Excess deaths and vaccinations are not in sync. And much of the anti-vaccine research cherry-picks the countries in which the stats fit what they are trying to prove and ignore the countries that don’t fit. As I’ve said before, I’ve read about these sorts of issues (and related ones) a lot and written about them as well many times. I have seen NO convincing data that vaccines caused significant problems other than the elevated myocarditis problems in young men, and even those were rarely fatal or permanent, and exceeded by the myocarditis problems caused by the virus itself, and this was admitted by health authorities quite early on.

The first problem there is that there are two different curves, one for the viral infection, and one for the vaccinations. The viral infection curve peaked earlier, and then the vaccination curve peaked a bit later. Which correlates better with the Excess Deaths? My understanding is that it is the vaccinations, which makes sense, because the vaccination naive very often build fairly effective natural immunities. Not clear though for those vaccinated first. We do know that reinfection can happen, and indeed, is somewhat common, with the vaccinated, and does happen with the (few) unvaccinated. Of course, the vaccinated getting reinfected shouldn’t be surprising, since the vaccines, until recently, produced the Wuhan (original) spike proteins, and Omicron mutated around those vaccines by changing their spike proteins sufficiently not to be recognized as antigens by Wuhan spike imprinted immune systems.

Which brings up a brief corollary – if the vaccines prevented, or at least significantly impaired, natural immunity imprinting, allowing reinfection by later variants, shouldn’t the viral caused complications and excess deaths be counted towards the Excess Deaths caused by the vaccines? I expect that would be harder to disaggregate.

Secondly, researchers can tell the difference between vaccine damage and virus caused damage. The residue is different. Most importantly, the spike proteins are different. But also, those having recently had the virus will have genetic residue of the whole virus, instead of just the spike proteins, while the recently vaccinated will have residue from the capsid, and other artifacts from the manufacturing process. One thing that has occurred over the last year or so are dyes that fluoresce with the detection of SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins, and now can differentiate between variants. Esp striking are the photos of myocarditis, long unique blood clots, and cancers fluorescing strongly from the presence of vaccine generated spike proteins. The problem is the intersection of these two things – Excess Deaths and that some people appear to have died from the vaccines. So far, it appears impossible to generalize, in a statistically significant way, from the specific to the general.

Compounding the problem here is that the government should have, and probably does have, the vaccinated status of many, if not most, of the Excess Deaths. This is not publicly available. With this information, the debate would be much easier to resolve. So, a conspiracy theorist would probably ask why is it not publicly available?

Oh, and the study results from Pfizer, for the post approval myocarditis and pericarditis study ordered by the FDA that ended in 6/2022, and was due in 12/2022, still hasn’t been submitted to them. 13 months late and counting.

It is all part of a piece.
Part of a pattern.
Part of a grotesque conspiracy against the citizenry and against medical practitioners (and others) who smelled a rat and WANTED to fulfill their role as healers.
Who wanted to restore SANITY to the government power grab

Related:
“FDA Launches Fresh Bid To Toss Out High-Profile Ivermectin Case”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/fda-launches-fresh-bid-toss-out-high-profile-ivermectin-case
“Dissecting A Modern Vaccine Propaganda Piece”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/dissecting-modern-vaccine-propaganda-piece
…In which Peter Hotez once again rears his ugly head (and general ugliness).

By “probably” I mean very close to 100% likely.

Understood, and agreed. . Honestly, I am more concerned about Drs recommending an unnecessary shot, as well as potential long term effects. I acknowledge being entirely ignorant regarding future problems and assume it is too soon to know?

By “probably” I mean very close to 100% likely.

The baby will probably be fine. Complications from the shot are very rare. But COVID is also very rarely serious in someone that young, so that’s why I don’t think the shots need to be given to that population.

It is the “probably” that is concerning. And, the idea that medical establishment is pushing the vax, and that so many people are not aware that, generally, seniors, and prior conditions, are at risk.

I suppose if the disease under consideration is really killing a lot of people, then vaccinating that nonvaccinated group later on is still the moral thing to do. But really, isn’t signing up to participate in such a study really an agreement to be exposed to the disease (if you draw the wrong straw) so the long term impacts of the vaccine can be assessed?
Get’s morally tricky when participants are parents of young children, or providing approvals for putting young children into test groups.

Most of us only get snatches of “true facts” so I appreciate, Neo, that you make multiple efforts to do the deep dive investigations and report back your findings.

The baby will probably be fine. Complications from the shot are very rare. But COVID is also very rarely serious in someone that young, so that’s why I don’t think the shots need to be given to that population.