Yet another paper shows all-cause mortality risk>benefit for the COVID vaccines

substack.com ^ | FEBRUARY 21, 2022 | Steve Kirsch

[ransomnote]

You heard it here first, but it's always nice to have independent confirmation of what I've been saying that the vaccines are nonsensical and mandating a nonsensical vaccine is even worse.

Steve Kirsch

Feb 18

 

I just got a new paper from Stephanie Seneff and Kathy Dopp.

From the abstract:

As of 6 February 2022, based on publicly available official UK and US data, all age groups under 50 years old are at greater risk of fatality after receiving a COVID-19 inoculation than an unvaccinated person is at risk of a COVID-19 death. All age groups under 80 years old have virtually no benefit from receiving a COVID-19 inoculation, and the younger ages incur significant risk.

You can read the full paper here.

It’s not published in a peer reviewed journal since it doesn’t support the narrative, but I get over 150,000 views on most of my articles, so please let us know in the comments if you find any errors.

 

[ransomnote]

PING

[DugwayDuke]

“It’s not published in a peer reviewed journal since it doesn’t support the narrative...”

It’s not published in a peer reviewed journal since it won’t withstand peer review.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

VaxxAwayDoug!!!

Nice of you to drop by to score some additional $15/hour wages.

[DugwayDuke]

aMorePerfectUnion wrote: “Nice of you to drop by to score some additional $15/hour wages.”

So what is wrong by insisting upon articles with such sweeping claims be subjected to expert peer review? You did note that the authors admitted this ‘analysis’ would not survive peer review when they stated: “It’s not published in a peer reviewed journal since it doesn’t support the narrative...”

[humblegunner]

I get over 150,000 views on most of my articles

Yeah, because it's ALL about the traffic.

I bet this wanker ain't even got a real job.

He just spews some bunk that y'all agree with and deserves a living, huh?

He needs to be sweeping up a bowling alley, in a bad part of town.

And what the hell is a "substack"?

Some off-brand blogsite that was the only one would have him?

[deport]

All age groups under 80 years old have virtually
no benefit from receiving a COVID-19 inoculation

***********

Yep, but it’s free. Any benefit is a day longer
to live on this earth rather than being buried
in it or cremated. Live to you die and enjoy it.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

—> So what is wrong by insisting upon articles with such sweeping claims be subjected to expert peer review

In an ideal world, yes.

In a world where the CDC doesn’t even release accurate and full data, doctors are prohibited from treating patients, and critical racism is taught at medical schools, don’t hold your breath.

I’m responding to your reflexive denial of all other data.

[ChildOfThe60s]

Peer review has been a joke for quite some time, before covid and about a lot of other things.

Discussing this with my family doctor, he said medical journals are now nothing but politically correct jokes

[SonAboveAnItch]

Really?

You give the impression that you’re too old, lazy and ignorant to do the most basic research to understand this posting. Educate yourself. Please.

[Jane Long]

Hey, Larry.....is substack a legitimate news gathering site? Or, just another “off-brand blogsite”, like some of the thread stalkers claim?

Some of my fave writers are on substack.....you (LS), Emerald Robinson, Steve Kirsch....etc.

[silverleaf]

You mean, comments by 3 guys whose grant funding comes directly or indirectly from pharma?

[DugwayDuke]

silverleaf wrote: “You mean, comments by 3 guys whose grant funding comes directly or indirectly from pharma?”

So, essentially, any one who is supportive of vaccines must take a vow of poverty to demonstrate their impartiality?

OK, fine, when American Front Line Doctors stop charging outrageous fees for ‘consultations, when Mercola gives up his million dollar business selling alternative medicine and vitamin supplements, when Malone tells discloses how he achieved a net worth of over $22M.

The authors of this ‘analysis’ so much as admitted that their work would not survive peer-review when the stated they wouldn’t submit it because ‘it didn’t fit the narrative’.

[Bobalu]

medical journals are now nothing but politically correct jokes

Yup, about as reliable as a detail man touting his newest and most expensive product... these guys always had lots of free notepads and penlight flashlights back in the day though (I may be dating myself here):-)

[mewzilla]

Deep State has a mad-on for substack.

I’d say that tells one everything one needs to know.

[mewzilla]

Their data is sourced and their calculations look sound.

What’s your problem with the paper?

[silverleaf]

“Peer review” has become just as corrupted as most other tools of the medical establishment. Pretty much been downhill since Lancet published the “ peer reviewed” article discrediting HCQ…then had to withdraw it because it was so shoddy. Despite which the article is still cited

I have heard and read quite enough about Dr Anthony Fauci, the $10 million dollar net worth public servant, and his “ peers”

[DugwayDuke]

mewzilla wrote: “What’s your problem with the paper?”

I want to see it peer reviewed.

[LilFarmer]

So peer review it yourself right here on FR and tell us what is wrong with it. Or do you need someone else to tell you what to think?