Root cause has been assessed for U.K. Yellow Card vaccine deaths by Dr Tess Lawrie (who also drafted a superb meta-analysis of ivermectin efficacy in covid19).
She found, IIRC, that 70% of the vaccine associated deaths had a thromboembolic underpinning event.
As a biological scientist & one time toxicologist, I find that unsurprising. We…
Root cause has been assessed for U.K. Yellow Card vaccine deaths by Dr Tess Lawrie (who also drafted a superb meta-analysis of ivermectin efficacy in covid19).
She found, IIRC, that 70% of the vaccine associated deaths had a thromboembolic underpinning event.
As a biological scientist & one time toxicologist, I find that unsurprising. We’ve known for years that spike proteins on the surface of many coronaviruses which infect humans or animals can trigger blood coagulation.
The most likely explanation for substantial numbers of deaths (1:3000 people) post vaccination is exactly this: some of the agents land in the circulation & the huge variability of where taken up, how effectively taken up, how well transcribed, for how long & the balance of clotting v bleeding in that individual could conceivably yield outcomes where one dies, ten are seriously injured and 2989 get minor to no persistent side effects.
I think it’s possible there’s an additional root cause pathology beyond thromboembolic but I’m not sure it’s necessary to posit it.
This comment may be misconstrued as misleading, please add a link to the accepted manuscript or preprint. I hope the paper adheres to FAIR principals and publishes the data.
Your comment raises some questions pertaining to conclusions and root cause:
1) Are these vaccine deaths or deaths "WITH" a vaccine ? For example, the shift to sedentary lifestyles have created the conditions for increased thromboembolic events.
2) Have these deaths been associated with preexisting thromboembolic comorbidities ?
3) Has anyone really looked for increased risk of venous thromboembolism due lifestyle changes ?
As you've said, corona viruses have been long known to trigger coagulation events. Specifically, SARS corona proteins show interactions with human Poly(A) Binding Protein Cytoplasmic 4 (PABPC4), Serine/Cysteine Proteinase Inhibitor Clade G Member 1 (SERPING1) and Vitamin K epOxide Reductase Complex subunit 1 (VKORC1).
Trigger mechanisms are still unknown and conditions including amylase buildup at coagulation sites are a root cause or part of (normal) coagulation events. Without precise understanding of trigger events, there is no way to attribute vaccines proteins as a cause venous thromboembolic events.
If sufficient funding is made available, it should be figured out in the next 18 months.
What is the group "us"? Humans/Westerners, via vaccines?
If this is your prediction, would you be open to figuring out how to make a bet from this? There is probably some way to trade "resources Yeadon cares about, assuming mass death within 18 months" for "resources Human cares about, assuming no mass death within 18 months", even if we don't trust each other much.
Yeah, I was jumping between ideas quickly. Let me try again.
You said in your previous comment, "In 18 months, I expect most of us will be dead." I interpreted that to mean something like "most people alive in November 2021 will have died by May 2023." First I wanted to confirm you meant something like that. The rest of my comment assumes that's what you meant.
I think it is very unlikely that most people alive in November 2021 will have died by May 2023.
When I have a very strong disagreement with someone, and someday it will be objectively obvious who was correct, I often offer to bet. If I am very sure there will be a drought in Seattle next year, and Joe is very sure it won't happen, then we can both bet $5000 on it. Both of us expect to double our money, so it looks like a good idea on both sides, and we'll find out who was wrong later. It also lets us demonstrate that we really believe what we say.
If I'm not friends with Joe, then we'd find a trusted third party, pay in advance, and at the end the third party would pay out to the winner.
I'd like to do something like this if you're willing.
The problem is, depending how you think the mass death will play out, you might not expect the financial system to be intact in 18 months. So paying $5000 now for $10,000 later would sound like a bad investment to you. If that's true, we might still find a bet or trade that looks like a good deal from both our perspectives. It would take some brainstorming though. I am offering to work out a regular bet through a trusted third party, or to brainstorm how to do a bet that accounts for different beliefs about the financial system.
I don’t think you’ve the slightest idea what’s happening in the world, have you?
This entire “pandemic” is fraud. It’s objectives are fear & “mass formation” (check), mass vaccination (check) & installation of a control system (check).
Later, sovereign currencies & cash will be replaced by CBDCs, accessed using VaxPass (above).
It is my belief that once this totalitarian tyranny is in place, depopulation will begin, end goal around 1 billion or less.
I’m uninterested in your bet. I’ve sufficient money. I’d love to be wrong. If I’m right, I can’t collect because one or both of us won’t be here.
I reserve the right to modestly extend the timescales, which you won’t object to since it’s immaterial to your presumption all is normal.
That's pretty a pessimistic outlook. The rate of mutation is worrisome, but not at the rate of panic... yet. There's not been a trustworthy study looking at broad vaccine effectiveness or populations with natural immunity.
A while ago, I guestimated 28% natural immunity due to genetic disposition, so that would account for 1.3B survivors.
I truly believe delta variant should be reclassified as another strain due to pathological differences from earlier versions. We shouldn't not be calling "Delta" variant SARS/CoV2, but something more like SARS/CoV3 due to break though events.
You are correct stating we're at war, however the political frameworks and radical media outlets are insistent on calling invasions an "incursions". The Delta variant is more like an invasion of an axis power player, a battle from a different invading force. This type of repositioning would reignite interest in combating the disease instead providing "the knuckle heads" an excuse to make false claims interventions are a failure and we all should give up and die. A very european attitude.
If people continue to die from SARS/CoV2 at 2020 rates (5.17M/yr) and there are no births, the human race will be wiped out in about 1500 years (lol). Fortunately, humans are reproducing at over 105M/yr. That's 20X the SARS/CoV2 mortality rate.
Maybe we'll end up in a dystopian future, like a star trek episode, where people die off as they become adults and the world is run by children (politicians).
I wasn’t clear. The “virus” isn’t the threat. At worst it takes a low % of elderly & ill, just like scores of respiratory viruses do, while virtually no healthy & younger die.
Oh yeah, that is an issue. I've discussed this before. I have no good answers due to social complexities, more specifically prominent presentation of suspicion breeding, territorialism when societies are under existential stress.
I've said this before, every response to cataclysmic events is a political response. Politicians are in charge of cashflows making political processes a critical, gating element of response. The problem with this system is democratic processes slowing response tempo and tactical focus.
As far as history records, a fundamental tenet of society has been the preservation of life. Pre-govt individual members of society accepted a personal, social responsibility to share food, housing education, caring for the ill, and elder members of social groups. Governance and politics has been that means to organize society assuring the execution of social tenets. Elements in modern govt (through election sponsorships and personal gain) are more open to preserving productive portions of society vs other deemed as a social burden (eg. on the dole). Then others are more "traditional/conservative" elements wanting to preserve life as a means to remain in power. Then there are members of society with expectations govt will protect their interests like staying alive, having available food, housing and a working health care system. This last segment of society is where democratic and parliamentary govts worry. Please note, what is usually considered "liberal" political ideology is actually the traditional sense of governance and personal social responsibility. The common conservative political ideology is a aberration and some may considered a defect compared to traditional social tenets and values (morality).
Political compromise is a critical part of all govts. And compromise is a part of, in this case, pandemic response. Conflicts arise when ideological priorities are unrecognized, under mediated, or unwilling accept collective agreements. The inability to accept mediated agreements may be considered a form of sociopathy, placing other lives at at risk for abstract ideologies. The question must be asked, is ones ideology worth more than the life of your child or grandchild ? If you answer ideology is more important than your child's life, many would question senses of empathy, sympathy, social responsibility and whether one is treating a person's life as an object, which I believe is considered a symptom of sociopathic mental disorders.
We also tend to compare lab experimental conditions with the real world. This is a dangerous approach when dealing with the natural world. The number of unaccounted pathways for infection and mutagenesis often result in unexpected outcomes. Politicians try to recreate lab conditions in society, where immutable barriers have somehow become aspirational in social settings. But, it's all we really have at this point. As new/better treatments emerge and the virus culls the population (to survivors with natural defenses), our response to pathogen threats will improve. Remember this is the first time in history we can track a pathogen's progress with precision. We will learn which methods are best placed based on evolution of other interventions ( pharmaceuticals at this point).
The situation is complex with no clear best answers. The only way to understand a way forward is contextualizing the big picture, whether you want a society based on a pure economic value of people (as exploitable resources) or a more traditional, conservative society with a sense of personal responsibility focused on tenets to preserve people's lives.
Were Dr Lawrie's assessments in the time of adenovirus AZ jabs? Adenoviruses were an already known as a cause of clotting when accidentally administered IV.
with over 170 epitomes crossing numerous cell type eg pneumonocytes and endothelium, traditional pathological assessment methods will be seriously challenged classifying underpinning events
Root cause has been assessed for U.K. Yellow Card vaccine deaths by Dr Tess Lawrie (who also drafted a superb meta-analysis of ivermectin efficacy in covid19).
She found, IIRC, that 70% of the vaccine associated deaths had a thromboembolic underpinning event.
As a biological scientist & one time toxicologist, I find that unsurprising. We’ve known for years that spike proteins on the surface of many coronaviruses which infect humans or animals can trigger blood coagulation.
The most likely explanation for substantial numbers of deaths (1:3000 people) post vaccination is exactly this: some of the agents land in the circulation & the huge variability of where taken up, how effectively taken up, how well transcribed, for how long & the balance of clotting v bleeding in that individual could conceivably yield outcomes where one dies, ten are seriously injured and 2989 get minor to no persistent side effects.
I think it’s possible there’s an additional root cause pathology beyond thromboembolic but I’m not sure it’s necessary to posit it.
This comment may be misconstrued as misleading, please add a link to the accepted manuscript or preprint. I hope the paper adheres to FAIR principals and publishes the data.
Your comment raises some questions pertaining to conclusions and root cause:
1) Are these vaccine deaths or deaths "WITH" a vaccine ? For example, the shift to sedentary lifestyles have created the conditions for increased thromboembolic events.
2) Have these deaths been associated with preexisting thromboembolic comorbidities ?
3) Has anyone really looked for increased risk of venous thromboembolism due lifestyle changes ?
As you've said, corona viruses have been long known to trigger coagulation events. Specifically, SARS corona proteins show interactions with human Poly(A) Binding Protein Cytoplasmic 4 (PABPC4), Serine/Cysteine Proteinase Inhibitor Clade G Member 1 (SERPING1) and Vitamin K epOxide Reductase Complex subunit 1 (VKORC1).
Trigger mechanisms are still unknown and conditions including amylase buildup at coagulation sites are a root cause or part of (normal) coagulation events. Without precise understanding of trigger events, there is no way to attribute vaccines proteins as a cause venous thromboembolic events.
If sufficient funding is made available, it should be figured out in the next 18 months.
In 18 months, I expect most of us will be dead.
You’re writing as if we’re in peacetime yet we are unquestionably at war.
What is the group "us"? Humans/Westerners, via vaccines?
If this is your prediction, would you be open to figuring out how to make a bet from this? There is probably some way to trade "resources Yeadon cares about, assuming mass death within 18 months" for "resources Human cares about, assuming no mass death within 18 months", even if we don't trust each other much.
You might try a more precise comment because I’ve literally no idea what you meant.
I am tired though, so it’s just as likely it’s me.
Yeah, I was jumping between ideas quickly. Let me try again.
You said in your previous comment, "In 18 months, I expect most of us will be dead." I interpreted that to mean something like "most people alive in November 2021 will have died by May 2023." First I wanted to confirm you meant something like that. The rest of my comment assumes that's what you meant.
I think it is very unlikely that most people alive in November 2021 will have died by May 2023.
When I have a very strong disagreement with someone, and someday it will be objectively obvious who was correct, I often offer to bet. If I am very sure there will be a drought in Seattle next year, and Joe is very sure it won't happen, then we can both bet $5000 on it. Both of us expect to double our money, so it looks like a good idea on both sides, and we'll find out who was wrong later. It also lets us demonstrate that we really believe what we say.
If I'm not friends with Joe, then we'd find a trusted third party, pay in advance, and at the end the third party would pay out to the winner.
I'd like to do something like this if you're willing.
The problem is, depending how you think the mass death will play out, you might not expect the financial system to be intact in 18 months. So paying $5000 now for $10,000 later would sound like a bad investment to you. If that's true, we might still find a bet or trade that looks like a good deal from both our perspectives. It would take some brainstorming though. I am offering to work out a regular bet through a trusted third party, or to brainstorm how to do a bet that accounts for different beliefs about the financial system.
I don’t think you’ve the slightest idea what’s happening in the world, have you?
This entire “pandemic” is fraud. It’s objectives are fear & “mass formation” (check), mass vaccination (check) & installation of a control system (check).
Later, sovereign currencies & cash will be replaced by CBDCs, accessed using VaxPass (above).
It is my belief that once this totalitarian tyranny is in place, depopulation will begin, end goal around 1 billion or less.
I’m uninterested in your bet. I’ve sufficient money. I’d love to be wrong. If I’m right, I can’t collect because one or both of us won’t be here.
I reserve the right to modestly extend the timescales, which you won’t object to since it’s immaterial to your presumption all is normal.
That's pretty a pessimistic outlook. The rate of mutation is worrisome, but not at the rate of panic... yet. There's not been a trustworthy study looking at broad vaccine effectiveness or populations with natural immunity.
A while ago, I guestimated 28% natural immunity due to genetic disposition, so that would account for 1.3B survivors.
I truly believe delta variant should be reclassified as another strain due to pathological differences from earlier versions. We shouldn't not be calling "Delta" variant SARS/CoV2, but something more like SARS/CoV3 due to break though events.
You are correct stating we're at war, however the political frameworks and radical media outlets are insistent on calling invasions an "incursions". The Delta variant is more like an invasion of an axis power player, a battle from a different invading force. This type of repositioning would reignite interest in combating the disease instead providing "the knuckle heads" an excuse to make false claims interventions are a failure and we all should give up and die. A very european attitude.
If people continue to die from SARS/CoV2 at 2020 rates (5.17M/yr) and there are no births, the human race will be wiped out in about 1500 years (lol). Fortunately, humans are reproducing at over 105M/yr. That's 20X the SARS/CoV2 mortality rate.
Maybe we'll end up in a dystopian future, like a star trek episode, where people die off as they become adults and the world is run by children (politicians).
I wasn’t clear. The “virus” isn’t the threat. At worst it takes a low % of elderly & ill, just like scores of respiratory viruses do, while virtually no healthy & younger die.
No, the virus has been got up to scare people, install mass psychosis https://rokfin.com/stream/9705/Foreign-Agents-10--Covid-and-Mass-Hypnosis?fbclid=IwAR06IUt2i8FMpA8RthiQRJpPl5ApwADvMff3j4lt79QBhblMcImhzkTV6aU
And from there, using vaccines to create VaxPass, boosters for mass depopulation & move to totalitarian tyranny.
Oh yeah, that is an issue. I've discussed this before. I have no good answers due to social complexities, more specifically prominent presentation of suspicion breeding, territorialism when societies are under existential stress.
I've said this before, every response to cataclysmic events is a political response. Politicians are in charge of cashflows making political processes a critical, gating element of response. The problem with this system is democratic processes slowing response tempo and tactical focus.
As far as history records, a fundamental tenet of society has been the preservation of life. Pre-govt individual members of society accepted a personal, social responsibility to share food, housing education, caring for the ill, and elder members of social groups. Governance and politics has been that means to organize society assuring the execution of social tenets. Elements in modern govt (through election sponsorships and personal gain) are more open to preserving productive portions of society vs other deemed as a social burden (eg. on the dole). Then others are more "traditional/conservative" elements wanting to preserve life as a means to remain in power. Then there are members of society with expectations govt will protect their interests like staying alive, having available food, housing and a working health care system. This last segment of society is where democratic and parliamentary govts worry. Please note, what is usually considered "liberal" political ideology is actually the traditional sense of governance and personal social responsibility. The common conservative political ideology is a aberration and some may considered a defect compared to traditional social tenets and values (morality).
Political compromise is a critical part of all govts. And compromise is a part of, in this case, pandemic response. Conflicts arise when ideological priorities are unrecognized, under mediated, or unwilling accept collective agreements. The inability to accept mediated agreements may be considered a form of sociopathy, placing other lives at at risk for abstract ideologies. The question must be asked, is ones ideology worth more than the life of your child or grandchild ? If you answer ideology is more important than your child's life, many would question senses of empathy, sympathy, social responsibility and whether one is treating a person's life as an object, which I believe is considered a symptom of sociopathic mental disorders.
We also tend to compare lab experimental conditions with the real world. This is a dangerous approach when dealing with the natural world. The number of unaccounted pathways for infection and mutagenesis often result in unexpected outcomes. Politicians try to recreate lab conditions in society, where immutable barriers have somehow become aspirational in social settings. But, it's all we really have at this point. As new/better treatments emerge and the virus culls the population (to survivors with natural defenses), our response to pathogen threats will improve. Remember this is the first time in history we can track a pathogen's progress with precision. We will learn which methods are best placed based on evolution of other interventions ( pharmaceuticals at this point).
The situation is complex with no clear best answers. The only way to understand a way forward is contextualizing the big picture, whether you want a society based on a pure economic value of people (as exploitable resources) or a more traditional, conservative society with a sense of personal responsibility focused on tenets to preserve people's lives.
Were Dr Lawrie's assessments in the time of adenovirus AZ jabs? Adenoviruses were an already known as a cause of clotting when accidentally administered IV.
Thank!
Where is the best place to get this injection in order to minimize the risk of spike protein getting into the blood stream?
Thank you.
with over 170 epitomes crossing numerous cell type eg pneumonocytes and endothelium, traditional pathological assessment methods will be seriously challenged classifying underpinning events
"epitome" ...I do not think that this word means what you think it means
Apple autocorrect won't let me change it to e-p-i-t-o-p-e-s