Thursday, January 05, 2023

Daily Stirrer News Headlines, 5 January 2023



  • CDC’s VAERS safety signal analysis based on reports from Dec. 14, 2020 – July 29, 2022 for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines shows clear safety signals for death and a range of highly concerning thrombo-embolic, cardiac, neurological, hemorrhagic, hematological, immune-system and menstrual adverse events (AEs) among U.S. adults.

  • There were 770 different types of adverse events that showed safety signals in ages 18+, of which over 500 (or 2/3) had a larger safety signal than myocarditis/pericarditis.

  • The CDC analysis shows that the number of serious adverse events reported in less than two years for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is 5.5 times larger than all serious reports for vaccines given to adults in the US since 2009 (~73,000 vs. ~13,000).

  • Twice as many mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reports were classified as serious compared to all other vaccines given to adults (11% vs. 5.5%). This meets the CDC definition of a safety signal.

  • There are 96 safety signals for 12-17 year-olds, which include: myocarditis, pericarditis, Bell’s Palsy, genital ulcerations, high blood pressure and heartrate, menstrual irregularities, cardiac valve incompetencies, pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrhythmias, thromboses, pericardial and pleural effusion, appendicitis and perforated appendix, immune thrombocytopenia, chest pain, increased troponin levels, being in intensive care, and having anticoagulant therapy.

  • There are 66 safety signals for 5-11 year-olds, which include: myocarditis, pericarditis, ventricular dysfunction and cardiac valve incompetencies, pericardial and pleural effusion, chest pain, appendicitis & appendectomies, Kawasaki’s disease, menstrual irregularities, vitiligo, and vaccine breakthrough infection.

  • The safety signals cannot be dismissed as due to “stimulated,” exaggerated, fraudulent or otherwise artificially inflated reporting, nor can they be dismissed due to the huge number of COVID vaccines administered. There are several reasons why, but the simplest one is this: the safety signal analysis does not depend on the number of reports, but whether or not some AEs are reported at a higher rate for these vaccines than for other non-COVID vaccines. Other reasons are discussed in the full post below.

  • In August, 2022, the CDC told the Epoch Times that the results of their safety signal analysis “were generally consistent with EB [Empirical Bayesian] data mining [conducted by the FDA], revealing no additional unexpected safety signals.” So either the FDA’s data mining was consistent with the CDC’s method—meaning they "generally" found the same large number of highly alarming safety signals—or the signals they did find were expected. Or they were lying. We may never know because the FDA has refused to release their data mining results.


Finally! Zachary Stieber at the Epoch Times managed to get the CDC to release the results of its VAERS safety signal monitoring for COVID-19 vaccines, and they paint a very alarming picture (see his reporting and the data files here, or if that is behind a paywall then here). The analyses cover VAERS reports for mRNA COVID vaccines from the period from the vaccine rollout on December 14, 2020 through to the end of July, 2022. The CDC admitted to only having started its safety signal analysis on March 25, 2022 (coincidentally 3 days after a lawyer at Children’s Health Defense wrote to them reminding them about our FOIA request for it). ... Continue reading >>>


Thousands Of Doctors Are Now Warning To STOP THE SHOT Immediately


- We were warned long ago the US government would use soft-kill methods to carry out genocide!

By Joel S. Hirschhorn of the Pandemic Blunder Newsletter for All News Pipeline

With a National Survey finding 28% of people polled know of a death caused by COVID-19 'vaccines,' it's way past time for more Americans to see the truth: COVID vaccines are lethal as well as ineffective. These new survey results add ammunition to the war against the government to take COVID vaccines off the market. 

About the new survey 

A Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 American Adults was conducted on December 28-30, 2022. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC, and is considered valid and representative of American sentiment. 

Survey results 

Consistent with a prior Zogby survey, Rasmussen found seventy-one percent (71%) say they have received a COVID-19 vaccination, while 26% have not. Concerns about vaccine safety are much higher among the unvaccinated. However the vaccinated appear to be waking up to the harms of the shots. 

Among the vaccinated, many of whom pushed the COVID-19 shots on family members or in the workplace, now 38% consider unexplained deaths from the vaccine at least somewhat likely. Whereas among those who wisely declined the vaccines, 77% of adults believe it’s at least somewhat likely that side effects of COVID-19 vaccines have caused a significant number of unexplained deaths. 

While 45% of the unvaccinated think someone they know personally might have died from vaccine side effects, only 22% of vaccinated adults know of a vaccine death making the population average a stunning 28%!

Continue reading >>>

Deaths registered in England and Wales were a massive 20.7% above the five-year average in the week ending December 23rd, according to the latest data from the ONS. There were a total of 14,530 deaths that week, which is 2,493 above the five-year average. Of these, 429 involved COVID-19 as a contributory cause and 308 were due to Covid as underlying cause, leaving 2,185 excess non-Covid deaths. Of the total, 829 deaths were recorded as due to ‘influenza and pneumonia’ as underlying cause. The total number of excess non-Covid deaths since the surge began in April is now just shy of 30,000 at 29,880.


Continue reading >>>

Ukraine: Big Push To End The War

Source: Moon of Alabama

Over Christmas I had a short talk with a relative about the war in Ukraine. He asked me who would win and was astonished when I said: "Ukraine has zero chance to win." That person reads some German mainstream news sites and watches the public TV networks. With those sources of 'information' he was made to believe that Ukraine was winning the war. One may excuse that with him never having been in a military and not being politically engaged. But still there are some basic numbers that let one conclude from the beginning that Russia, the much bigger, richer and more industrialized country, had clearly all advantages. 
My relative obviously never had had that thought. The 'western' propaganda is still quite strong. However, as I pointed out in March last year propaganda does not change a war and lies do not win it. Its believability is shrinking. Former Lt.Col. Alex Vershinin, who in June pointed out that industrial warfare is back and the 'West' was not ready to wage it, has a new recommendable piece out which analyses the tactics on both sides, looks ahead and concludes that Russia will almost certainly win the war: 
Wars of attrition are won through careful husbandry of one’s own resources while destroying the enemy’s. Russia entered the war with vast materiel superiority and a greater industrial base to sustain and replace losses. They have carefully preserved their resources, withdrawing every time the tactical situation turned against them. Ukraine started the war with a smaller resource pool and relied on the Western coalition to sustain its war effort. This dependency pressured Ukraine into a series of tactically successful offensives, which consumed strategic resources that Ukraine will struggle to replace in full, in my view. 
The real question isn’t whether Ukraine can regain all its territory, but whether it can inflict sufficient losses on Russian mobilized reservists to undermine Russia’s domestic unity, forcing it to the negotiation table on Ukrainian terms, or will Russian’ attrition strategy work to annex an even larger portion of Ukraine. Russian domestic unity has only grown over the war. As Gilbert Doctorow points out wars make nations. The war does not only unite certain nationalistic parts of Ukraine who still dream of retaking Crimea. It also unites all of Russia. Continue reading >>>

Eugenicists aim to destroy the role of mother and take control of life-creating processes

Source: Expose-news, by Rhoda Wilson

A special edition of Ecologie & Politique has warned that the eugenicists behind test-tube babies and surrogate motherhood now have their sights on genetic engineering and artificial wombs which would cut women out of the reproductive process.

Previously we published an article about EctoLife’s artificial womb. Its developer and promoter, Hashem Al-Ghaili believes the EctoLife concept could one day supplant traditional birth.  It will “reinvent evolution” as it would allow “parents” to select only viable and “genetically superior embryos” and “genetically engineer the[ir] embryo before implanting it into the artificial womb.”

We raised questions about what happens to the babies that are grown in the laboratory and then “parents” decide they don’t want.  And there are several other moral and ethical questions that arise such as whether babies will be manufactured purely to be used in experiments or for other nefarious purposes. 

The authors of the articles in Ecologie & Politique explore, among others, the detrimental social and transhumanist aspects of a world without mothers.

Would any of us want to live in a world without mothers?  The question may sound absurd, but the eugenicists behind test-tube babies and surrogate motherhood now have their sights on genetic engineering and artificial wombs which would cut women out of the reproductive process.  This is the warning sounded in a powerful special edition of the French journal Ecologie & Politique, which has sparked some controversy.

No comments: