COVID Vaccines Causally Linked to Increased Mortality, Resulting in 17 Million Deaths

Scott

Verified User
I know some people here won't listen to anything if it comes from The Epoch Times, so to those people, by all means just ignore this post. For anyone who considers that The Epoch Times might be reporting something interesting, this is for you...

**
Data suggest COVID-19 vaccines haven’t saved lives, but instead, have resulted in 17 million deaths and increased all-cause mortality in 17 countries.

A new scientific report challenges the idea that COVID-19 vaccines have prevented deaths after researchers assessed all-cause mortality in 17 countries and found COVID-19 vaccines did not have any beneficial effect on reducing mortality. Instead, researchers found that unprecedented peaks in high all-cause mortality in each country—especially among the elderly population when COVID-19 vaccines were deployed—coincided with the rollout of third and fourth booster doses.

The report, published Sept. 17 by Correlation Research in the Public Interest (pdf) (not yet peer-reviewed), quantified the vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR) for all ages—which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a given population. After analyzing mortality data, the researchers calculated a mean all-ages fatal toxicity by injection of vDFR of one death per 800 injections across all ages and countries. This equates to 17 million COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths worldwide from 13.25 billion injections as of Sept. 2, 2023.

"This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed (0.213 ± 0.006) % of the world population (1 death per 470 living persons, in less than 3 years), and did not measurably prevent any deaths," the authors said. The overall risk of death induced by COVID-19 vaccines is 1,000 times greater than previously reported in data from clinical trials, adverse event monitoring, and cause-of-death statistics obtained from death certificates.

All-cause mortality is the death rate from all causes of death for a population in a specific time period. This is the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events driving death and for measuring the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause.

"All-cause mortality is a good feature to use in statistical medical analyses since there is no ambiguity in whether someone has died or not," Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), told The Epoch Times in an email. "It is highly disturbing that these authors have found a consistent trend among seventeen countries showing a significant increase in all-cause mortality coinciding with extensive COVID vaccine rollout. Their estimate of one death for every 800 injections globally is alarming."

Ms. Seneff said her investigations into potential mechanisms of vaccine injury have led her to believe that it is plausible that these injections are "extremely toxic" and should not have been approved by regulatory agencies.

**

Full article:
COVID Vaccines Causally Linked to Increased Mortality, Resulting in 17 Million Deaths: Scientific Report | The Epoch Times
 
I know some people here won't listen to anything if it comes from The Epoch Times, so to those people, by all means just ignore this post. For anyone who considers that The Epoch Times might be reporting something interesting, this is for you...

**
Data suggest COVID-19 vaccines haven’t saved lives, but instead, have resulted in 17 million deaths and increased all-cause mortality in 17 countries.

A new scientific report challenges the idea that COVID-19 vaccines have prevented deaths after researchers assessed all-cause mortality in 17 countries and found COVID-19 vaccines did not have any beneficial effect on reducing mortality. Instead, researchers found that unprecedented peaks in high all-cause mortality in each country—especially among the elderly population when COVID-19 vaccines were deployed—coincided with the rollout of third and fourth booster doses.

The report, published Sept. 17 by Correlation Research in the Public Interest (pdf) (not yet peer-reviewed), quantified the vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR) for all ages—which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a given population. After analyzing mortality data, the researchers calculated a mean all-ages fatal toxicity by injection of vDFR of one death per 800 injections across all ages and countries. This equates to 17 million COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths worldwide from 13.25 billion injections as of Sept. 2, 2023.

"This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed (0.213 ± 0.006) % of the world population (1 death per 470 living persons, in less than 3 years), and did not measurably prevent any deaths," the authors said. The overall risk of death induced by COVID-19 vaccines is 1,000 times greater than previously reported in data from clinical trials, adverse event monitoring, and cause-of-death statistics obtained from death certificates.

All-cause mortality is the death rate from all causes of death for a population in a specific time period. This is the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events driving death and for measuring the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause.

"All-cause mortality is a good feature to use in statistical medical analyses since there is no ambiguity in whether someone has died or not," Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), told The Epoch Times in an email. "It is highly disturbing that these authors have found a consistent trend among seventeen countries showing a significant increase in all-cause mortality coinciding with extensive COVID vaccine rollout. Their estimate of one death for every 800 injections globally is alarming."

Ms. Seneff said her investigations into potential mechanisms of vaccine injury have led her to believe that it is plausible that these injections are "extremely toxic" and should not have been approved by regulatory agencies.

**

Full article:
COVID Vaccines Causally Linked to Increased Mortality, Resulting in 17 Million Deaths: Scientific Report | The Epoch Times

This Stephanie Seneff is a computer science person. Not an epidemiologist. Not a virologist. She has also written papers indicating glyphosate as a cause for autism as well as a connection between it and COVID deaths.

She is considered a quack by experts who would know.
 
This Stephanie Seneff is a computer science person. Not an epidemiologist. Not a virologist. She has also written papers indicating glyphosate as a cause for autism as well as a connection between it and COVID deaths.

She is considered a quack by experts who would know.

She says what they want to hear, so she is the best expert in the world. Phoenyx is starting out a brand new flu season like he finished the last one.
 
This Stephanie Seneff is a computer science person. Not an epidemiologist. Not a virologist.

As if you had to be either of those things in order to research and even write one or more papers on the issue of vaccines.

Speaking of which, she's actually written a paper of her own in regards to the mRNA vaccines, in conjunction with a Naturopathic Oncologist in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research. It's here if you'd like to take a look:

Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19

As to virology, I suggest you take a look at this thread I started almost a year ago:

Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com

She has also written papers indicating glyphosate as a cause for autism as well as a connection between it and COVID deaths.

Thanks for pointing that out. After a quick internet search, I found the article I imagine you're referring to. For anyone interested, here's her article on the subject:

COVID-19, Glyphosate, Deuterium and SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines | mit.edu

I haven't yet read it, and I'm already aware that it's received criticism. Right below her article in my search, I found this one:

Glyphosate and COVID-19: Dr. Stephanie Seneff Strikes (Out) Again | mcgill.ca

Given that I've heard bad things regarding glyphosate in the past, I suspect that Stephanie's on the right track, but since I haven't yet read her article, let alone her ideological opponent's, I'll leave it at that.

In any case, the article I referenced in the opening post only mentions Stephanie as a voice in support of the paper done by other researchers. For anyone who's interested, that paper is here:

COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere | correlation-canada.org
 
As if you had to be either of those things in order to research and even write one or more papers on the issue of vaccines.

Speaking of which, she's actually written a paper of her own in regards to the mRNA vaccines, in conjunction with a Naturopathic Oncologist in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research. It's here if you'd like to take a look:

Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19

As to virology, I suggest you take a look at this thread I started almost a year ago:

Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com



Thanks for pointing that out. After a quick internet search, I found the article I imagine you're referring to. For anyone interested, here's her article on the subject:

COVID-19, Glyphosate, Deuterium and SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines | mit.edu

I haven't yet read it, and I'm already aware that it's received criticism. Right below her article in my search, I found this one:

Glyphosate and COVID-19: Dr. Stephanie Seneff Strikes (Out) Again | mcgill.ca

Given that I've heard bad things regarding glyphosate in the past, I suspect that Stephanie's on the right track, but since I haven't yet read her article, let alone her ideological opponent's, I'll leave it at that.

In any case, the article I referenced in the opening post only mentions Stephanie as a voice in support of the paper done by other researchers. For anyone who's interested, that paper is here:

COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere | correlation-canada.org

Quack.

On 17 million deaths
On autism

She needs to stick with computers
 
This Stephanie Seneff is a computer science person. Not an epidemiologist. Not a virologist. She has also written papers indicating glyphosate as a cause for autism as well as a connection between it and COVID deaths.

She is considered a quack by experts who would know.

I noticed you couldn't muster the energy to refute even one word of the information provided. You're a good little leftist foot soldier aren't you? That's what they taught you in basic training right? If you can't discredit the message discredit the messenger. Extra grub for you at the mess hall tonight huh private?
 
I noticed you couldn't muster the energy to refute even one word of the information provided. You're a good little leftist foot soldier aren't you? That's what they taught you in basic training right? If you can't discredit the message discredit the messenger. Extra grub for you at the mess hall tonight huh private?

I don’t have to, dumbfuck. Those who are experts in those fields have already labeled her a quack. But, I already stated that in the post you responded to, didn’t I?

Illiterate fucking moron.
 
I don’t have to, dumbfuck. Those who are experts in those fields have already labeled her a quack. But, I already stated that in the post you responded to, didn’t I?

Illiterate fucking moron.

You're ranting isn't very impressive. You need a urologist to tell you when to piss. You're a retard of Biden propositions.
 
You're ranting isn't very impressive. You need a urologist to tell you when to piss. You're a retard of Biden propositions.

Have a literate 10 year old read these posts to you, moron. You continue to prove you cannot do it on your own.
 
I noticed you couldn't muster the energy to refute even one word of the information provided. You're a good little leftist foot soldier aren't you? That's what they taught you in basic training right? If you can't discredit the message discredit the messenger. Extra grub for you at the mess hall tonight huh private?

I agree with your general sentiment, but I think that last sentence was counterproductive. Perhaps domer has made it clear somewhere that he's leftist, but I've known leftists who are against the Covid vaccines (I'm pretty sure that they're significantly rarer on the left than on the right, but they do exist). Sometimes I wonder if it's even possible to have a productive discussion on this subject because it almost always turns into an insult fest -.-
 
I agree with your general sentiment, but I think that last sentence was counterproductive. Perhaps domer has made it clear somewhere that he's leftist, but I've known leftists who are against the Covid vaccines (I'm pretty sure that they're significantly rarer on the left than on the right, but they do exist). Sometimes I wonder if it's even possible to have a productive discussion on this subject because it almost always turns into an insult fest -.-

Ah, appears someone failed Logic 101, fact, no one can disprove that which has yet to be proven
 
Ah, appears someone failed Logic 101, fact, no one can disprove that which has yet to be proven

archives, from what I remember of you, you are one of the few that keeps things fairly civil, so I'll bite. Could you elaborate on what you're referring to?
 
I agree with your general sentiment, but I think that last sentence was counterproductive. Perhaps domer has made it clear somewhere that he's leftist, but I've known leftists who are against the Covid vaccines (I'm pretty sure that they're significantly rarer on the left than on the right, but they do exist). Sometimes I wonder if it's even possible to have a productive discussion on this subject because it almost always turns into an insult fest -.-

I’m a scientist and a realist. I know how to sort through the bullshit and conspiracy garbage. Obviously, you (among others) do not possess that ability. That’s why you resort to garbage sites and quacks for your sources.
 
I agree with your general sentiment, but I think that last sentence was counterproductive. Perhaps domer has made it clear somewhere that he's leftist, but I've known leftists who are against the Covid vaccines (I'm pretty sure that they're significantly rarer on the left than on the right, but they do exist). Sometimes I wonder if it's even possible to have a productive discussion on this subject because it almost always turns into an insult fest -.-

I admit my passions get the better of me sometimes. This is not an excuse for the last line but an explanation, I get tried of the constant refusal by leftists to address the issue. They think if they have discredited a source then they believe they don't have to address the information. If they aren't stupid then they are doing it on purpose and discussions can't be had because they dont want discussion.
 
Not that matters to the poster, but:

we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as numerous failed fact checks” (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/)

we rate the Epoch Times in the Hyper-Partisan Right category of bias and as Unreliable, Problematic in terms of reliability“ (https://adfontesmedia.com/epoch-times-bias-and-reliability/)

Quite the contrary, I am well aware of mediabiasfactcheck.com. So much so, in fact, that I've made a thread on the site that you may want to take a look at:

mediabiasfactcheck.com bias | justplainpolitics.com

As to your adfontesmedia.com site, I haven't been able to find a review of it other than at mediabiasfactcheck, and I've already given evidence in the thread above of its suspect nature.
 
Last edited:
I admit my passions get the better of me sometimes. This is not an excuse for the last line but an explanation, I get tried of the constant refusal by leftists to address the issue. They think if they have discredited a source then they believe they don't have to address the information. If they aren't stupid then they are doing it on purpose and discussions can't be had because they dont want discussion.

You are to be a slave in the New World Order....power is not interested in your opinion.
 
Back
Top