full comment

Additionally, in spite of the monkeyshines, including people being actively discouraged from making entries, we can still estimate the magnitude of the under-reporting. We know from the trials the rate at which to expect anaphylaxis. We know the much lower rate at which these are entered into VAERS. This gives us a ratio of under-reporting. And it's probably the lower bound of that ratio - anaphylaxis is immediate and obvious - you can't miss it and you can't explain it away. Other than dropping dead on the spot, every other adverse effect is far more likely to be under-reported.

Expand full comment

They cannot shut down VARES, because it is essential to getting anything medical approved. I work in the Medical Software industry, so I know from first hand how the FDA approval system works. You need to prove that what you want to get approved is safe (benefit vastly higher than risk) over the whole user/patient demographic. Now, it is practically impossible to prove such long term safety, unless you want to invest into a decade long clinical trial over a fully representative cohort. Thus, all regulatory bodies give you an easy way out: do a limited clinical study to prove that you do not outright kill your users, and then do a rigorous post-market surveillance. Now, VARES is your post-market surveillance system. Now, this anti-VARES propaganda is highly disingenuous: its close surveillance is an essential part of the regulatory system to prove that something is safe, yet it is supposed to be useless. What is it now? If it is useless, then all approved medicines and medical devices need to put off the market until you have gathered enough RCT data for long term safety. Or it is a useful, then it is an appropriate tool to accelerate the regulatory approval of medicines and medical devices. You cannot have it both ways!

Expand full comment

Take away US Code Section 300aa-22, the liability protection, enjoyed by the vaccine manufacturers. This will increase vaccination rates, for sure.

Expand full comment

Sadly, by now we know they AREN'T interested in an honest accounting. They hype the scariest numbers, and shove aside those which attack the narrative. As a quick example, take a look at the movement of the goalposts in Washington State.

https://imgur.com/a/uAysiDp

Goalpost 1: Licensed Beds Occupied by Patients

The most obvious metric of success. How busy are our hospitals? Turns out, not very busy at all. The first picture is the last day of date at this goalpost station. Our total occupancy hovered between 55-60% during the entire 'crisis'. This is nearly empty as it pertains to regular hospital occupancy.

Goalpost 2: Adult Staffed Acute Care Beds Occupied by Patients

First all, moving the goalpost here was an admission that kids weren't much at risk for going to the hospital for covid. Of course Inslee and the Idiot Brigade never once mentioned that, later mandated masking at school and all sorts of anti-kid rules. Moving the goalposts here had the effect of removing 5,500 beds from our supply. All of a sudden instead of 60% we were running at 83% and 'failing'. Note that actual hospital usage remains flat, and at the end you see the number of available beds falling. This is because of Inslee's stupid vax mandate. However, since that is inconvenient, we must move the goalposts again, to....

Goalpost 3: Percentage Only

On August 30, this chart was 'moved', and on its new home it doesn't show the total number of beds at all, only the occupation percentage. Clearly the total number of beds has to be known to determine the percentage of beds that are taken, but because the information was getting to be problematic, it's simply removed.

This isn't an accident, and Washington isn't the only state doing this. The rampant misuse of data ALL IN THE SAME DIRECTION proves this is deliberate. Why would Inslee want the emergency to stop? He's getting to hand out MILLIONS of dollars to the politically connected. It's Christmas all year for those in government who spend your money.

Expand full comment

Ministry of Truth in real life. How frightening is that? I mean, truly, desperately scary.

Expand full comment

Calif is the same. And when the flu and/or COVID-19-20-21-22 hits in December, it will be the vaccinated's fault there are no beds, not that the governors erased 20% of capacity.

Expand full comment

Your calculation is exceedingly correct and very you are extremely sentient.

That said, things are far worse than you are implying. Here's why.

About 10% of population only had one shot. They had one shot and would not do another.

Why is that so? Are they just lazy? Or did they suffer from ill effects and were too scared to do the "second shot"?

Many indications are that it is the latter.

Expand full comment

So the risk of death with Covid in Canada for someone in the 12-24 age group is no more than 1 in 40,000 (100 reported deaths and ~4MM). Covid deaths tend to be over-reported, so the true incidence is less, and kids without health issues have much lower risk. But even so, a male's risk for serious heart disease per this data is at least 1 in 5,000 (probably higher due to under-reporting), and the risk of sub-clinical but still serious illness is doubless much higher than this.

Just on this one adverse event, the vaccines should be severely restricted! Not to mention other serious issues including death.

More than infuriating!

Expand full comment

Didn’t the cdc actually recommend - when presented with the myocarditis risk in teenage boys back in the summer - that they should get the second jab EVEN IF THEY’D HAD myocarditis after the first? I remember reading that and completely losing the little faith I had left in the cdc.

Expand full comment

"...no doctor is going to give you dose two after such a severe adverse reaction to dose one."

I wouldn't bet on that actually. They have already normalized anaphylaxis, what's a side of myocarditis to them?

Expand full comment

The latest is they are recommending you mix and match the jabs! That’s a great way to contaminate your trial and fudge once again the results.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10105507/FDA-allow-fully-vaccinated-Americans-mix-match-COVID-19-vaccine-booster-shots.html#article-10105507

Expand full comment

Thank you, badass cat, for dissecting yet another example of how authorities are manipulating data to preserve a collapsing narrative while the scientifically illiterate clap on command as the deceptions are funneled down their credulous throats.

Expand full comment

They take us for idiots, and they are mostly right. As we let them.

Expand full comment

I think I speak for a lot of folks here. Especially given their conduct since the pandemic began, I no longer trust a single statement that government, the media and (unfortunately) big medicine.

Expand full comment

How can you trust pathological liars?

Expand full comment

I can' trust pathological liars in not telling me the truth. Just like Dr. Fauci saying he didn't fund Gain-of-Function research.

Expand full comment

thankfully more people are speaking up! worth reading this letter from an er doc. https://www.sirillp.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Letter-Regarding-Covid-19-Vaccine-Injuries-Dr-Patricia-Lee.pdf

Expand full comment

You think Ontario is bad, this is what the Saskatchewan Health Authority wrote yesterday on Twitter: "Your risk from COVID-19 is not determined by age, fitness level or community...your risk is determined by vaccine status. ~78% of all new cases & hospitalizations in #Sask in Sep were unvaccinated or partially vaccinated" Talk about a whopper. They won't allow replies on their twitter feed.

Expand full comment

Around here it's about 66% vaxxed in hospital

Expand full comment

Where is "around here"? Not meant to be snarky, I sincerely want to know. Thanks!

Expand full comment

Wow. Wouldn't that 4000+ myo/pericarditis number be substantially higher than the number of expected severe COVID cases in the 18-24 demographic?

I don't have the data in front of me, but how many people have died in that game group from COVID? I'd be shocked if it's more than 1000 (probably quite a bit less).

Expand full comment

MMR (which Merck is in a lawsuit for falsifying efficacy data) is usually given to babies unable to articulate their side effects

Expand full comment

Or practicing physicians tell the parent that an adverse effect can in no way be connected to a vax, because they’re “safe and effective”. Most doctors know nothing about vaccine side effects, which is one reason why VAERs is so underutilized and inaccurate. The overuse of vaccines, like the overuse of antibiotics, has harmed far more people than we will ever know. These things are good in moderation, but big pharma makes money when we’re sick, not when we’re healthy.

Expand full comment

I've given up on hearing any truth from doctors. Most of them have their heads up their asses.

Expand full comment

Yep. Unfortunately, even the good ones can’t admit their anti-establishment beliefs, because if they do they get their license pulled. This is how pharma maintains their power.

Expand full comment

It would be good to know, or rather important to know how many of those showing up on VAERS had covid prior to taking the vaccine. Does the vax have a compounding effect on the those with prior infection? Does the vax pose a greater or lessor risk of AE after prior exposure? Are these questions not important to the FDA?

Those with prior infection have needless exposure to the risk associated with the vax. Whatever happened to "first do no harm"?

Expand full comment