It’s still a pandemic because of the vaccinated
I’ve made an awful lot of mistakes in my life. But I try to learn from every one of them. For this reason, I keep returning to old models to see how they have fared against the ever-increasing empirical data.
So it is with New South Wales in Australia who are still releasing really useful data which, by-the-by, keeps me minded to believe that most of the people involved in the COVID scam do still honestly believe they are doing the right thing and are on the right side.
Alas, the data doesn’t care about sides or beliefs or anything. It simply exists and is open to interpretation. Whether you trust your own interpretation or someone else’s (including mine) is entirely up to you but here’s how I see it.
No-one really died with/from/of COVID in NSW until 10-Jul-21, one week after the mass mRNA experiment began in earnest. Deaths peaked on 02-Oct-21, one month after the experiment peaked. The similarity in shape of the two distributions is quite apparent with both deaths and jabs ending around the same time at the end of Nov ‘21.
Less than a month later (and in the middle of the Australian summer!), COVID deaths return – and they are three times worse than the previous winter. Coincidentally (or not), people start dying two weeks after the “booster” campaign starts on 11-Dec-21.
Although there is some missing data, it looks like jabbing peaks around two weeks before the deaths peak on 29-Jan-22 and again, the similarity between the distributions of jabs and deaths is, well, quite remarkable.
The following winter, COVID deaths emerge again, concomitantly with renewed jabbing. The data isn’t split by dose any more but I think we can assume this is dose 3 and even dose 4 for the really keen? Similar patterns of deaths coinciding with jabs with the former peaking on 06-Aug-22, two weeks after peek jabbing.
So… so far, so many coincidences. But, I have always maintained that if every death was properly recorded with jab status, we could have gotten to a conclusive position on jab-related mortality a long, long time ago.
NSW started sharing this valuable information in May 2022 and I am really grateful to @LCHF_Matt (Twitter) for painstakingly extracting the data from the weekly surveillance bulletins that NSW public health release in PDF format.
Clearly, there is no difference in COVID death rates according to your jab / no jab status.
However…
t is clear that the 4-jabbers are dying at substantially higher rates than every other dose status. In fact, the entire COVID death distribution in July to Aug 2022 is driven by the 4-jabbers.
Yes, of course, we could explain this away because the 4-jabbers are the oldest, weakest ones so they were more likely to die anyway, right? OK… So, it’s not stopping them from dying though?
Let’s park it there and conclude that at best, COVID jabs don’t prevent COVID deaths. But what about all those remarkable correlations between jab phases and COVID deaths?
Can we dismiss those too? I think we should take a closer look at COVID cases and jabs.
NSW has no COVID until one week after the mass mRNA experiment begins. The rise and fall (the distribution) of COVID cases is pretty much identical to the distribution of jabs.
When NSW’s booster campaign gets under way in Dec ‘21, COVID cases explode – in the middle of summer!!! The scale on the y-axis goes from 12,000 to 350,000! Again, the distributions are remarkably similar.
In winter 2022, COVID’s return is once again preceded by an increase in jabbing.
So, what do we have here?
- A remarkable capability of the NSW population to consistently anticipate the coming of COVID (even completely out of season) and protect themselves with the experimental therapy?
- A leaky vaccine that suppresses the natural immune defences and facilitates the emergence of immune-escape variants that inevitably result in “COVID deaths”?
My wager is, if the people of NSW stopped injecting themselves with this experimental toxin, their COVID problem will probably stop too.
P.S. If you believe the answer is #2, then it also implies that the jabbed are somewhat responsible for causing the COVID deaths of the unjabbed too. Something more to think about?
Your jab does not protect you but could be killing me.
See more here substack.com
Header image: Getty Images
Bold emphasis added
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
VOWG
| #
I do not believe the unvaxxed stat for 2022 as the i f r was 0.26% for the dreaded “covid”, for the unvaxxed and nobody was vaxxed.
Reply
Itsme
| #
I agree with VOWG -2022 could be showing up the ‘delayed’ deaths from the previous vax group, that would be in their view – ‘unvaxxed’
(that sneaky little trick they do in the UK)
Reply
Wisenox
| #
It never was a pandemic. I just posted this elsewhere, but it fits here very well.
The story of covid isolation:
“One sample (WIV04), collected from the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), was analysed by metagenomics analysis using next-generation sequencing to identify potential aetiological agents. Of the 10,038,758 total reads—of which 1,582 total reads were retained after filtering of reads from the human genome—1,378 (87.1%) sequences matched the sequence of SARSrCoV. By de novo assembly and targeted PCR, we obtained a 29,891-base-pair CoV genome that shared 79.6% sequence identity to SARS-CoV BJ01.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7095418/What is metagenomics?
“Metagenomics is defined as the direct genetic analysis of genomes contained with an environmental sample…
The DNA extracted should be representative of all cells present in the sample and sufficient amounts of high-quality nucleic acids must be obtained for subsequent library production and sequencing.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3351745/What is De novo assembly? Its a process where DNA fragments are put in a list. Wherever fragments overlap, the computer “stitches” them together:
This link explains it and has a picture of the process.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nmeth.1935This one states that: “De novo assembly is one of the most RAM intensive and CPU intensive tasks that can be undertaken in Geneious Prime.”
https://www.geneious.com/tutorials/de-novo-assembly/Its computer generated!
Targeted PCR is as it sounds, they’re targeting the reconstruction of a specific genome, which is SARS1. They tell the computer what genome to make.
So, how did they get the DNA fragments? Well, they created them. They broke apart the DNA from whatever was in the sample (bacteria, molds, fungi, insects, etc). Lung lavages are not clean samples.
“The PCR-positive BALF sample from ICU-06 patient was spun at 8,000g for 15 min, filtered and diluted 1:2 with DMEM supplemented with 16 μg ml−1 trypsin before it was added to the cells.”
(from first study cited)
Trypsin is a digestive enzyme that breaks down proteins.
This means, they took a lung lavage from a single patient, broke the DNA into fragments using Trypsin, fed the pieces into a computer, told it to recreate SARS1, it came close at 79.6%, so they called it covid.
Lung lavages are filled with all sorts of DNA. Using Trypsin, they get billions of random nucleotides to work with.
Its a computer generated hoax.
A good analogy would be taking a dictionary, breaking it up into words, giving someone the first and last words of a sentence, and then telling that person to recreate a sentence using your start and end words.
Reply