While Mr. Bridgen really does mean well, I am willing to bet that there is an influence operation surrounding him and feeding him -- in the attempt to get him to say something which is false (so that they can discredit him).
The worst lot I've seen in VAERS is Moderna's 032 H 20 A, with 789 serious adverse event reports per million doses (1,578 serious adverse event reports per two-dose regimen).
Upscaling by a factor of 5 to account for the estimate that only 1 in 5 serious adverse events are captured by spontaneous reporting, you get 7,890 serious adverse event reports per two-dose regimen -- 7.89 serious adverse events per 1,000 fully-dosed (0.789%).
That almost 1% hospitalization of the people taking these particular Moderna shots -- 1 hospitalized from the shot, for each 127 that took it-- but Bridgen's estimate works out to 14% hospitalization after the shots.
It's too easy to get carried away with items that appear to support our position.
I can only speak from my own observations, but I work in retail and there seem to be many customers that I saw regularly, who are no longer coming in, or are suddenly very ill.
More than I remember in the years before 2020, though that could also be my own bias.
More than a few staff collapsing, or developing rapid cancers and dying suddenly.
My rurual street has a large elderly population, most of whom have had major heart issues since 2021, including heart attacks and strokes, but also collapsing and infirmity.
Many of them now openly blame the jab for their ills and are now refusing all medical injections.
Although I agree with you 100% that high-profile people posting things like this with no real evidence-base is (or can be) very unhelpful,
I also think that 1 in 7 severe effects is not far off reality. Much closer than 1 in 400.
I base that on many things.
Anecdotes. I count the number of people at work (approximately 60 people) who have had very rare things like facial paralysis (2/60), stroke / mini-stroke in their 40s/50s (1/60), repeated chronic colds (several), death (1/60 in their 40s). Several people have talked about hearing loss, eye issues, etc. One person had a friend in the 20s who died suddenly (blood clots), but that is from a wider sample than 60 of course.
I count the number of people in academic circles I move in. I won't give all the numbers but suffice it to say I have a close friendship group of four profs (40s-50s) and all of them have a problem - heart or kidneys.
I observed waves of turbo cancer at the meditation centre I go to, and many people going to funerals. One of my teachers went to her homeland of Australia and came back and told me she spent all her time going to funerals of relatives and friends (she is in 60s).
Then of course MANY MANY studies.
Then of course the mechanisms in the Covid Vaccine. And I go all the way back to Stephanie Seneff's paper before the vaccines were even out, listing all the potential mechanisms of causing "adverse effects".
But most of all, I read Mark Crispin Miller almost every week. And every week he lists a sample of the death notices from many countries, focusing only on those that are unexpected, unexplained, sudden etc. It is obvious that this is an under-count for almost all countries because the age of the deaths (averaging 53 years old) and the suddenness does point to one factor. For Canada and for New Zealand he seems to have good coverage (i.e., he has sufficient volunteers to get many of the death notices that exist). This week the numbers were about 600 for Canada and about 60 for NZ. In both cases, this points to an excess mortality of about 7%. And this is consistent on a weekly basis. That is obviously a vast level of carnage. It is of course miles less than 1 in 7, because we are talking deaths, not severe reactions.
I'm in the UK. Deaths in Mark Crispin Miller are 125-150 per week usually. I read them and I have never seen anyone I know in there. And I know people who died suddenly and unexpectedly, so again it means this is probably an under-count due to lack of available information/lack of volunteers in the UK to create the lists.
As usual, the truth of how lethal the jabs actually are is harder to pin down than many people think.
Some people die from a jab and some people get a passing mild headache and some go golfing the next day.
This wide range of reactions to the jab complicates the matter. However, over the long run it seems like the problems for recipients of the jab could keep coming.
I think the death rate within a year of getting jabbed is probably provably excessive even by traditional standards of safety.
Side effects seem hard to attribute to the jab because a mode of action for the adverse effects is usually questionable at best.
Road rage and crazy driving are examples of something that’s probably impossible to study.
Basically guys like Steve Kirsch have calculated statistics that seem trustworthy on the lethality of the jabs.
Another issue is whether the jabs can offer anything good to their recipients.
Looks pretty bad for the jabs helping people in any long term sense.
First https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37724969/ showed that all who got shots were affected. Second, they legally defined gene therapy a vaccine. Gene therapy works, but a wrongfully designed "modRNA"-code for producing a "natural-like spike-protein" never found in human blood has to show wrongful results. Millions died and nobody found "natural" spike-protein in corpses. The set "record" is death within 15 seconds after recieving a shot but developing cancer is not connected to the shots.
Death within 15 seconds of receiving a vaccine is almost certainly not due to the vaccine. Why? Simply because 15 seconds is not long enough for the vaccine to leave the injection site, not long enough to elicit an anaphylactic reaction. If it were anaphylaxis then it’s more likely to be to one of the excipients such as the lipids. What you’re failing to take into consideration is the individuality and medical history of each recipient. There are 8 billion unique individuals on the planet, and yes that includes monozygotic twins.
While Mr. Bridgen really does mean well, I am willing to bet that there is an influence operation surrounding him and feeding him -- in the attempt to get him to say something which is false (so that they can discredit him).
The worst lot I've seen in VAERS is Moderna's 032 H 20 A, with 789 serious adverse event reports per million doses (1,578 serious adverse event reports per two-dose regimen).
Upscaling by a factor of 5 to account for the estimate that only 1 in 5 serious adverse events are captured by spontaneous reporting, you get 7,890 serious adverse event reports per two-dose regimen -- 7.89 serious adverse events per 1,000 fully-dosed (0.789%).
That almost 1% hospitalization of the people taking these particular Moderna shots -- 1 hospitalized from the shot, for each 127 that took it-- but Bridgen's estimate works out to 14% hospitalization after the shots.
Thank you for this explanation.
It's too easy to get carried away with items that appear to support our position.
I can only speak from my own observations, but I work in retail and there seem to be many customers that I saw regularly, who are no longer coming in, or are suddenly very ill.
More than I remember in the years before 2020, though that could also be my own bias.
More than a few staff collapsing, or developing rapid cancers and dying suddenly.
My rurual street has a large elderly population, most of whom have had major heart issues since 2021, including heart attacks and strokes, but also collapsing and infirmity.
Many of them now openly blame the jab for their ills and are now refusing all medical injections.
Thank you for writing this with such thoughtful consideration, Raphael. And a big CONGRATS on your recent wins! Keep 'em coming!
It's important (to me, at least) that you wrote this. Thanks.
Although I agree with you 100% that high-profile people posting things like this with no real evidence-base is (or can be) very unhelpful,
I also think that 1 in 7 severe effects is not far off reality. Much closer than 1 in 400.
I base that on many things.
Anecdotes. I count the number of people at work (approximately 60 people) who have had very rare things like facial paralysis (2/60), stroke / mini-stroke in their 40s/50s (1/60), repeated chronic colds (several), death (1/60 in their 40s). Several people have talked about hearing loss, eye issues, etc. One person had a friend in the 20s who died suddenly (blood clots), but that is from a wider sample than 60 of course.
I count the number of people in academic circles I move in. I won't give all the numbers but suffice it to say I have a close friendship group of four profs (40s-50s) and all of them have a problem - heart or kidneys.
I observed waves of turbo cancer at the meditation centre I go to, and many people going to funerals. One of my teachers went to her homeland of Australia and came back and told me she spent all her time going to funerals of relatives and friends (she is in 60s).
Then of course MANY MANY studies.
Then of course the mechanisms in the Covid Vaccine. And I go all the way back to Stephanie Seneff's paper before the vaccines were even out, listing all the potential mechanisms of causing "adverse effects".
But most of all, I read Mark Crispin Miller almost every week. And every week he lists a sample of the death notices from many countries, focusing only on those that are unexpected, unexplained, sudden etc. It is obvious that this is an under-count for almost all countries because the age of the deaths (averaging 53 years old) and the suddenness does point to one factor. For Canada and for New Zealand he seems to have good coverage (i.e., he has sufficient volunteers to get many of the death notices that exist). This week the numbers were about 600 for Canada and about 60 for NZ. In both cases, this points to an excess mortality of about 7%. And this is consistent on a weekly basis. That is obviously a vast level of carnage. It is of course miles less than 1 in 7, because we are talking deaths, not severe reactions.
I'm in the UK. Deaths in Mark Crispin Miller are 125-150 per week usually. I read them and I have never seen anyone I know in there. And I know people who died suddenly and unexpectedly, so again it means this is probably an under-count due to lack of available information/lack of volunteers in the UK to create the lists.
As usual, the truth of how lethal the jabs actually are is harder to pin down than many people think.
Some people die from a jab and some people get a passing mild headache and some go golfing the next day.
This wide range of reactions to the jab complicates the matter. However, over the long run it seems like the problems for recipients of the jab could keep coming.
I think the death rate within a year of getting jabbed is probably provably excessive even by traditional standards of safety.
Side effects seem hard to attribute to the jab because a mode of action for the adverse effects is usually questionable at best.
Road rage and crazy driving are examples of something that’s probably impossible to study.
Basically guys like Steve Kirsch have calculated statistics that seem trustworthy on the lethality of the jabs.
Another issue is whether the jabs can offer anything good to their recipients.
Looks pretty bad for the jabs helping people in any long term sense.
First https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37724969/ showed that all who got shots were affected. Second, they legally defined gene therapy a vaccine. Gene therapy works, but a wrongfully designed "modRNA"-code for producing a "natural-like spike-protein" never found in human blood has to show wrongful results. Millions died and nobody found "natural" spike-protein in corpses. The set "record" is death within 15 seconds after recieving a shot but developing cancer is not connected to the shots.
Lots of people really struggling with this concept. I'm not at all saying the jabs aren't harmful.
Death within 15 seconds of receiving a vaccine is almost certainly not due to the vaccine. Why? Simply because 15 seconds is not long enough for the vaccine to leave the injection site, not long enough to elicit an anaphylactic reaction. If it were anaphylaxis then it’s more likely to be to one of the excipients such as the lipids. What you’re failing to take into consideration is the individuality and medical history of each recipient. There are 8 billion unique individuals on the planet, and yes that includes monozygotic twins.
When asking about the weather. I think in terms of one’s “internal weather”.