More People are Dying in 2021 Everywhere Vaccines were Introduced. Johns Hopkins Data from 30 Countries Shows Vaccines are Causing Death. Statistician who Made Findings Now Banned from Twitter

From [HERE] and [HERE] The mass vaccination campaign against coronavirus, which started in late 2020-early 2021, has excellent, statistical support. With rare exceptions, all countries of the world (even economically backward ones) have established systems for statistical accounting of vaccinations against COVID-19.

The latest data is promptly given on the number of doses of drugs injected into people; the number of partially and completely (usually two doses) vaccinated; the proportion of vaccinated in relation to the total population of the country. Sometimes a breakdown is also given by age groups and types of injected vaccines.

The data of national vaccination statistics are collected and consolidated by some organisations that quickly give a general picture of the world and regions. Johns Hopkins University (USA) is considered one of the most authoritative centres for the accumulation and processing of statistical information on the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination against this virus.

A huge amount of statistical information on the topic of the pandemic and vaccination is accumulating, but, alas, there are very few serious analyses of these data sets.

Therefore, the posting earlier this month on the Internet of a video entitled "COVID Deaths Before and After Vaccination Programs" did not go unnoticed. This is not a documentary or filming of some events in the world. This is a video representation of a series of graphs compiled on the basis of statistical data from Johns Hopkins University.

The author of calculations and graphs is Joel Smalley, an English analyst and a specialist in quantitative data processing. The Englishman processed statistics on forty countries and revealed the same pattern: these countries experience sharp spikes in new diseases and deaths from COVID-19 after a large batch of COVID-19 vaccines is introduced into them.

Shortly after releasing his analysis and subsequent related postings Twitter suspended him and he seems to have been disappeared from social media altogether.

Question– Why is mortality in Scotland higher in 2021 than 2020?

Answer– Because more people are dying. And the reason more people are dying is because more people have been vaccinated. In other words, there’s a link between rising mortality and the Covid-19 vaccine.

Question– You can’t prove that.

Answer– You’re right, I can’t. The evidence is all circumstantial. But it is compelling, all the same. For example, rising mortality isn’t just happening in Scotland. It’s happening in many of the countries that launched mass vaccination campaigns earlier in the year. They’re all seeing a significant uptick in all-cause mortality. Why is that? What are they doing differently in 2021 than they did in the years before?

Question– I can see what you’re getting at, but I still don’t think you have enough evidence to make your case.

Answer– Okay, then you tell me: Why are more people dying in 2021 than 2020? And, keep in mind, all-cause mortality isn’t just up a bit; it’s smashing the five-year average. Check out this recent post from Alex Berenson at Substack:

Scotland is 87% adult vaccinated; weekly deaths are now 30% above normal

Oct 14, This is from the Public Health Scotland’s Covid-19 Daily Dashboard:

“The 315 excess deaths logged last week represents a 30% increase on the five-year pre-pandemic average for this time of year. This marks the 20th consecutive week with excess deaths above the five-year average and the highest since the week ending January 10, 2021.”

Even excluding Covid deaths they were almost 20% above normal for the most recent week, and the trend is rising.” (“Scotland is 87% adult vaccinated; weekly deaths are now 30% above normal”, Alex Berenson Substack)

Question– But how can you build a case on data from just one country? It’s ridiculous.

Answer– But it’s not just Scotland. The same rule applies to many of the countries that launched vaccination campaigns earlier in the year. Here’s more from Berenson:

Add Germany – Europe’s most populous nation – to the countries seeing unusually high all-cause mortality that is NOT Covid-related.

In September, Germany reported almost 78,000 deaths, more than 10 percent higher than the expected figure, German government demographers said earlier this week.

Press: “Mortality figures (in Germany) in September, 2021: 10% above the median of previous years.” (“It’s not just the UK; all-cause deaths are also now running well above normal in Germany (80% adults fully vaccinated)”, Alex Berenson Substack)

And then there’s this is from Data Analyst’s Twitter account (check out the charts):
Data Analysis @Data_is_Louder
·

Oct 26
COVID mystery Denmark, Finland and Norway excess deaths are higher than in their worst Covid outbreak. These mysterious excess deaths happened in time conjunction with vaccination rollout.

​Denmark –“5 months is a row 2021 has broken the 10-year record of people dying from all causes…..Covid-19 deaths close to zero during the same period.”

The same is true in Ireland, UK and Israel. Take a look at England (Ages 10 to 59 years old.)

What’s so disturbing about this chart is that it shows how the vaccines target the young. “While the COVID death toll has been largely confined to the elderly… it’s the young who are bearing the brunt of vaccine injury. According to VigiAccess, the adverse event database for the World Health Organization, 41% of the more than 2.4 million vaccine injuries reported so far are among those under age 44, and just six percent are among people over age 75.” (“The real pandemic has just begun, and it’s COVID shot-induced heart attacks in the young”, Lifesite News)

That’s something you’re not going to read in the media, and for good reason, too. Because it would undermine their lethal objective to continue hyping the vaccine.

Here’s more from quantitative analyst Joel Smalley:

Joel@RealJoelSmalley

Weekly deaths update from the CDC. “Despite” being over 80% fully vaccinated, since 24-July, over 65s deaths in Florida are 14% higher than same period last year. “Despite” at least 50% full vaccination in the under 65s, deaths are up 46% and will rise as reporting catches up.

The examples are everywhere across the Internet. You don’t have to look very far. Wherever mass vaccinations took place, there, too, morality has risen. And–once again–these are not Covid deaths. These are mainly heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, circulatory diseases and neurological issues; the same vaccine-induced ailments we were warned about by the physicians and scientists who’ve been telling us the truth from the start. Turns out they were right after all.

Simply put, the vaccines are increasing fatalities, not reducing them. They are making matters worse not better. They are perpetuating the crisis not ending it. 

And that is why the red line in the chart is pointing upward. It’s an indication that the death toll will continue to rise as long as we continue to do what we are doing now, inoculating millions of people with a cytotoxic pathogen that triggers blood clots, inflammation and autoimmunity. Here’s another chart of Scotland with a short comment from The Daily Skeptic:

“…. the presence of a Covid epidemic was not seen in summer 2020, but is seen in summer 2021. What differs between the two years? The glaringly obvious answer is the rollout of COVID-19 vaccination. There was no COVID-19 vaccination programme in 2020, but there was rollout of Covid vaccinations in a sequential way to increasingly younger age groups in 2021, a pattern that we see in the manifestation of excess deaths. …. The Yellow Card adverse events reporting system,…. has already recorded over 1,700 deaths in the U.K. population associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. There is therefore a prima facie case for COVID-19 vaccination being a contributing factor to the dramatic rise in summer excess deaths in Scotland in 2021.”
(“Are Vaccines Driving Excess Deaths in Scotland, a Professor of Biology Asks”, The Daily Skeptic)

Have you noticed how the media is trying to cover-up the sudden surge in mortality? 

Here’s a good example from an article at the UK Telegraph:

“While focus remains firmly fixed on Covid-19, a second health crisis is quietly emerging in Britain. Since the beginning of July, there have been thousands of excess deaths that were not caused by coronavirus. According to health experts, this is highly unusual for the summer.Although excess deaths are expected during the winter months, when cold weather and seasonal infections combine to place pressure on the NHS, summer generally sees a lull.

This year is a worrying outlier.

According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), since July 2 there have been 9,619 excess deaths in England and Wales, of which 48 per cent (4,635) were not caused by Covid-19.

So if all these extra people are not dying from coronavirus, what is killing them?

Data from Public Health England (PHE) shows that during that period there were 2,103 extra death registrations with ischemic heart disease, 1,552 with heart failure, as well as an extra 760 deaths with cerebrovascular diseases such as stroke and aneurysm and 3,915 with other circulatory diseases.” (“Thousands more people than usual are dying … but it’s not from Covid“, Telegraph)

So, according to the article, there were:

  • 24% more heart failure deaths than baseline

  • 19% ischaemic heart disease

  • 16% cerebrovascular disease (strokes)

  • 18% other circulatory diseases [MORE]

UK Government Data Shows Only 6 Children w/No Underlying Health Conditions Died from COVID During a 12 Month Period. Contrary to Relentless Propaganda Children Have a 99.9% Chance of Surviving Virus

From [HERE] and [HERE] Only six healthy children with no underlying health conditions died as a direct result of catching Covid during a 12-month window, NHS analysis has revealed.

Four died from Covid, while two developed a Kawasaki-like inflammatory condition called Pims-TS, caused by the virus.

The data calls into question the wisdom of closing schoolsand forcing children to spend months at home when the health risk to under-18s is so small.

Experts from NHS England, Public Health England and several universities and hospitals analysed official death figures in England between March last year and this February.

Their findings, published in the journal Nature Medicine on Thursday, showed that more than 3,100 children died during the study period, but only 61 had Covid.

Further examination of death certificates and medical records by independent clinical experts revealed that 25 of the 61 died due to the virus, with the six healthy children a sub-cohort of the 25. The infection played no role in 60 per cent of the recorded Covid deaths.

Prof Russell Viner, one of the study authors and professor of adolescent health at University College London, said: “Any death of a child is one too many, but we sadly must recognise that there are over 3,000 deaths of children and young people in England in ordinary years.

“The great majority of those who died were children and young people we know are sadly at much higher risk of death due to other serious medical conditions. I emphasise that this doesn’t mean children with allergies or asthma, but those very small groups who were vulnerable to winter viruses in any previous year.”

Children ‘have 99.995 per cent chance’ of surviving virus

Fifteen of the Covid/Pims-TS deaths – 60 per cent – were in children considered to be in a “life-limiting” condition, and 19 had a chronic condition. The virus “did not contribute to death” for the majority of the cases where it is listed on a child’s death certificate, the researchers said.

They also said that, during the study period, almost half a million under-18s contracted Covid, giving an infection fatality rate of five per 100,000 people. That means that if a child tests positive for the virus, they have a 99.995 per cent chance of surviving.

With more than 12 million under-18s in England, the researchers said Covid kills two children per million, meaning there is a 0.0002 per cent of a child dying from the virus.

The majority of the children – 72 per cent – who did die due to Covid were older than 10, and only two infants younger than 12 months died from the infection. In contrast, in non-Covid deaths, 46 per cent of all child deaths were in babies less than four weeks old.

Just 16 of the 25 children who died from Covid had comorbidities in two or more body systems and neurological conditions were the most common, affecting 13 people.

“All 13 [children] who died of Sars-Cov-2 with a neurological comorbidity had a complex neurodisability due to a combination of an underlying genetic or metabolic condition, hypoxic ischemic events or prematurity,” the researchers wrote.

“Eight of the 13 who had a neurological comorbidity also had a respiratory comorbidity, including five who required home respiratory support, four with non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen and one with low-flow oxygen.”

No Covid deaths in under-18s with Type 1 diabetes

The study revealed that there were no Covid deaths in under-18s with Type 1 diabetes or Down’s syndrome. None of the 25 children who died from the virus suffered with an isolated respiratory condition such as asthma.

There were children who died who had asthma, but these all had other health conditions and the experts deemed that asthma did not contribute to their death.

While the research was comprehensive and spanned England, it looked only at a time period where the alpha and original strains of the virus were present as the delta variant had yet to take off in the UK.

Delta is more infectious than its predecessors, and child and adolescent infection rates in children have rocketed this year compared to last. However, as yet there is no comparable analysis for the true number of Covid deaths post-February 2021.

Data from the Office for National Statistics showed that, for the whole of 2020, there were 20 deaths in people under 19 which involved, but not necessarily were due to, Covid, whereas figures for 2021 so far show there have been 48.

“We don’t have updated data on this for the last six months, although we will in the future,” said Prof Viner. “Paediatricians across the country believe that these findings still broadly hold – that children are at extremely low risk of death from this virus.

“Most deaths of children with a positive test are not related to Covid but reflect the commonality of infection in the population, and that the children at most risk are those who have always been at higher risk – those with serious other medical conditions.”

Separate research from King’s College London had previously found that children are very unlikely to develop long Covid when compared to adults.

A study published in august found one in 20 children who catch the virus develop long Covid, with the majority making a full recovery in less than a month.

The study showed that the most common symptoms in children were headaches, tiredness, a sore throat and loss of smell.

Molly Kingsley, the co-founder of the campaign group UsForThem, told The Telegraph: “UsforThem have argued since 2020 that pandemic measures must be proportionate and non-damaging to children.

“Whilst every child death is a tragedy, this study reconfirms what we have known for a while – that the vast majority of children are at minimal risk from Covid-19.

“This raises a serious question about the appropriateness of this government’s Covid response as it applies to children – for whom school closures, mask-wearing, exam cancellation and isolation have had a devastating impact.”

[As stated, like Vaccines, Black Skin is a Leading Cause of Coincidences] Another White Psychopath On Trial For Murdering a Black Man Pretends to Cry in Court. Cop Never Saw a Cameron Lamb w/a Gun

RACISTS FUNCTION AS PSYCHOPATHS IN THEIR RELATIONS WITH BLACK PEOPLE. IN PHOTO WHITE COP SUFFERING FROM PSYCHOPATHIC RACIAL DISORDER CRIED ON DEMAND IN COURT BUT WITHOUT TEARS. JUST LIKE THEY REHEARSED IT AND JUST LIKE OTHER WHITE MEN ON TRIAL FOR MURDERING BLACK MEN; KYLE RITTENHOUSE’S EYES WERE COMPLETELY DRY BUT MUCUS CAME OUT HIS NOSE, CHICAGO COP JASON VAN DYKE (WHO USED A NAPKIN AS AN EFFECTIVE PROP TO WIPE HIS DRY FACE) AND CINCINNATI COP SAM DUBOSE WHO CRIED W/O TEARS (BUT PARTLY COVERED HIS FACE AND PUT HIS HEAD DOWN) IN FRONT OF HIS OVERWHELMING WHITE JURY DURING HIS FAKE TRIAL.

DR. BOBBY WRIGHT EXPLAINED, 'THE PSYCHOPATH IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS CONSTANTLY IN CONFLICT WITH OTHER PERSONS OR GROUPS. HE IS UNABLE TO EXPERIENCE GUILT, IS COMPLETELY SELFISH AND CALLOUS, AND HAS A TOTAL DISREGARD FOR THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. PSYCHOPATHS SIMPLY IGNORE THE CONCEPT OF RIGHT AND WRONG. BY IGNORING THIS TRAIT IN THE WHITE RACE (THE LACK OF ETHICAL AND MORAL DEVELOPMENT) BLACKS HAVE MADE AND ARE STILL MAKING A TRAGIC MISTAKE IN BASING THE WORLDWIDE BLACK LIBERATION MOVEMENT ON MORAL SUASION. IT IS PATHOLOGICAL FOR BLACKS TO KEEP ATTEMPTING TO USE MORAL SUASION ON A PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO MORALITY WHERE RACE IS THE VARIABLE.' WRIGHT CALLED THIS CONDITION AFFECTING WHITES THE PSYCHOPATHIC RACIAL PERSONALITY [MORE]

From [HERE] and [HERE] It took nine seconds from the time Eric DeValkenaere arrived at the front yard of the house on College Avenue to the moment he pulled the trigger on his handgun, firing four times in rapid succession and fatally wounding Cameron Lamb. DeValkenaere was indicted by a Jackson County grand jury for first-degree involuntary manslaughter and armed criminal action in the Dec. 3, 2019, killing at 4154 College Ave.

Detective Eric DeValkenaere was charged with involuntary manslaughter and armed criminal action for recklessly causing the death of Cameron Lamb, according to prosecutors in Jackson County, Missouri.

DeValkenaere took the witness stand in his own defense on the third day of the criminal bench trial before Circuit Court Judge J. Dale Youngs, who is also white. Like the Rittenhouse and Ahmaud Arbery trials, the white defendants’ fate will be decided by a white fact finder.

DeValkenaere claims he shot Lamb after Lamb pointed a gun at another detective. 

The defendant's reckless behavior began by entering the victim’s property without consent, without a warrant, knocking over the fence to gain entry into that backyard, and firing his weapon, killing Cameron within seconds of entry,’ Jackson County Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker said.

‘The conscious disregard of a risk, or in this case, a series of risks or assumptions that were dangerous.

‘In this case, what we believe, though, is that his conduct was reckless.

‘It was reckless, and it was in violation of the Fourth Amendment.’

On December 3, police were called to an area near the intersection of the East 35th Street and College Avenue in the Oak Park Northwest section of Kansas City.

Police were asked to respond to a disturbance between two vehicles, one of which was a red truck driven by Lamb at a high rate of speed.

A police helicopter tracked one of the vehicles, which pulled behind a home on the 4100 block of College Avenue, according to The Kansas City Star.

According to police, detectives approached a man in the vehicle and ‘the officer was put in a position where he had to discharge his firearm.’

The two detectives - DeValkenaere and Troy Schwalm - approached Lamb from different sides of the house as Lamb sat in his truck.

Court documents indicate that the officers saw Lamb backing the truck into his garage.

At one point, Schwalm said he could see Lamb’s left hand, and that Lamb was looking at him. At no point did Schwalm see Lamb holding a gun, according to sworn statements.

DeValkenaere told investigators that he saw Lamb’s right hand on the steering wheel and his left hand sliding down his body.

The detective claimed Lamb reached into his waistband and pulled out a gun, which he aimed at Schwalm.

DeValkenaere then fired his weapon, shooting four bullets into the windshield of the pickup truck.

Two of the bullets fatally wounded Lamb, according to an affidavit.


style>.mcclatchy-embed{position:relative;padding:40px 0 56.25%;height:0;overflow:hidden;max-width:100%}.mcclatchy-embed iframe

Investigators at the crime scene said they found a gun on the ground beneath Lamb’s hand where the truck came to a stop.

The police claim Lamb’s body was inside the truck and his left arm was hanging out of the open driver’s side window. But medical records say Lamb is right-handed, and he had limited use of his left hand because of an injury he suffered in 2015.

According to court documents, Lamb made a phone call just moments before he was shot.

The call went to voicemail, which was able to record the immediate aftermath of the shooting.

It took nine seconds from the time Eric DeValkenaere arrived at the front yard of the house on College Avenue to the moment he pulled the trigger on his handgun, firing four times in rapid succession and fatally wounding Cameron Lamb.

DeValkenaere testified that he had no other option than to shoot Lamb who he believed pointed a gun at his partner. “I can’t let this happen. This can’t happen,” DeValkenaere said as he recalled what he was thinking at the time of the shooting. “I can’t let this happen.”

DeValkenaere took the witness stand in his own defense on the third day of the criminal trial before Circuit Court Judge J. Dale Youngs.

Moments before the shooting, DeValkenaere said he saw Lamb reach with his left hand for a handgun from his waistband and point towards Schwalm. He said Lamb kept the handgun between his legs as his hands were positioned on the steering wheel.

“My focus moves from that weapon to the center of his chest,” DeValkenaere said. “I bring my weapon and drive it towards him. And as I acquire the front sight, I discharge a round to his center mass.” DeValkenaere said he then retreated back and to the left of the house for cover and discharged three more shots at Lamb. Two of the bullets struck Lamb in the chest and the leg. He died at the scene.

At that time DeValkenaere said he wasn’t aware if Schwalm had been shot. He also said that he would not have opened fire had Lamb followed commands to keep his hands up and not point his weapon at Schwalm. When asked by his defense attorney, Molly Hastings, if DeValkenaere believed that he saved Schwalm’s life that day, he responded: “Yes.”

Schwalm has previously stated, according to prosecutors, that there was no gun in Lamb’s left hand. During the hour-long testimony on Wednesday, DeValkenaere explained what led up to the shooting but said the situation was potentially dangerous.

DeValkenaere denied planting evidence, having any other officer alter evidence or change their report of the shooting.

Earlier in the trial, Lamb's roommate testified that the gun found near Lamb's body was normally kept on a staircase. Crime scene technicians also testified they conducted a “cursory” examination of the body at the scene, but did not find two bullets in Lamb’s pocket until after his body was taken later to the medical examiner's office. [MORE]

Under cross examination, DeValkenaere acknowledged that he had no prior knowledge that Lamb was armed or had committed a crime.

DeValkenaere told Dollar that he had made no attempt to de-escalate before he confronted Lamb as he backed the pickup into the garage. According to prosecutors, when Lamb pulled into his driveway, DeValkenaere and another detective, Schwalm, arrived at the home to investigate the crash. The detectives walked onto the property, with DeValkenaere knocking over a barbecue grill and a car hood to get to the backyard.

Prosecutors have maintained that neither detective had a legal right to be on the property. They did not a search warrant nor did they have probable cause to be there. Roberta Merritt, who lived with Lamb and his girlfriend and was sitting on the porch, said she did not give the detectives permission to enter — nor did they ask for it, according to court records.

Police investigating the shooting found Lamb inside the vehicle with his left arm and head hanging out of the driver’s side window. On the ground near his left hand was a handgun, according to police. Medical records show that Lamb is right-handed and he did not have full use of his left hand as a result of an injury sustained in 2015, according to prosecutors. Phone records, according to the affidavit, and a voicemail recording recovered by prosecutors showed Lamb made a phone call about the time he was shot.

That call went to voicemail, and a recording of the immediate aftermath of the shooting was created. Dollar then played a video recording where DeValkenaere said: “Nobody at this scene when we arrived here. The lady in the pink was telling us that the Mustang had been over here prior.” DeValkenaere had previously told investigators that he only asked Merritt who was in the truck that was in the backyard when he and Schwalm arrived.

Poll Shows Reality Concealment and Happy Talk from Dependent Media Can't Stop Kamala Harris' Approval Rating From Falling to 28%, a Historic Low for any Modern Vice President

From [HERE] A new poll from USA Today and Suffolk University released on Sunday contains a grim snapshot of public sentiment toward the Biden administration.

President Joe Biden has been on a months-long slide toward historically poor polling numbers, but yesterday's USA Today/Suffolk poll was even worse for Vice President Kamala Harris.

Biden's approval rating hit yet another a new low, this time at 38%, but Harris' dropped to 28%.

A 51% majority of respondents said they disapprove of the job Harris is doing as VP.

At this early stage of a modern presidency, Harris' numbers in the USA Today/Suffolk poll are unprecedented.

The closest comparison — which involves slightly different methodology and margins of error — would be former Vice President Dick Cheney, the most unpopular US vice president in polling history. He bottomed out at 30% in Gallup's tracking survey, but that wasn't until the end of former President George W. Bush's second term in 2007.

Harris has taken on thorny assignments early on in her tenure as VP, including running point on the administration's efforts at handling the migration surge of asylum seekers at the southern border.

As Insider's Robin Bravender reported in late October, Harris aides are quietly worried about the 2024 presidential election, should Biden forego a reelection bid, with former 2020 primary rival and Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg posing a potential threat.

The USA Today/Suffolk poll had a sample of 1,000 registered voters nationwide and a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

Leaked Files Prove Dallas and Atlanta Cops Use Military Grade Aerial Surveillance to Watch and Collect Citizens' Movements w/o Any Reason or Justification, Rendering 4th Amendment Rights Meaningless

From [HERE] Distributed Denial of Secrets released a massive 600-hour leak of Dallas Police and Atlanta Police Department helicopter footage, raising more questions about the so-called rights of its citizens.

Distributed Denial of Secrets posted over 1.8 terabytes of police helicopter footage on the group’s website last Friday. The site states, “The extensive footage reveals the capabilities of the "military-grade" technology behind police surveillance. It also highlights the voyeurism inherent in surveillance and how it often focuses on protected first amendment activities and people who have no idea they're being watched and who've done nothing to justify the intrusion of surveillance.”

The majority of the footage appears to be from DPD and the rest from the Georgia State Patrol. Large sections of the video shows surveillance of Dallas neighborhoods, with highly detailed and zoomed-in images of people in their front yards, standing by their cars and sunbathing. The subjects appear to have no indication they are under surveillance.

Another section of video shows what appears to be large crowds at the State Fair of Texas, with the helicopter camera switching in and out of infrared imaging as it pans the crowd.

Video footage from Atlanta show highly detailed thermal imaging of the exterior of Mercedes Benz Stadium during a football game before the camera zooms in on individuals walking outside the stadium.

Footage from the Dallas leak shows cameras following individuals at extremely close range as they go about their daily lives. In one sequence, the camera zeroes in on two men fixing a flat tire on Interstate 30. The text of their bumper stickers is legible. In another, police focus on a man and a woman talking outside an AutoZone. The brand of sandal the man is wearing (Adidas slip-ons) is clearly visible in the footage.

Other sequences show police aiming military-grade thermal imaging at apartment complexes, private residences and groups of people in their backyards.The software mapping out addresses, streets and building names in the footage is the same package used by the U.S. Army Special Forces. The company that built it, called Aero Computers, also has law enforcement clients in 31 other states. The Texas Department of Public Safety uses the package as well.

The capabilities of the Dallas and Atlanta programs are unknown because journalists seem scared to ask. However, beyond mere 1st Amendment rights if the military grade systems are retained over time it would provide authorities with an encyclopedic record of everyone’s movements over an extended period of time; rendering the 4th Amendment rights of all City occupants non-existent.

In July 2021 the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Baltimore’s use of aerial surveillance that could track the movements of the entire city violated the Fourth Amendment right’s of the city’s mostly Black residents. The aerial surveillance program continuously captured an estimated 12 hours of day time coverage of 90 percent of the city each day for a six-month pilot period. The police also could enhance the process by integrating BPD systems—like its CitiWatch camera network, license plate readers, and gunshot detectors—into its “iView software,” “mak[ing] all the systems work together.”

The AIR program’s detailed data collection and 45-day retention period gave BPD the ability to chronicle all the people’s public movements in a “detailed, encyclopedic” record, akin to “attaching an ankle monitor to every person in the city.”

That ability to deduce an individual’s movements over time violated Baltimore residents’ reasonable expectation of privacy. In making that determination, the court underscored the importance of considering not only the raw data that was gathered but also “what that data could reveal.” Contrary to the BPD’s claims that the aerial surveillance data was anonymous, the court pointed to studies that demonstrated the ease with which people could be identified by just a few points of their location history because of the unique and habitual way we all move. Moreover, the court stated that when this data was combined with Baltimore’s wide array of existing surveillance tools, deducing an individual’s identity became even simpler.

The court explained that a detailed log of everyones movements constituted essentially a “general search” violative of basic 4th Amendment principles. The court explained that “allowing the police to wield this power unchecked is anathema to the values enshrined in our Fourth Amendment.” The court stated,

The AIR program is like a 21st century general search, enabling the police to collect all movements, both innocent and suspected, without any burden to “articulate an adequate reason to search for specific items related to specific crimes.” Because that collection enables Defendants to deduce information from the whole of individuals’ movements, this case is not “far from Carpenter”; indeed, it is controlled by it.

The dependent media has mindlessly focused on how the hackers obtained the material.

Emma Best, a journalist and co-founder of DDoSecrets, said the group is unaware of the identity of the leak source and that the video was stored by the two agencies on unsecured cloud infrastructure.

“In some of the videos, they use infrared tech to look at people inside buildings with thinner walls,” she tweeted. “The video provides no justifying context.”

DPD declined to comment on the leak Sunday afternoon, punting on questions regarding the department’s data security and helicopter video retention policies until business hours on Monday.

The leak comes three months after Dallas County prosecutors admitted that DPD lost 22 terabytes of case data during a data migration in the spring, with only 14 terabytes being recoverable. City officials have faced intense criticism of the protocols in place that allowed a data loss of this size, as well as the delay in disclosure of the deletion to the public.

Supreme Ct to Hear FBI Mosque Surveillance Case; Infiltrators Collected names, Info and Recorded Conversations (b/c Worshippers are Non-white, Speak Diff Language and Don't Worship a White Man as God)

From [HERE] The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Monday in a case involving an FBI undercover operation at a mosque in California. Area Muslims are suing the FBI over a nearly year-long surveillance program that, at least publicly, yielded no results and proved a huge embarrassment to the bureau (article available here (link is external)).

The FBI called it “Operation Flex”: a counterterrorism investigation in southern California. When three of the Americans targeted by the FBI learned of the investigation, they filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging that the FBI and its agents had discriminated against them based on their religion and had conducted illegal searches. That lawsuit is now before the Supreme Court, which will hear argument Monday on whether it should be dismissed under the “state secrets” privilege or whether a provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act allows it to continue.

The case, Federal Bureau of Investigation v. Fazaga(link is external), is the second case this term in which the justices will consider the state-secrets privilege, a doctrine that allows the government to withhold information in litigation when disclosing it would compromise national security. The first case, United States v. Zubaydah(link is external), involves how the privilege applies to a request for information about CIA torture at offshore “black sites.”

Like ZubaydahFazaga has its roots in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. In 2006 and 2007, the FBI paid Craig Monteilh, a former fitness instructor, to act as a confidential informant to gather information about Muslims in Orange County, California. Monteilh attended services at local mosques, where he told worshippers that he wanted to convert to Islam and collected the names and license-plate numbers of people at the mosques. He also made audio or video recordings of almost all of his conversations with people in the local Muslim community, and he sometimes left recording devices behind to capture conversations after he left. Members of the community eventually became concerned that Monteilh was expressing interest in violence – so much so that one community leader reported him to the FBI.

Monteilh’s identity and work as a confidential informant was revealed two years later, in connection with an immigration fraud case that the government eventually asked the court to dismiss.

The government argued that the plaintiffs’ claims alleging religious discrimination should be dismissed under the state-secrets privilege, because allowing the case to go forward would risk the disclosure of information that could harm national security. The district court agreed and dismissed the plaintiffs’ religious discrimination and search claims.

The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed the district court’s dismissal of the religious-discrimination claims. The FBI appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Crying w/o Tears Trick in Support of the 'Kill NHGRS when I Want Defense:' Corpse Like Teen Does Fake Shaking and Crying on Witness Stand but Only Mucus Comes Out During Performance to White Jury

IN PHOTO CORPSE/PUPPET LIKE TEEN CRIES ON DEMAND but WITHOUT TEARS DURING QUESTIONING BY HIS ATTORNEY. JUST LIKE THEY REHEARSED AND JUST LIKE OTHER WHITE MEN ON TRIAL FOR MURDERING BLACK MEN IN PUBLIC; CHICAGO COP JASON VAN DYKE (WHO USED A NAPKIN AS An effective PROP TO WIPE HIS DRY FACE) AND CINCINNATI COP SAM DUBOSE WHO CRIED W/O TEARS (but partly covered his face and put his head down) IN FRONT OF HIS OVERWHELMING WHITE JURY DURING HIS FAKE TRIAL. ENjoy the rest of their show!

Apparently, RIttenhouse’s defense other than his ‘white jury, we can murder Blacks when we want to and when needed to survive b/c Blacks threaten our survival defense’ is self-defense of another person’s property - which is a pretty weak legal defense since the law of defense of property in Wisconsin does not allow a person to intentionally use force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm for the sole purpose of defense of property. [see jury instruction below]. But there is no need for any rational thought when you have racism white supremacy, a white judge and jury and skin color is involved. As explained by Osho Rajineesh "A mind that is filled with belief is a mind which can project anything according to the belief. When you see things always remember this." [MORE] In the presence of Blacks racists cannot see things as they really are. As explained by Osho Blynd, Racism white supremacy is a virus in the mind. [MORE]

WIS JI-Criminal 860 Privilege: Defense of Another's Property — § 939.49(2) (Wisconsin Jury Instructions - Criminal (2020))

860 PRIVILEGE: DEFENSE OF ANOTHER'S PROPERTY — § 939.49(2)

Defense of Another’s Property

Defense of the property of another is an issue in this case. The law of defense of property allows the defendant to threaten or intentionally use force to defend the property of another only if:

· the defendant believed that there was an unlawful interference with the property of (name of third person) ; and,

· the defendant believed that the property belonged to (a member of the defendant's immediate family or household) (a person whose property the defendant has a legal duty to protect) (a merchant who employs the defendant) (a library that employs the defendant); and,

· the defendant believed that (name of third person) was entitled to use or threaten to use force to defend his property; and,

· the defendant believed that the amount of force used or threatened was necessary for the protection of (name of third person) 's property; and,

· the defendant's beliefs were reasonable.

The law of defense of property does not allow a person to intentionally use force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm for the sole purpose of defense of property.[i]

Determining Whether Beliefs Were Reasonable

A belief may be reasonable even though mistaken. In determining whether the beliefs were reasonable, the standard is what a person of ordinary intelligence and prudence would have believed in the defendant's position under the circumstances that existed at the time of the alleged offense. The reasonableness of the defendant's beliefs must be determined from the standpoint of the defendant at the time of his acts and not from the viewpoint of the jury now.

State’s Burden of Proof

The State must prove by evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not acting lawfully in defense of the property of another

Jury’s Decision

If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that all ____ elements of _________[ii] have been proved and that the defendant did not act lawfully in defense of property of another, you should find the defendant guilty.

If you are not so satisfied, you must find the defendant not guilty.

COMMENT

Wis JI-Criminal 860 was originally published in 1962 and revised in 1994. This revision was approved by the Committee in April 2005.

The 1994 revision of this instruction changed the format to allow integrating the description of defense of property with the instruction for the crime charged. See the Comment to Wis JI-Criminal 800.

WIS JI-Criminal 860 Privilege: Defense of Another's Property — § 939.49(2) (Wisconsin Jury Instructions - Criminal (2020))

Texas Jails are Filled w/Non-White Migrants as Border Arrests for Misdemeanor Trespass Overwhelm Courts

From [HERE] Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s effort to use state law enforcement to enforce immigration law by arresting migrants for trespassing is overwhelming local courts and resulting in few convictions.

Just 3% of the about 1,500 people arrested on misdemeanor trespassing charges since July as part of what Mr. Abbott calls Operation Lone Star have been convicted, all via guilty pleas, according to court records.

Most of the rest are waiting weeks or months in jail for their cases to be processed.

As of Nov. 1, some 1,006 migrants were jailed under the initiative. The state has focused resources for Operation Lone Star in two border counties, Kinney and Val Verde. Of them, 53% have been there longer than 30 days and 14% longer than 60 days, according to court records. Two men from Cuba were in jail 98 days after they were arrested.

It is unusual for people arrested on misdemeanor charges in Texas to stay in jail for more than a few days, according to defense attorneys and prosecutors. Single men from Honduras or Mexico—a category that includes most of the Operation Lone Star arrestees—are usually deported in a day or two when caught by the Border Patrol. Only the federal government has the authority to deport foreigners. Some men jailed under Operation Lone Star end up being released in the U.S. while they pursue immigration cases, lawyers for the migrants said.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Abbott said the Republican governor “initiated a new policy of arrest and jail—instead of President Biden’s catch and release program—to stop this revolving door and deter others considering entering illegally.”

Mr. Abbott announced the effort last spring, as the number of illegal border crossings started to soar. He has taken an aggressive stance in wanting to jail migrants, including requesting permission from city officials in Del Rio to arrest as many as 16,000 Haitians who formed a makeshift camp under a city-owned bridge in September, Mayor Bruno Lozano said.

Del Rio officials declined, saying the Border Patrol was already handling the situation, according to Mr. Lozano.

The Texas National Guard, which is controlled by the governor, is working in tandem with state troopers on the border. Other states have deployed National Guard troops to the border in the past, but they generally have helped federal authorities with tasks including vehicle maintenance and monitoring surveillance cameras. Texas is the first to implement a strategy of arresting illegal border crossers on trespassing charges. It has deployed thousands of troopers and guard troops in the effort. [MORE]

Trustmark National Bank Settles Allegations of Discriminating Against Black and Latino Neighborhoods. Will Pay $5 Million Penalty and $3.85 Million to Community Investment for Redlining Violations

From [HERE] and [HERE] The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) reached a settlement with Trustmark National Bank (“Trustmark”) to resolve allegations that it discriminated against Black and Hispanic borrowers in the Memphis, Tennessee, area in violation of the Dodd-Frank Consumer Financial Protection Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and its implementing regulation, Regulation B. The complaint alleges that the bank discriminated against majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Memphis, Tennessee-Mississippi-Arkansas Metropolitan Statistical Area (the Memphis MSA) by failing to market, offer, or originate home loans in those neighborhoods.

  • The complaint, filed concurrently with the proposed consent order, alleged that Trustmark discouraged applicants from majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods from applying for mortgages, including by not locating branches in and not assigning lending officers to such neighborhoods. In addition, Trustmark allegedly failed to monitor its policies and procedures for compliance with fair lending laws and regulations.

  • Under the terms of the proposed consent order, Trustmark will fund a $3.85 million loan subsidy program for impacted neighborhoods and will be subject to a $5 million civil money penalty to the CFPB, of which the CFPB will credit $4 million for a penalty collected by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Trustmark also agreed to open a new lending office in a majority-Black and Hispanic Memphis neighborhood, to fund targeted advertising to generate applications for mortgage loans in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, and to develop and offer consumer education programs for a period of five years. In addition, Trustmark will submit annual reports about its compliance with the consent order for a period of five years, among other things.

The bank agreed to pay $5 million in a civil money penalty and $3.85 million to a loan subsidy program to resolve redlining allegations brought jointly by the United States and the CFPB. 

The OCC examined the bank in 2018 and identified potential redlining, which resulted in a referral and investigations by the CFPB and DOJ, which then jointly filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.  The joint complaint alleged that the bank violated the Fair Housing Act, Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, and the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.  These laws and regulations prohibit covered entities from discriminating against prospective applicants based on race, color, or national origin.

The joint complaint alleged that only four of twenty-five branches in the Memphis MSA were in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, despite the census showing 50% of the neighborhoods in the Memphis MSA were majority-Black and Hispanic. The bank also did not assign a mortgage loan officer to any of its branches located in majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, preventing lending services to walk-in customers.  All marketing efforts were completed by existing loan officers located in majority-White neighborhoods.  The complaint also alleged that the bank failed to ensure its fair lending policies were adequate to ensure equal access to credit, and that it did not establish an internal committee following the OCC’s examination.  Furthermore, the bank selected three counties in the Memphis MSA to offer credit services in as part of its obligations under the Community Reinvestment Act.  Yet, the complaint alleged that these counties received 2.5 times more mortgage loan applications from the Bank’s “peer lenders.”

The parties’ motion for a joint consent order was granted on October 27, 2021.  In addition to a $5 million civil penalty ($4 million offset to the OCC), the Bank must take remedial efforts, including reporting and training, to improve its fair lending compliance program.  The agreement also provides an investment of $3.85 million into a loan subsidy program to increase access to credit for majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in its Memphis lending area.  Finally, the bank will be required to open a new lending office and fund advertising in a majority-Black and Hispanic Memphis MSA neighborhoods.

The bank neither admitted nor denied the substantive allegations.

EEOC Sues Don’s Specialty Meats, Inc. for Race Harassment - General Manager Regularly Called Black Man, “the Black boy,” and “little Black guy”

From [HERE] Don’s Specialty Meats, Inc, a food preparer and retailer in Scott and Carencro, La., violated federal law when it subjected an African American employee to a hostile work environment because of his race, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit filed September 24, 2021.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the general manager at Don’s Specialty Meats, Inc. routinely referred to the employee as “Black boy,” “the Black boy,” and “little Black guy,” and he regularly used the “n” word in the employee’s presence. Don’s Specialty Meats, Inc. also identified the employee as “Black boy” on the schedule, while identifying non-African American employees by name. When the worker’s supervisor repeatedly called the worker a “bitch ass [n——r]” in in front of managers and other employees, Don’s Specialty Meats, Inc. dismissed the employee—but not the supervisor—for the rest of the day. The next day, the general manager told the employee that he was a “bitch ass [n——r].” He then “disciplined” the supervisor by temporarily preventing her from wearing her supervisor’s shirt. The employee found the conditions so intolerable that he resigned.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits race-related harassment. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana (Civil Action No. 6:21-cv-03421) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

“The ‘n’ word is among the most offensive and inflammatory racial slurs in English, and its very use communicates racial bigotry,” said Rudy Sustaita, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Houston District Office.

Andrew Kingsley, senior trial attorney in the EEOC’s New Orleans Field Office, noted, “Employers must do all that they can to prevent the use of racial slurs, and if they are used, they must act immediately to remedy the harm caused by their use.”

The lawsuit was commenced by the EEOC’s New Orleans Field Office, which is part of its Houston District Office, which has jurisdiction over Louisiana and parts of Texas.

Biden Defender James Clayburn says, 'Stutterin Ass Brandon Hasn’t Broken His Word to Build Book Butter Better Battle baby Back Ribs Biocide,' as Many Evicted Blacks 'Search for the Grate Outdoors'

From [HERE] A new study investigates the impact of 2020 Covid-19 rental eviction moratoria on the wellbeing of US households, finding that eviction moratoria across the US resulted in a significant decrease in incidences of household food insecurity and mental stress, with larger effects evidenced among African American households.

In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and related disruption to economic activity, US weekly jobless claims in March 2020 skyrocketed to 7 million, roughly ten times that of peak levels recorded during the 2008 global financial crisis. According to the Census Household Pulse Survey, at the onset of the pandemic, the share of affordability constrained renters, defined as households paying more than one-half of their income on rent, jumped to one-half of all renter households. 

Further, renter households had little wherewithal to withstand Covid-related employment shocks, given that, in addition to their lower average incomes, they have very little savings and wealth. Renter household net worth on average is only $6,300, compared to an average homeowner net worth of $255,000. To assure shelter of affordability-constrained renters  and to damp the spread of the virus, many state and local governments in the US took the unprecedented steps of enacting moratoria on tenant eviction at the early stages of the pandemic, even before the CDC moratorium was implemented in September 2020. The Eviction Lab at Princeton estimates that the eviction moratorium helped prevent 1.55 million eviction filings, affecting more than 3.7 million people. Prior to the pandemic, the Eviction Lab estimated that over 1 million people were evicted from their homes each year. 

Researchers have linked rental eviction to numerous adverse outcomes including those related to employment, homelessness, and future housing stability. Among health impacts, eviction is associated with anxiety, depression, high blood pressure, and declines in self-reported health overall. While eviction wears on people’s mental health in normal times, those stressors multiply during a period of pandemic. According to the US Census Household Pulse Survey, about 4 in 10 adults in the US reported symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder in the wake of onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, up from 1 in 10 adults who reported these symptoms during 2019. Eviction moratoria assured renters of continued shelter during a period of elevated Covid-19 virus transmission, likely easing mental stress and anxiety among treated households. Further, moratoria on eviction and related deferral of rent may have provided treated households with financial relief by enabling households to re-direct scarce resources to other immediate consumption needs, including food purchases, and therefore lowering food insecurity. 

Moratoria on rental eviction may have conferred a broad set of benefits on vulnerable households and the local economy. There is evidence of direct, intended impacts of eviction moratoria in lowering the number of eviction filings and reducing the spread of Covid-19Kathryn Leifheit, a postdoctoral fellow at UCLA, estimated that during a six-month span of 2020, the expiration of state-level eviction bans were responsible for nearly 11,000 deaths and more than 430,000 cases of Covid-19 in the US. However, little is known about the indirect impact of eviction moratoria on other aspects of household well-being.

In a recent paper I co-authored with Stuart Gabriel (UCLA) and Xudong An (Philadelphia Fed), we use the staggered implementation of rental eviction moratoria , which was implemented by states in a haphazard manner throughout the March-August 2020 period, as an opportunity to identify the household impact of those interventions. For example, among states that enacted eviction moratoria, California was among the first to implement such measures in March 2020 while Virginia did not enact a state-level eviction moratorium until July. We use different data sources, such as the Federal Reserve financial institution supervisory data; Opportunity Insight Economic Tracker, the Census Covid-19 Household Pulse Survey, and Google Trends search query information to better understand the effects of eviction moratoria on household non-durable and food spending, food insecurity, and mental health.

We find that the implementation of state rental eviction moratoria led both to elevated credit card spending and debt payments. We also show a small but significant positive impact of rental eviction moratoria on borrowers’ credit score. We further distinguish between renters and homeowners to help our causal inference as renters, not homeowners, were the target beneficiaries of the eviction moratoria. 

A new study investigates the impact of 2020 Covid-19 rental eviction moratoria on the wellbeing of US households, finding that eviction moratoria across the US resulted in a significant decrease in incidences of household food insecurity and mental stress, with larger effects evidenced among African American households.

In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and related disruption to economic activity, US weekly jobless claims in March 2020 skyrocketed to 7 million, roughly ten times that of peak levels recorded during the 2008 global financial crisis. According to the Census Household Pulse Survey, at the onset of the pandemic, the share of affordability constrained renters, defined as households paying more than one-half of their income on rent, jumped to one-half of all renter households. 

Further, renter households had little wherewithal to withstand Covid-related employment shocks, given that, in addition to their lower average incomes, they have very little savings and wealth. Renter household net worth on average is only $6,300, compared to an average homeowner net worth of $255,000. To assure shelter of affordability-constrained renters  and to damp the spread of the virus, many state and local governments in the US took the unprecedented steps of enacting moratoria on tenant eviction at the early stages of the pandemic, even before the CDC moratorium was implemented in September 2020. The Eviction Lab at Princeton estimates that the eviction moratorium helped prevent 1.55 million eviction filings, affecting more than 3.7 million people. Prior to the pandemic, the Eviction Lab estimated that over 1 million people were evicted from their homes each year. 

Researchers have linked rental eviction to numerous adverse outcomes including those related to employment, homelessness, and future housing stability. Among health impacts, eviction is associated with anxiety, depression, high blood pressure, and declines in self-reported health overall. While eviction wears on people’s mental health in normal times, those stressors multiply during a period of pandemic. According to the US Census Household Pulse Survey, about 4 in 10 adults in the US reported symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder in the wake of onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, up from 1 in 10 adults who reported these symptoms during 2019. Eviction moratoria assured renters of continued shelter during a period of elevated Covid-19 virus transmission, likely easing mental stress and anxiety among treated households. Further, moratoria on eviction and related deferral of rent may have provided treated households with financial relief by enabling households to re-direct scarce resources to other immediate consumption needs, including food purchases, and therefore lowering food insecurity. 

Moratoria on rental eviction may have conferred a broad set of benefits on vulnerable households and the local economy. There is evidence of direct, intended impacts of eviction moratoria in lowering the number of eviction filings and reducing the spread of Covid-19Kathryn Leifheit, a postdoctoral fellow at UCLA, estimated that during a six-month span of 2020, the expiration of state-level eviction bans were responsible for nearly 11,000 deaths and more than 430,000 cases of Covid-19 in the US. However, little is known about the indirect impact of eviction moratoria on other aspects of household well-being.

In a recent paper I co-authored with Stuart Gabriel (UCLA) and Xudong An (Philadelphia Fed), we use the staggered implementation of rental eviction moratoria , which was implemented by states in a haphazard manner throughout the March-August 2020 period, as an opportunity to identify the household impact of those interventions. For example, among states that enacted eviction moratoria, California was among the first to implement such measures in March 2020 while Virginia did not enact a state-level eviction moratorium until July. We use different data sources, such as the Federal Reserve financial institution supervisory data; Opportunity Insight Economic Tracker, the Census Covid-19 Household Pulse Survey, and Google Trends search query information to better understand the effects of eviction moratoria on household non-durable and food spending, food insecurity, and mental health.

We find that the implementation of state rental eviction moratoria led both to elevated credit card spending and debt payments. We also show a small but significant positive impact of rental eviction moratoria on borrowers’ credit score. We further distinguish between renters and homeowners to help our causal inference as renters, not homeowners, were the target beneficiaries of the eviction moratoria. 

Why are more people dying above what is normally observed, even after accounting for COVID-infection deaths? Doctor says Vaccines are Directly and Indirectly Killing People

by Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn from [HERE] During the pandemic, many deaths have occurred in the U.S., approaching 2 million Americans. But ponder this: Have large numbers of excess deaths over pre-pandemic years resulted from something other than COVID infections?

There have been increasing articles and studies about excess deaths during the pandemic. Too many of these seem aimed at getting attention rather than being accurate and balanced.

The concept of excess deaths is simple: Deaths above what was normally observed before the pandemic. But why are more people dying even after accounting for COVID-infection deaths? Getting to the correct answer is the goal of this article.

The core issue in seeking truth is how to evaluate excess deaths during the pandemic and then explain them. If there really are non-infection excess deaths, then the goal is to rise above often bad and uncertain data from government agencies to correctly figure out whether something especially concerning is happening – perhaps something governments do not want to acknowledge and deal with, as we shall see.

Classification of deaths

To get to the truth about excess deaths it is important to make a critical distinction by defining two classes of deaths.

Class 1: First, direct pandemic effects, which are twofold.

Most attention is needed to assess the magnitude of deaths from COVID infection. These include breakthrough cases that are COVID infections despite full vaccination.

The other direct impact is deaths from COVID vaccines.

Class 2: The second class is very different. They are indirect health impacts resulting from things other than direct medical actions aimed at addressing COVID.

These are the many collateral deaths resulting from severe contagion controls used by federal and state governments, especially lockdowns, stay at home mandates, limited hospital and physician access, school closings, job losses, travel restrictions and widespread impacts on personal and medical freedom.

These many indirect impacts cause large numbers of deaths across the entire population. They are the collateral damage caused by pandemic government authoritarian actions, but not infections nor COVID vaccines. They are done, supposedly, in the name of public health.

The government does not collect comprehensive data on these indirect deaths. Be clear about this category of deaths. They are caused by all the public health systems used to address the pandemic.

To be clear, deaths directly associated with COVID infections cover a range of situations. Government agencies report COVID-related deaths. That word "related" is very important, because proving causality has been contentious. Most physicians see causality when deaths occur soon after COVID symptoms or a positive test result.

There are reasons why there are legitimate concerns and criticisms of official COVID death data. It comes down to what criteria are used to declare a death as either caused by COVID or just, in some way, related to the infection.

U.S. federal and state agencies have, for the most part, been very liberal in declaring deaths as COVID ones. This has resulted from both financial incentives, political motivations (maintaining public fear and acceptance of authoritarian government actions) and procedural government guidance.

In the latter category are guidelines from CDC for death certificates issued in March 2020 that replaced a practice used for the previous 17 years. This change allowed physicians, medical examiners and coroners to place less importance on all kinds of health problems contributing to a death and, if there was any evidence of COVID virus infection from testing (before or after death) or symptoms, to declare a death as a COVID one.

In other words, many people, especially the elderly, could have died with COVID but not fromCOVID. They may have died from their underlying medical problems and weakened immune system more than effects directly associated with COVID infection. Some die because they have been given the very expensive approved drug remdesivir that causes acute liver and kidney problems and has a death rate of over 25%. Yet their deaths go into the COVID death column.

On the other side, is the view that some people have died from COVID infection, but their deaths have not been officially declared as a COVID death. Most likely these have been people who have died at home without medical attention. It is difficult to believe that the numbers of deaths in this class could account for a large excess death figure. Why? Because people who die from COVID infection almost always experience severe symptoms as they move from stage one viral replication to stages two and three when vital organs are attacked, especially breathing problems. These typically cause them to seek medical attention, usually hospitalization where so many COVID deaths occur.

Not to be dismissed is the reality that many COVID deaths have preempted a number of normally occurring deaths, such as from the seasonal flu and many types of accidents in a more mobile population. The latter are subsumed in the COVID death data. They do not explain excess deaths. If anything, they reduce non-infection excess deaths.

Taking all this into consideration means that COVID death totals are most likely to overstate the lethality of COVID. In fact, as I have discussed elsewhere, COVID lethality for the whole population was initially overstated by Fauci to justify extreme government actions and mass vaccination. He started the pandemic by wrongly saying that the China virus was so much more deadly than the seasonal flu. Only the elderly had a high risk of death (and younger people with serious underlying medical problems) that warranted focused government attention, initially by using safe and effective generics, namely ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and later vaccines.

In seeking truth about excess deaths, it is most important to recognize the countless and not quantitatively reported indirect impacts of the pandemic on health and deaths of very large numbers of people who were not actually at significant risk from COVID infection.

Deaths have resulted, for example, from people not getting normal pre-pandemic health care from treatment to prevention and suffering from extreme mental stress (often pushing addiction and suicide) caused by abnormal living and negative economic conditions. Unlike direct pandemic deaths, there is hardly any useful tabulation of indirect pandemic death impacts by government agencies. In the name of public health government agencies have harmfully impacted the lives of nearly all Americans.

There is need for caution when seeing numerical excess deaths beyond official COVID deaths, in coming up with explanations that involve controversial causes. The big example is blaming what seems as major excess deaths on COVID vaccines, especially if the many indirect pandemic causes of death are not addressed, mainly because data are not readily available.

Also note that breakthrough COVID infections in fully vaccinated people that sometimes cause death are appropriately categorized as direct COVID deaths.

As I have discussed, declining vaccine effectiveness (especially for variants) make the fully vaccinated vulnerable to dying from COVID infection. But it would be wrong to say that these deaths are different than COVID ones. And wrong to place these deaths in a category of vaccine deaths. Moreover, as I have analyzed, breakthrough deaths in the U.S. most likely account for tens of thousands of deaths, much smaller than true excess deaths – though their numbers are likely to increase in coming months and years as mass vaccination continues.

For example, recently this was reported: "Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield said that more than 40% of people who have died from Wuhan coronavirus in the state of Maryland over the last 6-8 weeks were fully vaccinated." And government data revealed that in September, 70% of COVID-19 deaths both in Sweden and the U.K. were "fully vaccinated" individuals.

To recap, it is important to focus on the many causes of vaccine induced deaths and collateral deaths that do not result from the viral infection. Make no mistake, there are now widely recognized medical explanations of vaccine induced deaths, including a broad array of serious blood problems this author has reviewed. Data on vaccine deaths will be examined below.

Indirect health impacts

A March 2021 study examined how the pandemic caused non-infection health impacts and made it clear that they cannot be ignored:

"The COVID-19 pandemic and global efforts to contain its spread, such as stay-at-home orders and transportation shutdowns, have created new barriers to accessing healthcare, resulting in changes in service delivery and utilization globally.

"One hundred and seventy studies were included in the final analysis. Nearly half (46.5%) of them included studies focused on cardiovascular health outcomes. The main methodologies used were observational analytic and surveys. Data were drawn from individual health facilities, multicentre networks, regional registries, and national health information systems. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries with only 35.4% of studies representing low- and middle-income countries.

"Healthcare utilization for non-COVID-19 conditions has decreased almost universally, across both high- and lower-income countries. The pandemic's impact on non-COVID-19 health outcomes, particularly for chronic diseases, may take years to fully manifest and should be a topic."

A November 2020 article, "Death by Lockdown," "forecasted more than 100,000 excess deaths due to drug overdoses, suicide, alcoholism, homicide, and untreated depression – all a result not of the virus but of policies of mandatory human separation, economic downturn, business and school closures, closed medical services, and general depression that comes with a loss of freedom and choice." What was recognized is "that as bad as a virus is, policies that wreck normal social functioning will cause massive and completely unnecessary suffering and death."

A new article from the New York Post made these wise observations:

"Instead of keeping calm and carrying on, the American elite flouted the norms of governance, journalism, academic freedom – and, worst of all, science. They misled the public about the origins of the virus and the true risk it posed. Ignoring their own carefully prepared plans for a pandemic, they claimed unprecedented powers to impose untested strategies, with terrible collateral damage. We still have no convincing evidence that the lockdowns saved lives, but lots of evidence that they have already cost lives and will prove deadlier in the long run than the virus itself. A few scientists and public-health experts objected, noting that an extended lockdown was a novel strategy of unknown effectiveness. In April 2020, John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya and other colleagues reported that the fatality rate among the ­infected was considerably lower than the assumptions used to justify lockdowns."

The TB case has been one of worst collateral health impacts of the pandemic. This was documented in a detailed story. "Tuberculosis killed roughly 1.5 million people in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, up from 1.4 million in 2019. And researchers say COVID is to blame." And there is every indication that it has gotten much worse worldwide.

"The COVID-19 pandemic has reversed years of progress and efforts in the fight against tuberculosis," said Dr. Tereza Kasaeva, head of WHO's global TB program. Kasaeva said that COVID lockdowns, limited access to health care and patients' concerns about visiting medical clinics made TB far more deadly during the pandemic.

Justin Hart of Rational Ground noted in October 2021 that, "It's estimated that 50% of regular child immunizations were missed in the spring of 2020. You can do some actual math, and I feel confident in saying that more children will die from missed vaccines in a year's time than died of COVID-19." This is just another example of a collateral impact of the pandemic.

The conclusion is that when examining excess deaths, it is important to recognize indirect deaths resulting from pandemic control actions by governments.

The Economist article

Here are highlights from a discussion of a widely addressed article titled "The pandemic's true death toll."

This conclusion was the attention grabber: "Fifteen million more people have died during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to historical norms, according to a recent October report by the Economist. This figure is more than three times the reported COVID-19 deaths, which stands at 4.6 million people." In other words, about 10 million excess deaths over direct COVID infection deaths.

"And what about people who died of preventable causes during the pandemic because hospitals full of COVID-19 patients could not treat them? If such cases count, they must be offset by deaths that did not occur but would have in normal times, such as those caused by flu or air pollution." These ideas fall into the class of indirect COVID impacts.

The Economist had to invoke indirect pandemic impacts in addition to vaccine induced deaths. When speaking of many millions of excess deaths globally, the only rational explanation are the widespread indirect pandemic impacts that have devastated the entire global population. This means that it has not been the virus that has killed most people, but rather government actions. It is quite plausible that for every COVID death two more people have died from the indirect impacts of pandemic management.

Here are the data reported for North America: 675,000 COVID deaths and 843,000 excess deaths (middle uncertainty). That is a very large number of excess deaths that could only be explained by health impacts of government actions. For the U.S. it was reported that the cumulative COVID-19 infection deaths have reached close to 650,000, and excess deaths are 820,000, presumably indirect deaths. Updating, for the current U.S. number of 730,000 infection deaths, that implies 921,000 indirect collateral deaths.

Important NIH and other results

Here is an important observation from a recent report from the NIH: "Roughly 2.9 million people died in the United States between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. Compared with the same period in 2019, there were 477,200 excess deaths, with 74% of them due to COVID-19." That amounts to 343,584 COVID deaths during the first year of the pandemic; it is consistent with the over 730,000 COVID deaths reported since 2020.

For 2020, when COVID began ravaging the country, compared to pre-pandemic 2019, that leaves 133,616 deaths to be explained. The answer cannot be deaths associated with COVID vaccines for this pre-vaccination period. That is the key point – pre-vaccination, which means that the plausible explanation for the significant excess deaths of 133,616 are the many negative health impacts causing deaths from the expanding government pandemic control actions in 2020. These included many lockdowns, stay at home mandates, disruptions in health care and loss of jobs. In other words, collateral deaths.

In agreement with this statement was the finding in a medical journal article titled "Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes in the US, March 1, 2020, to January 2, 2021." It said deaths attributed to COVID-19 accounted for 72.4% of U.S. excess deaths, leaving 27.6% explained most likely from collateral deaths.

A June 2021 Scientific American article said 18% of excess deaths across the U.S. last year (2020) were not assigned to COVID. Thus, 78% was related to COVID infections. Reported was that Andrew Stokes, Boston University, and his colleagues calculated excess deaths for each of more than 3,100 U.S. counties. To do so, they compared provisional 2020 mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics with predicted death rates based on previous years. The researchers then compared the proportion of excess deaths attributed to COVID on death certificates with those assigned to other causes. Their data showed that 18% of excess deaths across the U.S. in 2020 were not assigned to COVID. That infers about 77,000 indirect deaths, reasonably explained by collateral deaths.

A journal article published in April 2021 reported: "Between March 1, 2020, and January 2, 2021, the U.S. experienced 2,801,439 deaths, 22.9% more than expected, representing 522 368 excess deaths. … Deaths attributed to COVID-19 accounted for 72.4% of U.S. excess deaths." That leaves 27.6% or a little over 144,000 non-COVID infection deaths. Detailed data were given on specific non-COVID deaths, including: heart disease, Alzheimer disease/dementia and diabetes.

A September 2021 article titled "Impact of COVID-19 on excess mortality, life expectancy, and years of life lost in the United States" found that for 2020: There were 375,235 excess deaths, with 83% attributable to direct, and 17% attributable to indirect effects of COVID-19. So, about 64,000 deaths were collateral deaths.

A new report, "Collateral Damage from COVID" said: "In the first year of the U.S. COVID pandemic (the 52 weeks ended February 27, 2021) there were 665,000 excess deaths (deaths above the normal seasonal death rate) reported by the CDC. The official COVID death toll for that span was 514,000 (77%). Shockingly, this means that non-COVID deaths caused by the pandemic and possibly by our policy choices, are likely to total at least this 151,000 difference." The latter would logically be collateral deaths.

And this is how that 151,000 difference was explained: "Excess deaths due to unnatural causes surged by an estimated 82,000 above the normal levels, from March 2020 through August 2021. Unnatural causes are dominated by homicides, suicides, overdoses, and accidents. And, excess deaths due to the Big Four natural causes (heart and lung disease, cancer, and stroke) soared by over 86,000 over those same 18 months, mostly during 2020. These two categories alone total 168,000 excess deaths." Clearly, many deaths were caused by government pandemic controls that made lives extremely difficult and stressful.

On this point, the report noted: "The death toll from unnatural causes has risen sharply and is not likely to fall as quickly. Research shows that collateral effects on health, direct and indirect, following unemployment and other economic disruption remain elevated for several years. The same seems likely to be true for overdoses and homicides, due to lingering mental health effects, though perhaps not for accidental deaths."

In contrast to the above, it was reported in October 2020 that a report by CDC said that overall, an estimated 299,028 excess deaths occurred from late January through Oct. 3, 2020, with 198,081 of them (66%) caused by COVID-19. But that left nearly three months in later 2020 unaccounted for, when COVID infections probably mounted. So, some 100,947 (or 134,596 for 12 months) excess deaths not related to COVID infection is mostly in agreement with the above figures. These CDC numbers are the least credible.

Thus, despite data variations, most of these reports were fairly consistent in attributing 72 to 83% of U.S. excess deaths over pre-pandemic years to COVID infection deaths, leaving a fairly broad range of about 64,000 to 151,000 excess deaths to non-infection causes. These would be the collateral impacts of pandemic control actions by federal and state governments, but are much lower than what The Economist estimated; but these are not systematically measured by the government.

The average of the above reports is 25.3% for non-infection deaths and for these an average of 117,745 such collateral deaths annually, and before vaccine deaths would be a significant fact.

Dr. Joseph Mercola's views

Receiving major attention on alternative news sites in October 2021 are the views of Dr. Joseph Mercola that will now be summarized. He has been a strong proponent for explaining non-infection deaths on the basis of COVID vaccines.

"The number of Americans who have died between January 2021 and August 2021 is 16% higher than 2018, the pre-COVID year with the highest all-cause mortality, and 18% higher than the average death rate between 2015 and 2019. Adjusted for population growth of about 0.6% annually, the mortality rate in 2021 is 16% above the average and 14% above the 2018 rate."

Mercola asked the key question: "Did COVID-19 raise the death toll despite mass vaccination, or are people dying at increased rates because of it?"

"The death toll from the jabs is estimated to be between 200 and 500 deaths per million doses administered. With 4 billion doses having been administered around the world, that means 800,000 to 2 million so-called 'COVID-19 deaths' may in fact be vaccine-induced deaths." This range is a high fraction of about 5 million total global COVID infection deaths. In the U.S., 414 million doses have been given; using the above range that yields a range of 82,800 to 207,000 vaccine deaths on top of the 730,000 infection deaths given by CDC.

[To be clear, vaccine-induced deaths are definitely real and significant. The issue is their magnitude. Nor is it fair to argue that vaccine induced deaths are to some degree hidden within COVID death data. And clearly it is unreasonable to argue that high COVID deaths after mass vaccination, which has been widely observed, should be counted as vaccine deaths.]

The key question is whether the high level of U.S. vaccine deaths is compatible with what the public is seeing.

Mercola also references the following:

"According to this whistleblower, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) under-reports deaths caused by the COVID shots by a conservative factor of five or more. She claims the number of Americans killed by the shots was at least 45,000 as of July 9, 2021. At that time, VAERS reported 9,048 deaths following COVID injection. That number is now 16,310 (as of October 1, 20218). Using an under-reporting factor of five, that gives us an estimated vaccine death toll of 81,550." That is at the low end of the range calculated above.

Another source is also used by Mercola:

"Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, has come up with even more drastic numbers. In the video 'Vaccine Secrets: COVID Crisis,' he argues that VAERS can be used to determine causality, and shows how the VAERS data indicate more than 212,000 Americans have already been killed by the COVID shots." That is at the high end of the range calculated above.

To recap, Mercola's reporting provided different sources to support the range of 82,800 to 207,000 for vaccine deaths to date.

Rose and Crawford study

The September 2021 study "Government's Own Data Reveals that at Least 150,000 Probably DEAD in U.S. Following COVID-19 Vaccines," by Jessica Rose and Mathew Crawford, is the most detailed and impressive effort to determine vaccine deaths. It has been criticized by FDA: "Although under reporting is a limitation in VAERS, with regard to COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring, there currently is not evidence to suggest it would underestimate the amount of COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths to such a large degree." This author disagrees with FDA. Here is the official view of CDC: "'Underreporting' is one of the main limitations of passive surveillance systems, including VAERS. The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small fraction of actual adverse events." As you will see below, the 150,000 figure for vaccine deaths is a low, conservative estimate.

This is the summary of its findings: "Analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database can be used to estimate the number of excess deaths caused by the COVID vaccines. A simple analysis shows that it is likely that over 150,000 Americans have been killed by the current COVID vaccines as of Aug 28, 2021." This is close to the high end of the range given above.

The study is both long and complex. Here are some highlights.

On the problem of underreporting of vaccine deaths: "In our informal physician surveys we saw a bias to under-report serious adverse events in order to make the vaccines look as safe as possible to the American public since most physicians believe they are hurting society if they do anything to create vaccine hesitancy. Secondly, we'd estimate that at least 95% of physicians have completely bought into the "safe and effective" narrative and thus any event that they observe they deem as simply anecdotal and don't bother to report it since it couldn't have been caused by such a safe vaccine that appeared to do so well in the Phase 3 trials."

On the search for quantifying underreporting in the CDC VEARS system: "The point of this paper is not to find the exact number of deaths, but merely to find the most credible estimate for deaths. We think that anaphylaxis is an excellent proxy for a serious adverse event that, like a death, should always be reported so we think 41X is the most accurate number." That means multiplying CDC numbers by 41.

To get estimates of vaccine deaths: "There are three ways to estimate the number of excess deaths caused by the vaccine. Using these three methods we can estimate the low and high likely bounds for the number of excess deaths caused by the vaccine:

1. Subtract the average number of background deaths in previous years: estimate is 252,109;
2. Use 86% based on the analysis in the Mclachlan study; estimate is 252,073;
3. Use 40% based on the estimate of Dr. Peter Schirmacher one of the world's top pathologists; estimate is 175,865."

This was the explanation for looking at other studies: "In order to validate that our estimates are reasonable (or simply that the evidence was more likely consistent with the hypothesis that the vaccine does more harm than good), we looked at four different quantitative methods from very small to very large and summarized their estimates:"

Excess Case Fatality Rate analysis done in Europe: 72,000-180,000
Excess death analysis for 23 nations: 147,960
Small island study: 171,000
Analysis of Norway deaths: 150,000

"In summary, the qualitative and quantitative confirmation techniques we used were all independent of each other and of our main method, yet all were consistent with the hypothesis that the vaccines cause large numbers of serious adverse events and excess deaths and are inconsistent with the null hypothesis that the vaccines have no effect on mortality and have a safety profile comparable to that of other vaccines."

"We were not able to find a single piece of evidence that supported the FDA and CDC position that all the excess deaths were simply over-reporting of natural cause deaths."

In wrapping up a very complex analysis this was said:

"In 1976, they halted the H1N1 vaccine after 500 GBS cases and 32 people died. However, there is no stopping mortality condition for these [COVID] vaccines. We are likely at 150,000 deaths and counting and nobody in the mainstream medical establishment, mainstream media, or Congress is raising any concerns. No member of the medical community is calling for any stopping condition nor autopsies. We find this troubling."

Here is the most important reason for respecting this study. As you can see the final estimate of 150,000 vaccine deaths is lower than other figures in various studies but consistent with the range from Mercola's reporting. Overall, this figure of 150,000 vaccine deaths is conservative.

Here are more concluding insights that the public should greatly think through, especially when deciding whether or not to get a vaccine shot, initial or booster:

"In short, say our vaccine reduces the risk of dying from COVID by 2X. But it came at a cost, e.g., increasing your risk of dying from a heart attack by 4X. And let's say both events are equally likely (which they aren't). Then you've made a bad decision … you're more likely to die if you took the vaccine.

"When you combine (1) the negative efficacy of the vaccine with (2) the negative all-cause mortality benefit, it's impossible to justify vaccination. Either alone is sufficient to kill the benefit; both of them together makes things even more difficult for recommending vaccination.

"The bottom line is clear: If you got the vaccine, you were simply more likely to die. The younger you are, the greater the disparity."

As more Americans succumb to pressure, propaganda and mandates, it is very likely that the figure of 150,000 vaccine deaths will become an underestimate of the lethality of COVID vaccines.

Lastly, it is relevant to note what the eminent medical researcher Dr. Judy Mikovits has said. Her medical science credentials are impeccable, including a long stint at the National Cancer Institute. Her views may seem extreme to some people, but they are based on a deep scientific understanding and are consistent with the highly frightening forecasts of other scientists and physicians.

She said: "I just can't even imagine a recipe for anything other than what I would consider mass murder on a scale where 50 million people will die in America from the vaccine." Time will tell whether this dire prediction will materialize as more people get the shot. The shot that kills.

Israel deaths

Since the start of the third booster shot on July 30, the COVID death rate in Israel has been reported to have jumped from about .15 to 3.5 per million in early September. Is it possible that a similar negative impact will happen in the U.S.?

In an August 2021 paper entitled "Young adult mortality in Israel during the COVID-19 crisis,"noted Israeli researcher Dr. Steve Ohana examined a surge in Israeli youth deaths, which he says are unexplained by anything other than a surge in vaccinations for the age group 20-49." Specifically, he noted that, "the surge in mortality coincided with the rollout of the Israeli vaccination campaign for the 20 s to 49-year-olds, which reached more than 75% of individuals in this age group." Dr. Ohana concluded that his findings should "urgently prompt a pause in the vaccination campaign, until the reasons of the youth excess mortality observed in mass vaccination countries are clarified."

Finally, here is perhaps the most interesting development in Israel recently reported. "There are a million people that are currently about to surrender their freedoms instead of getting a booster." This means that 1 million people in the most vaccinated country on the planet were letting their Green Pass expire." This would greatly curtail their freedom to access many places.

report from Israel examined excess deaths for one period and reported the following: "According to data from the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), during January-February 2021, in the midst of the vaccination operation, there was a 22% increase in overall mortality in Israel compared to the bi-monthly average mortality in the previous (pre-vaccination) year. In fact, the period of January-February 2021 is the deadliest one in the last decade, with the highest overall mortality rates, when compared to the corresponding months over the last 10 years. The report highlights that younger people between the ages of 20-29 appear to be the demographic that saw the most dramatic increase in mortality following the rollout of the Pfizer vaccine. In this group, during the same vaccination period, January-February 2021, there has been a 32% increase in overall mortality compared to the bi-monthly average mortality in 2020."

As the U.S. pushes booster shots for everyone, including young people, there may be lessons to learn from Israel.

Conclusions

It is challenging to reconcile the average of 117,745 excess deaths beyond infection deaths given above with the conservative figure of 150,000 vaccine deaths. Add in the indirect, even higher collateral deaths across society broadly, probably what The Economist found, namely for the current U.S. 730,000 infection deaths and some 921,000 indirect collateral deaths. The latter seems reasonable when you consider that most of the population, several hundred million people, had their lives devastated by government pandemic controls. In other words, a collateral death rate of around .5%.

As to the latter, though taken in the name of public health, most government actions have had no basis in medical science. Considering all the deaths, pandemic management has been a colossal failure with the highest level of COVID infection deaths globally in the U.S.

Adding up the infection, vaccine and collateral deaths gets to a total approaching 2 million pandemic deaths. And note that breakthrough infections of the fully vaccinated are escalating, as vaccines lose effectiveness, and are at least 10,000 to 20,000.

Public health officials failed to promote early wide use of generics and foolishly pushed mass vaccination that has not proven effective. The former could have prevented over 600,000 infection deaths.

Perhaps the greatest tragedy is that public health officials have stubbornly refused to admit their mistakes.

The government has made no attempt to systematically account for the non-infection indirect collateral pandemic deaths. And surely more and more Americans are dying from the onerous pandemic controls – now emphasizing vaccine mandates – that are destroying and disrupting the lives of millions of people. Especially in view of the above estimates for vaccine deaths.

Finally, and most importantly, nearly all of the excess deaths approaching 2 million Americans could have been prevented by better government policies:

1. COVID infection deaths could have been prevented by promoting wide use of a number of protocols to cure and prevent infection by using generic medicines and other proven drugs. And also by aggressive programs to address obesity, diabetes and various causes of weakened immune systems.

2. Vaccine deaths could have been prevented by focusing on about 5% of the population at significant risk from fatal COVID but not the entire population, meaning no vaccine mandates.

3. Not using invasive contagion controls, namely lockdowns, that have disrupted and destroyed lives and caused huge numbers of collateral deaths.

Dr Asks 'If hospitalizations/deaths are almost exclusively occurring in the UnVaxed why would booster shots be necessary? Why are most COVID hospitalizations/deaths in the UK among the Fully Vaxxed?'

From [HERE] U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) Tuesday held a roundtable discussion on federal COVID vaccine mandates with a panel of people injured by COVID vaccines and scientists from some of the most prestigious research organizations in the world, including The BMJ and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Peter Doshi, a senior editor at The BMJ and associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, and Retsef Levi, a health system and analytics professor at MIT, expressed doubts about COVID vaccine efficacy and the failures of the scientific community. 

“I’m saddened we’re super-saturated as a society right now in the attitude of ‘everybody knows,’ which has shut down intellectual curiosity and led to self-censorship,” said Doshi.

Doshi said we’re not in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.” If hospitalizations and deaths are almost exclusively occuring in the unvaccinated “why would booster shots be necessary?” Doshi asked. “And why would the statistics be so different in the UK, where most COVID hospitalizations and deaths are among the fully vaccinated?”

“There’s a disconnect there, and something to be curious about,” Doshi said. “There’s something not adding up.”

Doshi argued the public was lied to in early 2021, when health officials including Dr. Anthony Fauci, claimed COVID vaccine trial data proved the vaccine saved lives.

After presenting the trial data for the vaccines authorized for use in the U.S., Doshi pointed out “there were similar numbers in the vaccine and placebo groups.” He argued those “who claimed the trial showed the vaccine was highly effective in saving lives were wrong” and that “the trials did not demonstrate this.” 

Doshi talked about anti-vaxxers and criticized the official definition of the term. He presented the panel the official Merriam-Webster definition of anti-vaxxer: “A person who opposes the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination.”

“The second part [of the definition] stunned me,” said Doshi. 

“There are entire countries from the United Kingdom to Japan which do not mandate childhood vaccines,” he said. “There are no mandates, and I would wager that perhaps a majority of the world’s population meet this definition of an anti-vaxxer.”

Doshi told the panel that “vaccine” is another definition “worth checking on.”

“I argue these products which everyone calls MRNA vaccines are qualitatively different from standard vaccines,” Doshi said. “So I found it fascinating to learn that Merriam Webster changed the definition of vaccine early this year.”

“mRNA products did not meet the definition of vaccine that has been in place for over 15 years, but the definition was expanded such that mRNA products are now vaccines,” Doshi said.

He then argued that just because we’re calling the COVID shot a “vaccine” doesn’t mean “these new products are just like all other childhood vaccines which get mandated.”

“Each product is a different product, and if people are OK with mandating something simply because it’s a vaccine, I believe it’s time to inject some critical thinking into the conversation,” Doshi said. 

He also criticized the fact that society is vaccinating and mandating the vaccine for large portions of the public despite the raw data on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines not being available yet.

“So while we are told to keep following the science, what we are following is not a scientific process based on open data, we are following a process where the data are secret, and in my view there is something very unscientific about that,” Doshi said.

Levi told the panel “scientists in the most prestigious journals assert that the vaccine is safe, failing to report on serious side effects such as deaths.”

He explained that national emergency services calls in Israel for cardiac arrest among young individuals under 40 years old saw a dramatic increase — more than 25% — in parallel to the COVD vaccination campaign. 

“We wrote an academic paper raising concerns regarding these statistics and called on the authorities to check on this … needless to say they never got back to us.” 

Levi claimed the government attempted to censor the research by calling its credibility into question. “They called the research fake,” Levi said. 

Levi warned the panel: 

“These vaccines have serious and unknown side effects, and we need to use them with caution.”  [MORE]

Pandemic of the Vaccinated? Contrary to Government Lies, Data from 188 Countries Proves the Highest COVID Case Rates are in the Most Vaccinated Countries

From [theExpose] Worldwide analysis of 188 nations shows a massive global correlation between vaccination and higher case rates of Covid-19, proving the world is currently experiencing a pandemic of the vaccinated.

METHOD

Data was analysed from the ‘Our World in Data’ site of Johns Hopkins University on 247 million Covid-19 cases from the very start of the pandemic to October 31st 2021, for all 188 nations where they have data on both the percentage of people vaccinated and the cumulative confirmed cases per million . 

The results on the average cases per million people against the percentage vaccinated were as follows –

CONCLUSION

The above shows that the incidence of cases increases fairly linearly with the percentage of vaccinated people at a rate of 800 cases per million per extra percentage vaccinated. 

The nations with the lowest case rates are almost exclusively in Africa, which also has the lowest rates of vaccination. 

Whereas the nations with the highest case rates also have the highest rates of vaccination. 

The inescapable conclusion from all the data we have up to October 31st is that vaccines increase case numbers. This is not a representative sample of a few thousand cases from one nation. It is a full study of all the cases so far in every reporting nation. 

The results are in. There is a massive correlation positive between vaccination percentage and case numbers. Vaccinations are clearly opening the door to the virus.

In heavily vaccinated nations such as the UK the case rate in the fully vaccinated over 30’s is presently only 23-55% higher than the case rate in the unvaccinated. But the case rate in the unvaccinated is elevated due to infection by vaccinated people.

The media narrative is that the unvaccinated are infecting the vaccinated. This data indisputably shows that the reverse is the case. This has now become a pandemic of the vaccinated. 

They are increasing the case numbers in the unvaccinated – because their immune systems are being damaged by the vaccines. That is what the fairly straight and very steep line above is declaring. 

Had there been no vaccination in the UK the figures would now be more like those of the African countries as seen in the bottom left of the above graph. 

One of the clearest ways to see that the vaccinated are infecting the unvaccinated is the comparison of  71% vaccinated in Israel with 27% vaccinated in Palestine. 

The graph shows Israel leading Palestine in cases and dragging them up above the world average case level.

More than Half of US States are Suing to Stop the Blight House COVID Vaccine Mandate

From [HERE] More than half of U.S. states are suing to stop the Biden administration from implementing new rules that require employers with more than 100 workers to ensure their employees are vaccinated against Covid-19 or get a weekly test. 

The states’ attorneys general, who filed multiple lawsuits in various courts Friday, said they were suing because the federal government doesn’t have the authority to issue the requirements. They say the issue should be left to states. 

“States have been leading the fight against COVID-19 from the start of the pandemic,” Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, said Friday. “It is too late to impose a federal standard now that we have already developed systems and strategies that are tailored for our specific needs.”

In September, Nina Pierpont (MD, PhD) published a paper on September 9th, entitled “Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Now Pointless: Covid-19 vaccines do not keep people from catching the prevailing Delta variant and passing it to others.” It analyzes 3 major studies published in August 2021 which together demonstrate the COVID injections do not prevent infection or transmission of Covid-19. As such, she concludes that vaccine mandates are unjustified and baseless.

Dr. Pierpoint is a graduate of Yale University (BA in biology), with a MA and PhD from Princeton University in population biology/evolutionary biology/ecology, and the MD degree from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. She has been a Clinical Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Columbia University’s College of Physicians & Surgeons. She is currently in private practice in upstate New York, specializing in behavioral medicine.

The paper states the following:

“Executive Summary:

1) Excellent scientific research papers published or posted in August 2021 clearly demonstrate that current vaccines do not prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

2) Vaccines aim to achieve two ends:

a. To protect the vaccinated person against the illness.
b. To keep people from carrying the infection and transmitting it to others.

i. If enough people are vaccinated or otherwise become immune, it is hoped that the disease will stop circulating. We call this herd immunity.

ii. On the way to herd immunity, there is an assumption that people who are immunized can form safe clusters or groups within which no one is carrying or transmitting the virus.

3) Unfortunately, this last assumption (2.b.ii) is no longer true under the new variant of SARS-CoV- 2, Delta (B.1.617.2), which now accounts for essentially all cases worldwide.

4) Delta is more infectious than the Alpha strain (B.1.1.7) that prevailed in the UK from January to May 2021 (and in the US from March to June 2021), meaning that Delta is passed more readily person-to-person than the previous dominant strain.

a. Infectiousness is a correlate of high viral load (see section 5, below).
b. From its origin in India, Delta has soared to nearly complete domination of COVID-19 viral strains everywhere in a matter of months, because it spreads so easily and infects both vaccinated and unvaccinated people.

5) New research in multiple settings shows that Delta produces very high viral loads (meaning, the density of virus on a nasopharyngeal swab as interpreted from PCR cycle threshold numbers).

a. Viral loads are much higher in people infected with Delta than they were in people infected with Alpha.
b. Viral loads with Delta are equally high whether the person has been vaccinated or not.

c. Viral load is an indicator of infectiousness. [13,14] The more virus one has in the nose and mouth, the more likely it is to be in this individual's respiratory droplets and secretions, and to spread to others.

6) Due to evolution of the virus itself, all the currently licensed vaccines (all based on the original Wuhan strain spike protein sequence) have lost their ability to accomplish vaccine purpose 2(b), above, "To keep people from carrying the infection and transmitting it to others."

7) Vaccine mandates are thus stripped of their justification, since to vaccinate an individual no longer stops or even slows his ability to acquire and transmit the virus to others.

8) Under Delta, natural immunity is much more protective than vaccination. All severities of COVID-19 illness produce healthy levels of natural immunity. [MORE]

Surgeon General Disrupts NFL Pre-Game to Remind Unmasked Fans, 'Biden's Dictates Good: Mandates are Necessary Even Though Vaccines Don’t Prevent COVID, Stop its Spread and May Harm or Kill You'

From [HERE] U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy defended the actions of the Biden administration in a Sunday interview on ABC's "This Week" after it announced a sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandate for companies with 100 employees or more.

"The president and the administration wouldn't have put these requirements in place if they didn’t think that they were appropriate and necessary, and the administration is certainly prepared to defend them," Murthy told ABC News "This Week" co-anchor Martha Raddatz, adding that the U.S. has a history of using vaccine requirements to protect the population.

The Biden administration on Thursday released new federal rules that view COVID-19 as an occupational hazard, meaning nearly 100 million U.S. workers will be required to have proof of the COVID-19 vaccine by Jan. 4, with some workers allowed to test weekly.

"It's important we take every measure possible to make our workplaces safer," Murthy said. "It's good for people's health, it's good for the economy, and that's why these requirements make so much sense." [MORE]