Estimating Vaccine-Induced Mortality, Part 5(ish): Polling Consistent With Massive Death Tolls
The Chloroquine Wars Part LXV
A few weeks ago, the founder at Vaccine Truth pointed out to me that they ran a large Twitter poll, the results of which showed similar numbers of people who knew somebody who died shortly after vaccination as knew somebody who died of COVID-19. I explained that the poll was biased based on the audience, so not a good way to get an estimate of the true number of post-vaccination deaths, which is the real goal of the exercise. After a couple of back-and-forth exchanges, he agreed with me and decided to self-fund a more scientifically conducted national poll. Polling results are never exceptional science (Exhibit A: the 2016 presidential election), but they can certainly stand out as signals at times. And really---what choices remain when the authorities responsible for understanding the totality of such deaths claim, "zero deaths" or "virtually zero deaths" by excusing themselves from doing the work involved to find out? At the recent ACIP meeting, after scientists submitted into record evidence they believe pointed to substantial vaccine death numbers, with University of Maryland Pharmacy Professor Linda Wastila presenting a summary commentary, the committee voted 14-0 to recommend the vaccine boosters for approval without any discussion or even an indication of having read the evidence. Such a poll would at least provide a first-order indication to help us all understand the degree to which vaccine-induced deaths are being laundered in the COVID data.
After contacting some major polling agencies, it seemed as though none of them were at all willing to even take money to run the poll. Apparently, the pollsters seem to know, without even asking, a great deal about the results (“low-incidence”). They know more even than the FDA, whose commissioner herself said with respect to tallying the number of post-vaccination deaths that it, "would require a study." Doesn’t this make you wonder why the statisticians with psychic abilities run polls instead of hedge funds?
Calls about this project to the above particular polling agency were not returned.
Preliminary Poll Results
After some hunting, Vaccine Truth did find pollsters willing to conduct the following poll:
How many people do you know personally who have died of COVID?
3 or more
How many people do you know personally have have died of the COVID vaccine?
3 or more
What is your gender?
What is your age?
The poll is still in progress, so I may update these preliminary results if they shift substantially. The last two questions may be close to irrelevant, but I think I have a handle on potential bias that I’ll discuss briefly. The results from questions 1 and 2 show that the expectation of “low-incidence” events was unwarranted. I put together a simple spreadsheet to see if I could fairly compute the implied proportions between the two categories of deaths, and whether or not they fit my prior analyses (here and here).
Note, I ran a sensitivity analysis on the assumed values for the expected numbers of deaths in the “3 or more” categories.
I decided that since the poll leans to the young side, and I assume older people near death know fewer people [as some of their friends have passed away, and their focus narrows more to family], my bias leans toward the expected numbers of deaths not being particularly high. Since the COVID-19 curve has more positive responses than the COVID-19 vaccine curve, we should expect EV(3 or more) to be higher among the COVID-19 responses. My best reasonable guess is to take 5 and 4 as these values, respectively. But in the spreadsheet you will see that I ran a basic sensitivity analysis on various ratios without seeing tremendous movement in the proportions. Ultimately, under the assumption that there are 664,000 official COVID-19 deaths and essentially all excess deaths associated with COVID-19 vaccines were so categorized, then I compute the number of excess deaths associated with COVID-19 vaccines to be in the ballpark of
Note that this number is greater than the remaining number of COVID-19 deaths since vaccination began (by around 5,700). Interesting, Vaccine Truth’s original twitter polled asked about deaths since the vaccine program began and came out with nearly identically equal numbers (though I was still right to say that it wasn’t good evidence given that the attachment of the account to the topic loads the survey with so much bias---but it did get a lot of retweets).
Given 371 million administered doses, the estimated number of vaccine-induced deaths based on the professionally conducted survey comes out to be 470 deaths per million doses. The (very rough) range in my first analysis was 200 to 500, and the total from the second analysis was 411.
Yeah, but This is All Crazy Right-Wing Conspiracy Theory
As a young boy, I often knelt on my bed and prayed that the lord would see me through the journey of quitting nearly all of lucrative trading and giving up every one of my enjoyable consulting and teaching jobs to run a substack devoted to right-wing conspiracy theory that would result in broken relationships and ridicule. Um...just kidding. Do I need to explain to anyone how that never happened?
Never in my life did I expect to be labeled "right-wing", though I don’t lean left either. I'd like to see a world in which we solve the game theoretic tensions between the wings and align interests. I like the way Chris Martenson says, “I don’t do right-left, I do up-down.” Though I think during the pandemic, what we’re seeing is people of all sorts of political stripes (or none) coming together behind the drive to better investigate COVID-19 vaccines and other “pandemic facts”. The only serious bias I can establish in my many communications is a desire for honest science and medicine---and to save lives. If you're imagining the researchers at the ACIP meeting to be some dudes in camo who flew to Atlanta clutching their guns to have a word with the CDC, you're so far off target that it's best to step back and re-examine the circumstances.
When I searched for a research assistant, I received over 100 emails that averaged perhaps six paragraphs long, and dozens of spreadsheets and PDFs written by all manner of concerned citizens, including a university professor afraid he is about to lose his job. At least a third of those people (I may have read 80 and stopped because it was all more than I could respond to) mentioned a friend or family member seriously injured or killed by a COVID-19 vaccine. I won't submit that into evidence, but I want for you to know.
I know far too much about response bias and survey statistics to suggest my computations above are convincing on their own. In isolation, they are a signal that should be investigated (and the FDA/CDC still respond to emails with vague dismissals of “we disagree” without stating their investigations, methods, or flaws they find in my work or that of others reaching similar conclusions). But the way I think about most evidence that I judge as more than pure coincidence is that consistency of results of different analyses drag up the credibility of the least precise form of evidence. That might be viewed as an evidentiary feedback loop consistent in spirit with hypothesis testing. The greater a cluster of results grows, the more meaningful it becomes.
Aside from a handful of weak critical responses, nobody yet has made a serious challenge of my analyses despite some barking on social media. David Wiseman, PhD (whom I have worked with a bit, and consider both an honest and very careful scientist) emailed me a suggestion that my range is a bit on the high side, and I dearly hope that he is correct. However, Panda’s Marc Girardot mentioned to me by email that he ran two similar analyses and came up with an estimate of 476 deaths per million doses. Among our several analyses, we have included roughly half the globe, and with scarcely little intersection. In an unsolicited comment that I was later forwarded, Paul Alexander, PhD called my analysis “great”, “well done”, and “rigorous”. That’s a great compliment as he seems to have credentials that suggest a high degree of experience.
So, in the future, I would like to recenter pejorative descriptions of myself and others in my research sphere to something more like “evidence-based conspiracy theorists”. If you disapprove of this request, please file a comment with the Ultimate Intergalactic Arbitration Council of Statistics and All Other Matters of which I am Administrator.
Squaring the Facts
The idea that vaccine-induced deaths simply don’t exist is a notion that seems to be pushed only within the United States, so far as I can tell. Understand that I’ve spoken with researchers and doctors in several dozen nations during the pandemic, and other people in more than that. But I’m sure you want citations, so here are a handful:
German pathologist Dr. Peter Schirmacher examined a few dozen bodies of those who died shortly after vaccination and raised the alarm stating his conclusion that 30% to 40% of them died due to the vaccination. Are any U.S. media outlets even talking about that? I’ll discuss the numbers more below.
Japanese researchers (Shimazawa and Ikeda, 2021) report an excess of women dying due to ischemic strokes in close temporal proximity to receiving Pfizer vaccine shots. Note the name of the Pfizer vaccine used here: tozinameran. Does anyone else wonder if having so many names for a single vaccine makes it hard to conduct international research on its effects?
Norway linked 13 deaths to vaccines at a time when only around 40,000 Norwegians had been vaccinated, and the post-mortem examinations were not yet all complete (and more deaths might have taken place later out of those 40,000). That suggests at least 325 deaths per million doses administered to that point in Norway.
A few weeks ago I received a spreadsheet of Medicare data that I believe to be some of the same evidence sent to attorney Thomas Renz who is suing the government over hiding vaccine associated deaths. If the data is correct, it showed 425,000 deaths after 29 million administered doses to medicare patients. Of course, it would be absurd to suggest all those deaths are due to vaccination. Actuarial data suggests that most of those deaths are "background" expected deaths, though I did not complete that analysis since I am uncertain how well the Medicare demographic maps to the population superset actuarial numbers (I did pay the bills in college doing actuarial work, so I know better than to go too far with population comparisons). But the point is that [obviously] plenty of Americans know somebody who died after getting vaccinated.
However, applying the “Schirmacher range estimate”, we get 127,500 to 170,000 deaths among the Medicare patients alone. There is also a pronounced temporal relationship to their deaths that looks a whole lot like that of the VAERS deaths:
Alas, the charade of zero COVID-19 vaccine deaths is coming to an end. Dr. Peter McCullough tended to a patient with clotting so bad that her legs turned black. After she died, her body was whisked to the morgue, but he tracked it down and demanded examination. The VAERS system will not immediately allow him to update the case as a death (requires CDC approval...and given how many doctors quit entering VAERS reports due to how irritatingly difficult the system is...we might guess some SAEs likely turned into deaths later). However, it will be on record as a vaccine-induced death.
Your Moment of Zen?
A few days ago I was sent an email about a debate to take place over the overall benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines in use. It is taking place in a venue that has decided to disallow anyone who has not been vaccinated.