Video of Analysis of "Patterns of Deployment of Toxic Covid Batches" (Toxic Batches Appear to be Systematically Released)
(www.bitchute.com)
🤢 These people are sick! 🤮
Comments (75)
sorted by:
The fact that the timing of toxic batches doesnt overlap at all between these companies is pretty damning. This exposes the coordination of criminal activity.
It doesn't expose anything because we don't have enough data, and are making too many assumptions.
If a hospital system who is a high reporter of death rotates between suppliers, it's going to make it look like those suppliers are rotating their toxic batches.
Since some hospitals are higher reporters to VAERS than others, and not everyone buying new doses at the same time, and a host of other factors will produce all kinds of patterns in the data which doesn't actually mean anything.
The only take away we have is that these vaccines are not safe. Beyond that, you cannot draw reliable conclusions from incomplete data, as most never report.
Incorrect, you have fundamentally misunderstood the data.
Please explain how.
By your logic, if there's two dangerous products, and one is purchased by a hospital which reports defects, and the second is purchased by a hospital which does not report defects, the conclusion is that the second product is completely safe. Such a conclusion is absurd.
There's many variables that can explain why you're seeing a particular pattern. The conclusion reached in this video is one explanation of a pattern, and it's one of the lesser likely ones. Trying to take partial data and use it as a defense for one particular explanation of a pattern is garbage statistics.
Coordination to use people as guinea pigs without their knowledge, to experiment with harmful drugs.
This means ...
CONSPIRACY.
I mean, people knew this was an experiment from the beginning and signed wavers to take the damn thing, I almost dont feel bad for them.
the data means they delivered on their promise. they promised it would be an experiment and death is an expected outcome, with zero promise of effectiveness. EUA means, you're a volunteer monkey. The data shows the experimentation in progress. they knew toxic batches would destroy lives and they never lifted a finger to "pull" the toxic batches. they know they are safe leaving the toxic batches in circulation, the monkies signed the waiver. the politics are set in place to herd the monkies into booster roulette. all the while it provides zero protection against CV19.
they're just pissed the original CV19 didn't cull as many as planned. meanwhile they're tuning the vax to cull and releasing tuned CV20, CV21, CV22 to up the total cull. each shot is an 80% no adverse reaction. at booster 1 (3rd jab) you have a 50% chance of bad juju. at booster 3 you have a 74% bad juju outcome. FYI, Israel is now at booster 2- people dying like files, booster 3 will be required in 1st quarter.
At the 9:15 mark, an utterly horrific/fascinating data point. There appears to be coordination among the major "vaccine" manufacturers in releasing toxic batches.
One company releases toxic batches for a period of time, then as soon as they stop, another manufacturer starts releasing toxic batches.
I cannot come up with a scenario other than close coordination between them.
A lot of big questions remain:
EDIT: To whomever the mod was that stickied this, thank you. This video deserves serious analysis and discussion.
Could be something like everyone taking a stab at ceasar, so everyone is in it together. That's all I could really think of.
"OK we all have to be part of the killing or we cant be sure someone won't flip"
It doesn't show coordination between the manufacturers at all. All it shows is buying patterns have changed over time. Rotating between suppliers for items which are mostly interchangeable is normal.
You don't have the full data regarding how big the batches are, who is buying them, when are they buying them, how much from each are they buying. Without the full data, you cannot draw any reliable conclusions.
For the data presented to be correct, it would have to have equal sized batches, that are distributed evenly, and simultaneously to hospitals, doctors, and clinics everywhere, from all manufacturers. That is surely not happening.
You have no way of knowing if it was consumed as quickly as it was made. It could have been damaged in transport, forgotten in a back room and thrown out, shipped off to another country, or a whole slew of other possibilities.
Seeing patterns in data is meaningless. If you cannot isolate away an exact cause for a particular pattern, you cannot draw a specific conclusion from the pattern.
I work with real data too. That's why I know about selection biases and similar issues. Most statistics are junk.
The VAERS system only covers 1% of actual cases, this is well known, not contrived. Most doctors don't even know what it is. Any statistics you try to draw from VAERS is going to slanted towards those who know about and use the system.
It also doesn't provide a full picture of anything you look at. If one batch is 10 times the size of the other, and the amount of adverse effects is 10 times the size of the other, then both batches are just as deadly and have the same percentage of adverse effects, although one of them is going to look 10 times worse, when it isn't.
Since the batch data is woefully incomplete in a variety of aspects, I have the luxury to tell you any conclusions drawn with it is pure fantasy.
I recommend reading "How to lie with statistics" and "Statistics done wrong".
I wonder if each drug maker used a slightly different method of toxicity, and they are comparing and contrasting the differences and similarities.
Thanks for posting. I’m glad someone is doing this research.
Bingo
My 85 year old grandparents (both in horrible health) got both shots of Pfizer 6 months ago and never noticed a single symptom. Another close relative also got Pfizer and noticed no symptoms. Yet I know many others that had horrible side effects for 48 hours. Not sure what to think…
Waiting to see if there’s long term damage on loved ones who show no symptoms is stressful. I pray the Lord’s protection on my family and friends daily.
I know someone in a nearby city who had adverse reactions. She saif that everyone in her circle also had serious issues.
I am interested to see the data points that come in once people begin to connect the dots and start realizing that their symptoms were adverse events.
My theory is the first comers all got placebos for being good little sheep and free advertising.
The rest roll the dice. Some special saline rounds for high status folks.
It would apoear so. And the good little early-adopter sheep will now be "rewarded" for their ignorant obedience when they get the boosters (that are composed of the "real" roulette wheel of toxicity).
Of course, they'll not connect the dots because "everything was ok after the first jab or two, so the jabs are TOTALLY safe".
"Ignorance is bliss", . . , until it hurts or kills you.
It's not. This video and all the previous ones posted like it are just bad at statistics. They're finding patterns in the incomplete data which don't mean anything, and are trying to draw conclusions from it. See my other recent posts for more info.
This is pretty much the only accurate conclusion drawn in this thread.
This seems to important research. The implementation has been systematic, deliberate, and coordinated.
It's garbage research which is (inadvertently) lying with statistics. Since not all doctors/hospitals are reporting injuries (only 1% report), the data from a pattern point of view is worthless. This data here at best vaguely shows some buying patterns from those that are more likely to report an issue.
All vaccines across all batches should be viewed as extremely dangerous and toxic.
If we had freedom of speech or anything approaching it, this would be one BFD.
Neatly spaced over time seperate releases of toxic batches were shipped. Moderna first, then J&J and then Phitzer. It seems more than enough suspicious evidence for criminal investigations to commence. Somebody Call the Cops!!!!
Very few batches were toxic, that's my favorite take away. Will try and research for my relatives if they know batch #s. Hopefully they got missed. All batches are not created equal.
Moderna first, then J&J, then Pfizer means someone who is a high reporter of issues bought in those orders. It doesn't mean anything regarding the quality of the item at the time.
All batches are toxic. The ones which seem safe were probably smaller batches, or batches where a large amount was damaged in shipment and not used, or something of that nature. You cannot compare vastly different numbers with incomplete data and expect to walk away with any reliable conclusions.
Remember back in the 80's when there was an urban legend about psychos spiking Halloween candy with diseased needles? Well this is pretty much the real life version of that nightmare.
Programmer here ---
I downloaded the VAERS data and started to write some code to replicate the results.
There's one BIG assumption being made here, which is that 'all batches are the same size'. We have no confirmation of that.
You could see the exact same 'anomalies' with a consistently 'moderate toxic' formula and differing batch sizes.
Extremely small batches would have almost no adverse effects, and large batches would have many adverse effects - with no difference in toxicity.
The Pfizer 'ramp down' could be a gradual lowering of batch sizes (interspersed with minuscule batches).
I am not trying to say the vaxxes are ok -- in fact I actually suggested this kind of 'toxicity tweaking' as a theory about a month ago.
I'm just saying that without knowing the batch sizes, this is not a smoking gun.
Here's the previous theory -- do they line up?
If they give SALINE to almost everyone (the first time around), they still get ALL of their EVIL BENEFITS. Here's how...
https://greatawakening.win/p/13zgXB5572/if-they-give-saline-to-almost-ev/
Thought experiment for critical thinkers:
Pick a 'standard batch size' - for example, 10,000 doses per batch.
If the batches are that size or smaller, then the 'most toxic' batches would show one adverse reaction for every two or three patients. I have a hard time believing that would go unnoticed by even the most jaded doctor or nurse.
If the batches are that size or larger, then we quickly exceed the total number of doses produced ('avg batch size' times 'number of batches').
I think it's impossible that each batch is the same size.
Again, this is just a thought experiment -- I don't have real numbers to compare it to.
Thanks for being one of the few in this thread who is a critical thinker, and has some understanding regarding garbage statistics.
Batch size is one of the problems. Even for identical batch sizes, they aren't necessarily all injected. Large amounts of a batch might have been thrown away for a variety of reasons, like damage during shipment, or sitting on a shelf too long and expiring.
There's a ton of other issues aside from size, see my other posts in this thread for more.
The 'batch number' data entry is terrible.
I estimate that there are (roughly) 300 true batch numbers, but there are more than 40,000 additional 'botched' batch numbers (extraneous letters, '4' instead of 'A', extra spaces or periods, starts with '#', etc.).
Almost all of those botched batch numbers have only one entry (for obvious reasons), but a few have more than 100, such as 'batch number' "EUA", "PFIZER", "N/A", etc.
The analysis in the video is useless (as he clearly thinks there are far more than 300 actual batch numbers).
That is also a good point, and shows yet another problem with all this junk analysis of the VAERS data.
It's not just a 'problem', it completely invalidates the very premise of the analysis (that there are a lot of 'safe' batches).
'Worst pandemic in the world', and no one verifies (or fixes) the data. /smdh
On a side note, there is a database of Vax lot numbers - but the CDC won't release that info publicly. It is 'registered users' only, and private individuals will be denied access.
https://vaccinecodeset.cdc.gov/LotNumber/
Thanks for looking into this. I had a number of questions about this after watching the video. You bring up an excellent point.
Other questions I had were whether we know if batch numbers were really given in chronological order, and whether moderna, jognson and johnson, and pfizer batches are all distributed evenly across batch numbers or not.
I suspect he is getting the 'chronological order' of the batches by the dates of injection.
The three companies seem to use different batch numbering schemes.
He is somehow assigning a single date to each batch and making that his x-axis upon which all of his results depend. In the data I only see dates for each individual vaccination, not a date a vax lot was issued. I tried taking the mininum and the mean of the individual dates for each VAX_LOT but my plots look nothing like his. Mine are much more spread out with Pfizer and Moderna distributed across all of 2021. I am including the non-domestic data in order to get the fullest picture possible. He needs to provide more details on how to reproduce what he did to support his remarks. Many folks are happy to jump to the most nefarious conclusions without rigorous backing.
I don't know if you've scrolled through the data to see what the 'batch names' look like, but there are huge swaths of useless batch numbers in the VAERS data. (And they would be downright misleading to a lazy analysis.)
I had to cull roughly one-third of the data due to missing batch numbers or batch numbers such as 'N/A', 'unk', 'idk', or 'Really?'. Huge numbers of them had a '#' prepended or were simply garbled text. If these were not culled, the analysis is (truly) worse than useless.
Each one of those 'garbled' batch numbers would look like a 'non-toxic' batch because each one would have exactly one 'adverse event'.
I wish I knew if the maker of the video did such a cull, or if a lot of these 'safe batches' are named 'unknown', '0.23.HG[..', or 'will find later'.
There's several different issues with the data presented. Different batch sizes is just one of the problems.
The data presented here only works when you assume every company is supplying the same size batches to everywhere at the same time. However, that's not necessarily the case. The distribution companies could look at availability from the different companies each time, and going with whatever makes sense in the moment. Some batches will go entirely to one area, some will be spread out more.
When you factor in some hospitals will be more likely to report a problem, while others not, rotating between suppliers, different size batches, drawing any conclusions from the data is meaningless.
You're saying a variable which explains the data is IMMATERIAL and then drawing a conclusion you prefer once you excluded an explanation you don't like.
The bucket effect is explained by variables you don't like. There is nothing random here, as all these variables you don't care for have a large outcome on the patterns you're noticing.
It could be that each company was 'tweaking' it's batch sizes during those windows - but not the formula/toxicity.
Note: I am NOT an apologist for the Vax companies. See my earlier post (above) for proof of my 'skepticism'.
True about the importance of the batch size - But I imagine there are process control standards. The other interesting pattern in the analysis is each vaccine company is clumped timewise so what would account for that?
Even with process control standards, a lot of 'partial batches' were discarded due to improper storage or expiration. I have no idea if this explains any of the variance.
With regard to the two separate time windows, it could be that each company was 'tweaking' it's batch sizes during those windows - but not the formula/toxicity.
Again, I am NOT an apologist for the Vax companies. See my earlier post (above) for proof of my 'skepticism'.
Let us know if your program can replicate the results of presentation. I think it would be worth doing… Also in the presentation it was hard to see what the actual timeline was date wise. I am curious If the second J&J cluster coincides with the April 13 pause that Trump put out a communication about. At the time I felt this pause was meaningful.
Trump Statement
APRIL 13, 2021 PALM BEACH, FL Statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America. The Biden Administration did a terrible disservice to people throughout the world by allowing the FDA and CDC to call a “pause” in the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine. The results of this vaccine have been extraordinary but now it’s reputation will be permanently challenged. The people who have already taken the vaccine will be up in arms, and perhaps all of this was done for politics or perhaps it’s the FDA’s love for Pfizer. The FDA, especially with long time bureaucrats within, has to be controlled. They should not be able to do such damage for possibly political reasons, or maybe because their friends at Pfizer have suggested it. They’ll do things like this to make themselves look important. Remember, it was the FDA working with Pfizer, who announced the vaccine approval two days after the 2020 Presidential Election. They didn’t like me very much because I pushed them extremely hard. But if I didn’t, you wouldn’t have a vaccine for 3-5 years, or maybe not at all. It takes them years to act! Do your testing, clean up the record, and get the Johnson & Johnson vaccine back online quickly. The only way we defeat the China Virus is with our great vaccines!
The first J&J cluster started roughly 1/15/21, and the second roughly 5/22/21
So basically right after the pause was the second J&j cluster taking into account a new formulation (speculation), then distributed and effects recorded
The pause was very suspect as it made no sense - 10 days later they lift the pause after review of data. You only need to look at VAERS to know that they are not pausing over concerns - I believe some other review / strategy needed to be adjusted.
If you speculate they may be tweaking batch size, what would be the motivation?
Why would batch size be a factor in their plan?
I rather can see a motivation for tweaking amount of ingredient x (99.9% tolerate ) as the vaccine was rushed and they didn’t have everything perfectly ready. Here is what I see From Canadian point of view - given that the source code for OpenVerify has eight doses and same with EU cards and given that PM ordered about 8 doses per person until 2025 - there is an optimal amount of doses they need. Is it because that is what is required for cumulative amount of ingredient X ? I am also going down this path since microscopic analysis from various source is also showing that there are “ingredients” present that should not be there.
To clarify, I'm not saying they are intentionally tweaking the batch size. (I assume batch sizes can change for all sorts of good or bad reasons.) I was only saying that variations in batch size could account for everything we're seeing here. (And I say that as someone who wants to find a smoking gun.)
See my earlier post for my take on intentional 'tweaking':
https://greatawakening.win/p/13zgXB5572/if-they-give-saline-to-almost-ev/
Does anyone have a data source that shows how big each (individual) batch is?
tallllkkkk slowerrrrrrrrrr
You mean “reeeeeeeeaaaad slowerrrrrr,” lol
Very interesting! So they are trying to figure out quantity of an added ingredient where the vast majority of humans would survive (no Alarm bells raised). This also may correspond with Trump rushing the vaccine as a good thing… They were not ready and perhaps 80% of the vaccines have zero amount of this ingredient. What I also read into this though is that the next batches will all contain this mystery additive. Perhaps one can also see a rushed keystone cops approach to trying to figure out value and Pfizer had to take over and do the experiment in a systematic fashion.
Very good, in depth, analysis of company to batches to adverse reactions.
More of ^ this!
Anybody involved in this should be kept alive as long as possible and tortured daily for the rest of their life.
It's a buggy platform. Turn your phone horizontal when full screening and it usually fills in.
Aw man, yeah bitchute is pretty buggy.