Long-term Lancet study, vaccines don’t prevent death

Follow-up of trial participants found ‘no effect on overall mortality’

~snippets:

“So how is it that mRNAs had no effect on all-cause mortality but protect against fatal COVID?”

either the vaccines “don’t really protect against COVID, or the nominal benefit is washed away by the mortality from adverse events.”

“What is clear, however, is that the mRNA vaccine makers understood that there was no mortality benefit for healthy people and pushed the shots on them anyway,

Horowitz pointed out that epidemiological data also indicate the shots are ineffective in reducing mortality overall.

Further, nearly every age bracket had a vaccination rate higher than 90%

New Zealand experienced nearly all of its deaths after all of that was accomplished

Dr. Meryl Nass, a clinician and epidemiologist, presented on her Substack page an analysis of CDC data on 30 million adults in California and New York, three-quarters of whom were vaccinated.

She found vaccinated Californians and New Yorkers were three times more likely to develop COVID than those who had prior immunity and were unvaccinated.

Further, vaccinated Californians had a higher rate of hospitalizations (severe illness) than those who were unvaccinated

Meanwhile, a former adviser to the FDA commissioner who continues to serve in an oversight role says the agency is ignoring its requirement to disclose clear safety and efficacy problems with the COVID-19 vaccines

MORE



What racket they cooked up eh?

 

It's Official! CDC and UK government data reveal the COVID vaccines do not prevent cases, transmission, severe illness or deaths

So what DO they do, and WHY are we using them?


"Our vaccines are working exceptionally well," Walensky told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. "They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death -- they prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission." https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html

Thus spoke Rochelle Walensky, CDC Director, in an August 5, 2021 interview with CNN's Wof Blitzer. She may have believed the vaccines prevented severe illness and death then, but she cannot possibly believe that now.

That was 8 months ago. The vaccines had barely been rolled out 8 months earlier. Now we have nearly 16 months of observation and what have we found? What has Rochelle's CDC revealed that contradicts her glib patter?

Over the past few days I have identified and analyzed such studies on my blog (here and here) and Substack. The data are from official sources, published by the US CDC and the UK's Office of National Statistics.









What is the bottom line?

High quality, official data obtained on over 30 million American adults and 48 million residents of England incontrovertibly reveal that:

1. Natural immunity was 3 times better at preventing cases than vaccination alone, even before Omicron.

2. Natural immunity was somewhat better at preventing serious illness, measured as hospitalizations, than vaccination alone, even before Omicron.

3. Boosters (a 3d shot) reduced the death rate in England of the vaccinated from Omicron, but the benefit was starting to drop off by January 2022.

4. Natural immunity provided 3 times more protection against infection (and therefore against transmission) than did double vaccination, during the Delta wave. After Omicron arrived, vaccine efficacy was even worse.

5. Overall, England's unvaccinated population had a lower COVID death rate during the Omicron wave than the COVID death rate in its doubly vaccinated population.

6. The vast majority of COVID deaths occur in those over 70. In this age group, the doubly vaccinated died from COVID at higher rates during Omicron than the unvaccinated.

THE REST

 

As important today as when Voltaire said it:
“Those that can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

Quickie Bio
I am a board-certified internal medicine physician. I have given 6 Congressional testimonies and testified for legislatures in Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Alaska, Colorado and New Brunswick, Canada on bioterrorism, Gulf War syndrome and vaccine safety/vaccine mandates. I have consulted for the World Bank, the Government Accountability Office, the Cuban Ministry of Health and the US Director of National Intelligence regarding the prevention, investigation and mitigation of chemical and biological warfare and pandemics. I was the first person in the world to investigate an outbreak and prove it was due to biological warfare, publishing the results in 1992. This was the world’s largest anthrax outbreak, which occurred during Rhodesia’s civil war. I was a main author, along with Robert F Kennedy Jr. and the NGO Childrens Health Defense, of a Citizen’s Petition to the FDA regarding the Covid vaccines' authorizations and their single approval, and a letter to the FDA and its vaccine advisory committee regarding the many reasons the vaccines are not suitable for children. I am also the author of detailed articles regarding the suppression of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin for treatment of Covid, which have been read by over 50,000 people on my website, and been reprinted on many other sites. I have been interviewed by all major US newspapers, TV networks, and numerous alternative channels.


Who Am I?

Meryl Nass, M.D.
Most-cited papers of mine include one investigating Zimbabwe's major anthrax epidemic and a review of anthrax vaccine's usefulness in biological warfare. A November, 2001 Congressional testimony in response to the anthrax letters may also be of interest. Below, I've posted photos taken when I'm not at work or in front of the computer. Contact me at merylnass@gmail.com
View my complete profile


Why am I blogging?

Because life is meant to be lived! The left side of this blog has photos of some peak experiences. And the right side contains information about which I am passionate.

Too many peoples' lives are characterized by lack of authenticity, and fear of acknowledging and expressing their true nature. Employees cannot say what they think at work, and in the corporate system we must squish ourselves into square holes when we are round pegs. We thus lose touch with our souls, becoming cogs in a soulless, profit-driven machine.

The culture of political correctness has meant, in medicine, that we ignore how the foundations of our science are being undermined by commercialism. Clinical data generated or presented by the manufacturers of drugs, vaccines and devices cannot be trusted: there are hundreds of studies proving this. But this fraudulent information continues to be the only data informing the approval of vaccines, drugs and devices.

MORE


This is very well said:
Too many peoples' lives are characterized by lack of authenticity, and fear of acknowledging and expressing their true nature. Employees cannot say what they think at work, and in the corporate system we must squish ourselves into square holes when we are round pegs. We thus lose touch with our souls, becoming cogs in a soulless, profit-driven machine.


.

 

Fake news.

 

The reason there was no mortality was that they didn't get the disease in the first place.

 

Maine Physician Suspended for COVID Misinformation
— Licensing agency says Meryl Nass must undergo neuropsych exam for her claims about COVID vaccine
by Cheryl Clark, Contributing Writer, MedPage Today January 13, 2022

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/96652

 

NOT for this, I believe it was a 30 day suspension and the reason for the suspension was because she legally prescribed (as many other physicians did) IVM and HQ...'at the patients request!!'

(When they cant bust them on anything else, da guv does that for people like you that without looking into it to see why she was suspended....'summarily', 'unfairly', write her and everything valid that she did off in a quip rather than take into consideration the facts, they want her to shut up about the fraud, at least she didnt 'coincidentally' have a car accident or commit suicide like so many other whistleblowers coincidentally do)

Your torpedo missed your attempted target
Feel free to try again...'on point'!

 

Yep, right out of Orwell. In a time of universal deception such as we have today, speaking the truth is a radical act.

Meryl Nass has spoken the truth and is being punished accordingly. Rather like Julian Assange in that regard. Rather like Simone Gold and so many others.

 

Off topic.

 

I actually do not see the study you're talking about because you waste space on things like blogs but based upon available info I think you're misinterpreting the results.

In statistics, there is something called power. A study must be sufficiently powered to be able to see an effect. If we reach at least 95% probability that an effect isn't random, we reject the null hypothesis (the default hypothesis is no effect). Not finding an effect can mean the study is underpowered to find it (cannot reject the null hypothesis), rather than that it isn't there. This is a study design issue, but the further away from 50:50 odds of an effect happening the harder it is to get sufficient statistical power.

So if we're talking about healthy and young participants in a safety study, it's extremely hard to reject the null hypothesis for covid death because covid is only rarely lethal against them. If we're talking about ecological data, an issue from your snippets is if 90% are vaccinated, the comparison group is not likely similar to the vaccinated group for a fair comparison. And was there really evidence of excess mortality from adverse events? I'd have to see the study, and it wasn't clearly cited in your post.

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/latest

 

Been sayin all along that all the testing is defective since no distinctions are made, therefore no data, and that seems like a wee bit of an important point all the way across the board!

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanmic/PIIS2666-5247(22)00287-7.pdf

 

So where is the link to the original research? I found a link to her (the nutcase dr) websites a link to world nut daily and a YouTube

If I am missing it I am sorry but your title is promising me an article in the lancet and that is what I want to read

 

why dont you simply go to the uk guv webste an pull their data? otherwise its all on hers in the op just follow the links

 

Everybody except the ignorant public has known this from the beginning!


CDC's COVID-19 prevention recommendations no longer differentiate based on a person's vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur, though they are generally mild (16), and persons who have had COVID-19 but are not vaccinated have some degree of protection against severe illness from their previous infection (17).s ...Aug 19, 2022

Summary of Guidance for Minimizing the Impact of COVID-19 ...
https://www.cdc.gov › mmwr › volumes

Updated CDC COVID guidelines remove distinction ... - ABC11
https://abc11.com › cdc-new-covid-guidelines-north-ca...
Aug 11, 2022 — The Centers for Disease Control gave unvaccinated people much of the same treatment as vaccinated people in updated guidance Thursday.

Posts claim CDC's new guidelines mean unvaccinated have ...
https://publichealthcollaborative.org › posts-claim-cdcs-...
Aug 13, 2022 — Posts claim CDC's new guidelines mean unvaccinated have same risk as vaccinated ... LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Share this: The CDC recently updated ...


CDC LONG OVERDUE: no distinction between vaxxed and ...
https://www.grantcountybeat.com › editorials › editorial
Aug 15, 2022 — Unvaccinated people now have the same guidance as vaccinated people. ·

 

Your title claims the research is published in the Lancet - is the title misleading?


Long-term Lancet study, vaccines don’t prevent death

 

@Kokomojojo

I came to check out your thread because of the Lancet study in your title, which I do not see here, only a link to Dr. Meryl Nass's newsletter. Is that all you are using, meaning I would need wade through that person's publication, to find whatever snippet they'd chosen, from the larger study? That's false advertising.

 

You literally just took the words right out of my mouth (see previous post).

 

False advertising??
WTH?
Nowhere do I say I posted the studies in the OP, larger smaller or otherwise.
Yes derived from studies posted in the lancet journal that she cites on her website.
In combination with the cdc backpedaling.
The graphs state from where the data is compiled.
Feel free to download the data for yourself and plop it into a spreadsheet.
You will get the same graph.


Crystal clear from the actual data that the unvaxed and vaxed lines do in fact converge and successive jabs can be seen to be less effective with each jab. Data was compiled from NY, Cal, and the UK gov databases.

 

We know for a fact that new zealand had over 90% vaccination and boost compliance across their population.

Next thing you know an aspirin will be classified as a vaccine since it helps reduce fever therefore preventing death!!



So what can we deduce about vax/'immunization' from the stats?

 

"Next thing you know an aspirin will be classified as a vaccine since it helps reduce fever therefore preventing death!!"

Seriously!

These propagandized and indoctrinated branch COVIDIANS will believe just about anything as long as some handpicked, megalomaniac government stooges tell them too!.....

 

Duh-- I'm talking about the thread TITLE. Like you couldn't understand that? Aren't thread titles supposed to match the title of the linked article? Is the title of the page of the Nass link, "Long-term Lancet Study, Vaccines Don't Prevent Death?" The answer, is "no." The title of the link-- and so what should be your thread title-- does not include the words, "Lancet Study," but, rather, is: "It's Official! CDC and UK government data reveal the COVID vaccines do not prevent cases, transmission, severe illness or deaths."

FYI.

 

Hmm...

Looks the same to me, unless font and color count?

 

Yes, that would be the link-- but I see no indication in your OP, of it being sourced from "Clark County Today." Nor do I see that link, in your OP. Lastly, when I use your OP's link, this is the site, at which I find myself:

https://merylnass.substack.com/p/its-official-cdc-and-uk-government?s=w

So, you now appear to only be compounding your initial insincerity, with a pathetic doubling down on it-- are you, by any chance, thinking of running in the Republican Presidential Primary?

Your claim, then, is that, somewhere in your OP, the site you actually did use, uses the same general phrase, from the beginning of the Lancet link, thereby justifying your use of that link, in your title?

 

I dont see a problem,
the title is not my creation,
as you can see the title above and headline both match the goog search.
you stand proven wrong.
So how can I help you?
you appear to be searching for a claim that you might actually get right to make up for your blunder because you made a religion out of the vax right?