Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.01.22 Board Correspondence - FW_ Vaccines are taking an average of 5 months to kill people.ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening attachments, clicking on links, or replying.. From:Paulsen, Shaina To:Bennett, Robin; Clerk of the Board; Connelly, Bill; Cook, Holly; Cook, Robin; Hironimus, Patrizia; Kimmelshue, Tod; Lucero, Debra; Paulsen, Shaina; Pickett, Andy; Reaster, Kayla; Ritter, Tami; Stephens, Brad J.; Sweeney, Kathleen; Teeter, Doug; Valencia, Shyanne Cc:York, Danette; Nuzum, Danielle Subject:Board Correspondence - FW: Vaccines are taking an average of 5 months to kill people Date:Thursday, September 1, 2022 12:31:24 PM Please see Board Correspondence below. Shaina Paulsen Associate Clerk of The Board Butte County Administration 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200, Oroville, CA 95965 T: 530.552.3304 | F: 530.538.7120 From: Prayinghawk144 <prayinghawk144@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2022 12:30 PM To: Clerk of the Board <clerkoftheboard@buttecounty.net> Subject: Vaccines are taking an average of 5 months to kill people DISTRIBUTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS. YOU ALL NEED TO WAKE UP AND STOP THIS. THERE IS STILL A CHANCE. SEND ME AN EMAIL AND WE WILL MAINTAIN YOUR ANONYMITY. YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HUMANITY. JULIE THREET https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/this-one-graph-tells-you-everything? s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web Sent from Mail for Windows Vaccines are taking an average of 5 months to kill people The CDC has been hiding the Social Security Administration death master file. I got it from a whistleblower. This shows deaths are taking 5 months from the jab to happen. This is why it's hard to see. Steve Kirsch 16 hr ago We’ve always assumed the vaccine kills you quickly (in the rst two weeks) because that’s when people notice the association and report it to VAERS. This is still true; it does kill some people quickly. However, thanks to an HHS whistleblower, we can now clearly see that most of the deaths from the vaccine are happening an average of 5 months from the last dose. That is for the second dose; it may be getting shorter the more shots you get but there are arguments both ways (since there can be survivor bias). But this explains why the life insurance companies got o-the-charts all-cause mortality peaks for people under 60 in Q3 and Q4 rather than right aer the shots rolled out. The ve month delay is also consistent with death reports where people are developing new aggressive cancers that are killing them over a 4 to 6 month period. The 5 month death delay was also conrmed using only European data. That analysis was posted Aug 11, but I learned about it aer I wrote this post. So when you hear of a death from stroke, cardiac arrest, heart attack, cancer, and suicide that is happening around 5 months aer vaccination, it could very well be a vaccine- related death. Executive Summar y The data from the Social Security Administration death master file (ages 18 to 55) I got this chart from a whistleblower who works for HHS. This is data you are not supposed to see. The mortality increase (60% at peak) is huge. That sort of increase can only be caused by something novel that aected massive numbers of people. There is only one possibility that ts that: the COVID vaccine. The peak is September 9, 2021. This graph, which is not publicly available, is from the US Social Security death master file. It compares deaths from 2021 to deaths in 2020. You simply cannot get such a rise in deaths like that unless something very deadly is affecting massive numbers of people. This explains why insurance companies all over the world were seeing massive death spikes in Q3 and Q4 of 2021. The vaccine was simply taking an average of 5 months from the most recent injection to kill people. The peak here is September 9, 2021. The peak is April 12, 2021. Daily vaccine doses administered in the US The peak is April 12, 2021. The most obvious conclusion is that the vaccine takes an average of 5 months to kill people aer the second dose. The second peak in December 2021 will result in life insurance companies having spikes in Q1 and Q2 of 2022. Occam’s razor Here’s what UK Professor Norman Fenton said An analysis posted at Chris Martenson’s site found the same 5 month delay using dierent source data! That is really stunning. I had no idea when I wrote my article. Here’s the reader comment pointing this out and here’s the comment on Peak Prosperity posted August 9, 2022 which was just a few weeks before I found the same thing from the US data. Another analysis using only European data found the exact same 5 month delay! What the gure shows is the “correlation coecient” as function of a temporal delay, that is, time shi. a negative time shi indicates that excess mortality is preceding the vaccination status a positive time shi indicates that the administered doses precedes the excess mortality The optimal time shi is dened as that time shi that maximizes the absolute pearson coecient. We search for the highest, or the lowest value. The lowest value is around -0.3, while the highest value is around 0.8. Because the absolute value of the highest,+0.8, is larger than the absolute value of the lowest, +0.3, the optimal time shi is + 5 months. That is, Administered Doses precedes Excess mortality. DaveDD’s full post on Peak Prosperity As Holden indeed mentioned, we do nd a negative relation also when there is no shi. However, the explanatory power of +0.8 is way larger than -0.3. The reason why I used “causes” instead of causes is that there are several characteristics of causal relations. What we tested now is “temporal precedence”. An eect can not precede the cause, plus, a cause predicts the eect better than the cause predicts the eect. In the cause of observational causality, another important aspect is that the cause should predict the eect better than the eect predicts itself. In this case we indeed nd that Excess Mortality predicts itself poorly —of course, for a time delay equal to 0, it does predict itself, for all other time delays, it has little to no explanatory power—. From this we can conclude that, based on the data sets used, Administered Doses do cause Excess Mortality. Of course, our “brilliant experts” are still stuck in the 19th century wrt statistical methods. I do not expect that they will be able to explain the excess mortality with their current methods, simply because 5 months is a huge time delay, and because here is typically little knowledge of observational causal methods. About the method The method used is based on correlations. The current state-of-the-art is based on Information Theory, but that’s too out of the ordinary for layman, and even experts, so we better not go there. When I have time in a couple of weeks I might run the information theoretical causal analytics. About the data As mentioned, the data sets from Holden’s sources were used. We selected only EU countries, we did not dierentiate between sexes and age groups. Finally we used monthly data due to time restrictions on my side (I simply do not have time to search for, or create weekly data sets for the excess mortality). If someone has a better explanation for this data, I’d love to hear it. Alternate hypotheses It does appear from reading the comments that it makes sense to reader and explains what they personally observed. If any fact checker wants to challenge me on this, you can use the Contact Form and let’s have a recorded conversation. The CDC doesn’t want to talk about this. They also won’t tell us why they aren’t showing us this data. For sure, the NY Times and rest of the mainstream media will ignore this and won’t ask any questions. Maybe Tucker Carlson will talk about it. Armed with this new knowledge, we should stop looking just for deaths proximate to the vaccine and look at the overall death rate in Canada of young doctors, e.g., doctors 50 and younger. What I found when I did that is that the number of young doctor deaths in Canada increased by a factor of 2.5X in 2021 vs. 2020 (15 deaths vs. 6). I’ve requested the data for earlier years to see how this compares It was wrong to assume that most of the vaccine-related deaths were happening shortly aer vaccination. Some are, but most are not. It’s just that they were easier to notice when there was temporal proximity to the jabs. If someone you know died around 5 months aer vaccination, you should denitely have a proper autopsy done as described in my earlier interview with Ryan Cole. Please share this info. 674 Comments Implications for the Canadian doctor death data Summar y Write a comment… 25 replies by Steve Kirsch and others DaveDD 14 hr ago ·edited 13 hr ago Pinned https://peakprosperity.com/community/general-discussion-and-questions/administered- doses-cause-excess-mortality-with-a-5-months-delay-repost/#post-188295 A simple observational causal analysis of August 9 came to the same conclusion. This was based on European data. ______________ Edit, as one has to be a member to read the content of he linke above, I took the liberty to post the text here. "This is my promised reaction to Holden. Let’s start with the conclusion based on the EU data from the data sets that Holden used (see picture). <1436-ExcessMortality.png> What the figure shows is the “correlation coefficient” as function of a temporal delay, that is, time shift. A negative time shift indicates that excess mortality is preceding the vaccination status. A positive time shift indicates that the administered doses precedes the excess mortality. The optimal time shift is defined as that time shift that maximizes the absolute pearson coefficient. We search for the highest, or the lowest value. The lowest value is around -0.3, while the highest value is around 0.8. Because the absolute value of the highest,+0.8, is larger than the absolute value of the lowest, +0.3, the optimal time shift is + 5 months. That is, Administered Doses precedes Excess mortality. As Holden indeed mentioned, we do find a negative relation also when there is no shift. However, the explanatory power of +0.8 is way larger than -0.3. The reason why I used “causes” instead of causes is that there are several characteristics of causal relations. What we tested now is “temporal precedence”. Continued in Reply,,, 57 Reply Gift a subscription Collapse Cherie Zimmerman 22 min ago For my dad it was 6 mos. I know it was the vax. He was cancer free for 17 yrs. after a successful larynx cancer treatment. Then the vax, and then aggressive cancer. 672 more comments… 1 Reply Gift a subscription Collapse © 2022 Steve Kirsch ∙ Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice Substack is the home for great writing