Generalfox.com

Advanced Science Topics and Thought

Generalfox.com

The Proof is always in the results – say, just what are the results?

That’s an interesting question. I offer an overview of the experimental mRNA vaccine effectiveness below:

  • The mRNA vaccines do not confer antibody immunity to the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2).
    • Instead, they promote antibodies to the ‘synthetic spike protein’.
    • But that spike protein is not specific to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
    • The antibodies produced do not provide protection from the pathogen (COVID-19 virus).
  • mRNA vaccines might slightly reduce hospitalizations and deaths.
    • At times there are more fully vaccinated people in the hospital than there are unvaccinated.
  • mRNA vaccines might reduce severe symptoms.
  • mRNA vaccines do not prevent the carrying of the pathogen.
  • mRNA vaccines do not stop transmission from one person to the next.
  • Even fully vaccinated people can still get COVID-19.

Recall the definition of “Vaccinated”

It is important to remember this as you review the information that follows. According to the CDC you are fully vaccinated for COVID-19 when you are two weeks beyond your second shot (dose). Therefore, any individuals having received a vaccine shot, and dying prior to the 14th day following is reported as an un-vaccinated death. As well, anyone getting COVID-19 prior to the 14th day would be reported as an un-vaccinated COVID-19 case.

Observation: The vaccine would have been affecting the body immediately following injection – thus I find it odd that anything happening prior to the 14th day would simply be dismissed as not being relative to the injury. I wonder what the results would have been like if the results did not include a 14 day delay?

Interpreting The Data – Death Rates

I looked to the US CDC for information but became confused when I seen so many different entries, and I could not get the numbers in the charts to add up. As per their website, starting Jan 1, 2020 and ending Feb 5, 2022 the death rates were:

Age GroupCOVID-19 Deaths
(ICD-code U07.1)		Pneumonia Deaths
(ICD-10 codes J12.0-J18.9)		Influenza Deaths
(ICD-10 codes J09-J11)		Total Deaths
(All Causes)
All Ages898,699798,60510,2297,070,005
1-4 years93271657,377
5-14 years2443908111,756
15-24 years2,3472,1059175,546
25-34 years9,9648,242250159,234
35-44 years25,11619,961395235,150
45-54 years60,57748,674846418,318
55-64 years132,106117,0051,852945,992
65-74 years205,457189,4412,2221,443,819
75-84 years230,870212,9282,2691,709,703
85 years and over231,722199,1322,1342,023,637
US Center for Disease and Control (CDC)

To help bring meaning to each of the columns, I have included its “ICD” code number or range. This is important – each ICD code is associated with a doctor’s diagnosis (a billable code). This is how the hospitals get re-imbursed for the treatments that are provided. You’ll notice that COVID is slipped in with other illnesses / disease. This gave the chart a whole new meaning to me after having reviewed the meaning behind each number.

  • “COVID-19 Deaths (ICD-code U07.1)” – This code is used for the recording of “Deaths involving COVID-19” and became effective April 1, 2020. As I understand it, prior to this time COVID-19 was being reported under other codes:
    • “J12.89, Other viral pneumonia, and B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was included in the above counts
    • “J20.8, Acute bronchitis due to other specified organisms, and B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was not included in the above counts
    • “J40, Bronchitis, not specified as acute or chronic; along with code B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was not included in the above counts
    • “J22, Unspecified acute lower respiratory infection, with code B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was not included in the above counts
    • “J98.8, Other specified respiratory disorders, with code B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was not included in the above counts
    • “J80, Acute respiratory distress syndrome, and B97.29, Other coronavirus”
      • this code was not included in the above counts
  • “Pneumonia Deaths (ICD-10 codes J12.0-J18.9)”
    • This range of codes is used to record pneumonia cases, and from what I understand this includes J12.89 (Other coronavirus) which was where COVID-19 cases were reported prior to April 1, 2020. So yes, these death types were mixed together in the above counts, making actual counts less clear
  • “Influenza Deaths (ICD-10 codes J09-J11)”
    • This code range is used to record deaths due to influenza not related to COVID-19. So I wonder why they are even being presented?

Here is an example as to how these codes are used: Let’s say someone went to a hospital and was diagnosed and treated for Adenoviral pneumonia then the reimbursement number “ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code J12.0” would be used. Where it gets strange is when someone already has an illness, catches COVID-19, and dies – how is that reported? What if someone has COVID-19 and is shot with a weapon and dies – should that be reported as COVID-19 death? Unfortunately it seems that COVID-19 related deaths were pushed to the limelight.

It is important to notice that the US CDC has admitted that 75% of the people who have died from the COVID-19 virus already had another illness that generally lead to death. This means that those individuals did not die solely from COVID-19 – they died because they caught it while their immune system was already in a weakend state. While we can say that they died of COVID-19 (which would artificially inflate the perception of the severity of COVID-19) would it not be more correct to say that these people’s bodies were already fighting illness, disease, cancers, etc., and thus had already weakened immune systems and so when they caught COVID-19 their bodies could not fight it off? And would it not be more accurate to also report the count of these individuals separately from those who died solely due to COVID-19?

Here is an article advising that Ontario is now reporting that the prior reported COVID-19 deaths was actually lower than prior stated. The data reveals that, depending on the wave, the number of reported deaths (where COVID-19 was actually the underlying cause of death) ranged from around just under 60% to 75% of the previously disclosed numbers. In the article it is reported that, according to Alberta Health Sciences, three quarters of Albertans who died of COVID did so while suffering from three or more underlying health conditions – and only 4% of deaths were in persons suffering from no conditions. Here is another article advising Ontario removed an additional 400 deaths from the COVID-19 count, due to an adjustment stemming from the cause of death.

COVID-19 death rate comparison with other forms of death

It would seem that COVID-19 has the same death rate as Pneumonia, which we have been living with for decades without lock-downs, etc.. I found an interesting visulatization on Heratige.Org, which visually shows the number of deaths associated with COVID-19 out of the total death rate per each of the age groups above. In the visualization below, you can see that for the hardest hit age group (85+), COVID-19 deaths accounted for 13% of the total death count.

Observations:

  • It is interesting to notice that the number of deaths “involving” COVID-19 vs “due to Pneumonia” are close to one another.
  • Recalling alleged reporting issues, testing issues, different cycle threasholds being used during testing, and etc., I wonder what the above table and visualization would look like if the numbers were properly adjusted?

According to the WHO, there are 3 to 5 million cases of severe seasonal influenza and about 290,000 to 650,000 respiratory deaths annually. As I understand the COVID-19 numbers to not have been reported perhaps as accurately as they could have been, and I have come to understand that the number of deaths caused by the Common Cold and Flu to essentially be an educated ‘guess’, I’m not sure how to compare the two together. GoodRX Health wrote an article to help people understand the differences between – but note that while I am unsure as to the accuracy of the numbers used in their example they do provide some good talking points.

While I normally reference news agencies, cross-referencing my information to ensure validitiy, I could not in this particular case – here is an article suggesting that COVID-19 deaths are higher this year than last, challenging the effectiveness of the vaccinations.

Observation: I question as to why information was not very clearly disclosed to the general public. I feel that it should have been, so that the general public could move forward on a decision to be vaccinated or not based on fully qualified information.

Actuarial Numbers

Actuaries analyze the financial costs of risk and uncertainty, using mathematics, statistics, and financial theory to assess the risk of potential events. Their work is essential to the insurance industry. It is interesting to note that, according to a study performed by the COVID-19 Actuaries Response Group, using 2017 thru 2019 as a baseline, mortatlity increased rather significantly in 2021 per the ages between 15 and 44. They are clear to advise that some deaths were attributed to COVID-19 (on the death certificate), with the excess deaths shown as non-COVID-19 deaths. With these deaths corresponding to the increased COVID-19 deaths it does make you wonder how they might be related to the effects of the Pandemic.

Interesting Studies And Facts

SymptomCases
Miscarriage3,435
Menstrual Disorders20,162
Vaginal/Uterine Haemorrhage (All Ages)7,629
Testicular Pain/Swelling1,370
Erectile Dysfunction484

I find it very interesting to note publications that the suicide rate actually decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic. The publications advising that there was a decrease cite an increase in advertising about the mental health hotlines, which did surge an apparent 35% at one point in time during the COVID-19 outbreak. Of course, I also found articles advising of an increase in suicides (here and here). Whether you live in an area or within a demographic that suffered heavily from the effects of COVID-19 or not, the lockdowns would have had an affect on you. My condolences to those who lost a friend or loved one.

Vaccine Batch Monitoring – How Bad Is My Batch?

An interesting website has been created to help identify the number of reports the various vaccine batches have had. The batch information will be on your vaccine information. Mine was higher than I’d like, but not as high as some…

Vaccinated People Can Still Get COVID-19:

I found this article advising that a fully vaccinated person has become infected with the new Omicron virus. On December 5, 2021 Natural News reported:

“The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) have allegedly identified a unique strain of SARS-CoV-2 called the “Omicron variant.” The illness has not been properly defined using symptom-specific diagnostic criteria, nor has a specific virus been isolated and shown to replicate in human cells. Nevertheless, a “fully vaccinated” person is sick in California and the rest of the country is now supposed to fear a new disease label, and get vaccinated with the same vaccines that the sick, vaccinated person previously took. Watch as the corporate media begins to spread mass panic, calling for more vaccines, mandates, boosters, masks, social isolation and shutdowns…”

After reading the article I was left with the following thoughts:

  • With the US White House releasing a statement on the “omicron strain” telling all Americans “to get their booster shots and get themselves and their kids vaccinated.”, it is clear that individuals older than 18 years are no longer considered “fully vaccinated” if they haven’t received a third dose of the vaccine.
  • Despite having been “fully vaccinated”, the individual identified by the CDC was forced to quarantine.
  • I found it interesting that the same variant was only found in “fully vaccinated” individuals in Africa.

Illogical quarantine rules

Being vaccinated no longer means that you can’t get the disease or virus you are being vaccinated for, essentially as I understand they are only working to lessen your symptoms once you have it. So a rather strange absurdity arising from all this is the highly illogical quarantine rules being pushed forward. As of Feb 27, 2022 here are the current rules:

“For people who are unvaccinated or are more than six months out from their second mRNA dose (or more than 2 months after the J&J vaccine) and not yet boosted, CDC now recommends quarantine for 5 days followed by strict mask use for an additional 5 days. Alternatively, if a 5-day quarantine is not feasible, it is imperative that an exposed person wear a well-fitting mask at all times when around others for 10 days after exposure. Individuals who have received their booster shot do not need to quarantine following an exposure, but should wear a mask for 10 days after the exposure.” 

US CDC

Why do I find the above flawed? If you have COVID-19 there are many ways of spreading it to others – and the vaccine does not stop anyone from getting it, it could merely lessen your symptoms. Considering this, why would it be suggested that if you have COVID-19 and are ‘fully vaccinated’, then you can feel free to be present in the public space while only wearing a mask, but if you are no longer considered ‘fully vaccinated’ then you must isolate for 5 days from others? This suggests that if you are ‘fully vaccinated’ that you cannot spread COVID-19 – which is false. I therefore view this as nothing more than a double-standard that is removed from science and in place to push an agenda.

Profit Results

Why is this here – well it is a result of the pandemic. While plenty of us lost our jobs, savings, and businesses, mRNA vaccine providers have seen amazing profits! It was reported that Pfizer made USD $36,800,000,000 in vaccine sales in 2021. Probably doesn’t hurt when governments are mandating them unto the people.

Lawsuits

You would think that information about a product that could potentially save lives and improve people’s health, if well designed, would be happily given to the general public and government officials to help re-inforce the products great benefits. So I grew confused when I learned that it took a Freedom of Information Act request for individuals to obtain a report covering the first 90 days of ‘post authorization’ vaccine safety data from Phizer. It is also interesting that no major news outlets covered this information after a judge ordered its release. The article states that over 1,200 deaths were reported within the first 90 day window, with a significant number appearing to happen within the first 24 hours after vaccination (appearing is stressed as the report lacks critical details that would have allowed the ability to align the specific deaths with the reported observation that the median elapsed time between vaccination and the adverse event was “<24 hours” for many types of AEs). The report is viewed as having many difficiencies:

  • It is a ‘second go’ by Pfizer after the first report was deemed insufficient and lacking detail.
  • The report is entirely passive, meaning that there was no active data collection – they relied on “spontaneous” reported events with no inquiry into the adverse events.
  • There is no attempt made to define the incidence of events.
  • There is no visible effort made to compare the levels of events to an expected baseline of such events.
  • You cannot determine first vs second vaccination injections as this was not reported.
  • The age brackets are without defined ranges; “child”, “adult”, and “elderly”.

I hope you check out the page and watch the video, the presenter breaks out the information in a clear and easy to understand manner.

Files obtained from the Food and Drug Administration in November through a Freedom of Information lawsuit recorded 158,893 adverse events from the Pfizer vaccine in the first two and a half months of distribution, including 25,957 incidents of “nervous system disorders.”. The lawsuit was filed by a group called “Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency”, which is comprised of more than 30 professors and scientists from universities including Yale, Harvard, UCLA and Brown. As WND reported, the FDA proposed that it be given 55 years to release all 329,000 pages of documents related to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine requested by the group. The FDA has now modified that request, asking a judge for a delay of 75 years. Thankfully, it would seem that a Federal Judge ruled that the FDA was to quickly make public 12,000 pages of the data it used to make decisions about approvals for Pfizer/BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine, and then release 55,000 pages every 30 days after that until all 450,000 of the requested pages are public.

In another lawsuit, a nonprofit organization advocating for full transparency of medical products’ safety and efficacy called, “Informed Consent Action Network” (ICAN) filed against the CDC and it’s parent entity “The Department of Health and Human Services” (HHS) per their refusal to make public the post-licensure safety data of COVID-19 vaccines. Article here and here. The agency turned down three Freedom of Information Act requests to publish collected reports citing that the information could not be deidentified (personal health information could not be removed). It was reported, however, that de-identified data does exist – a document outlines that Oracle is collecting, managing, and housing the data, and per their internal policies, staff is unable to view any individualized data that includes personalized data; they will instead be provided with aggregate unidentifiable data for reporting.

A grouping of lawyers are working to change the current compensation rule for those who had a severe reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine. As I understand from their website, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program covers vaccines like the flu shot, MMR, DTap, HPV, pneumonia, and other childhood vaccines – but it does not cover the COVID-19 vaccine. These lawyers are advocating for the COVID-19 vaccines to be covered. Check out their website, here.

Opinion / Question: If mRNA vaccines are so wonderful, and if we are so safe and protected by their use, then why wouldn’t the US FDA be rushing to release this wonderful information as quickly as possible? And why wouldn’t the manufacturer want to release the information along with a fully detailed explinanations to raise confidence? Let’s do the math – the FDA suggested that it take 8 minutes to process a page, thus they can only release 500 pages a month. If you calculate that out, 8 minutes a page x 500 pages = 4000 minutes, or 67 hours. If your work week is 37.5 hours, then a single person can do this in under 2 weeks. For a company having made so much money they could hire an extremely high count of individuals to help with this – it doesn’t seem like they are in any kind of rush to get the information out….

Read the next section, “Who or What Can You Trust?“.