The good news, as pointed out by a person sitting next to me, is that 300 or so days after the last dose, it appears that all-cause deaths are normal again. (the vaxxed and unvaxxed lines agree with each other)
this was an issue for many, when asked how long before you can say we are safe? For those who managed to get pressured into, say, one jab, and regretted it.
The answer, up until now, has been "We don't know"
I think that this data (especially the all-cause mortality first one) shows it quite clearly:
You will be safe 300 days after the last jab, according to this study of 18M subjects. But the risk is higher, and earlier, every time you get another jab.
All that I can say is that everyone I knew who only got the first two are still around today and in seemingly good health but who knows how many of them really got placebo's in the first rounds*. It's only those who took boosters who have been perpetually sick every month and such.
(I'm pretty convinced there were a lot of placebos when they were first rolled out as it would have been way too sus if tons of people dropped dead just after one shot. The boosters were meant to be where the real damage came from.)
That's in the second graph, where they sector and compare the number of jabs - against death.
What happens in the first graph (the all-cause mortality, vax vs. unvax one), is that there is a spike of deaths ( a hump) in the vaxxed, at around 100 days. Then, it tapers off. < So that could be considered the danger zone - say 90 - 120 days after the jab enters your arm.
Significant, is that the all cause mortality is about 5X the unvaxxed rate at that time. < This means one is 5X more likely to die if one is vaxxed at 90 - 120 days after said jab.
Next is the second graph: Remember this is an analysis of peaks, and the graphs count 'day 0' as the day u get a jab.
As Dr. Murakami noted, “We found that as the number of doses increases, the peak of deaths appears faster, meaning the more doses you get, the sooner you’re likely to die, within a shorter period. So, the risk increases with more doses.”
The peaks, or bumps, of vaxxed deaths appear sooner and harder, after each dose. < This means that the more jabs, the faster u die.
But the point I was making is: Say you have a change of heart, and don't get any more jabs - After 300 days, one can say, with statistical confidence now, that one is 'back to normal' - in terms of risk of death. (Provided there are is no lasting damage). And it significantly tapers off after 200 days.
It's looking for the silver lining in this damning report. May be of some use -
Don't know, but I do know that they let this experiment run for an unaceptable amount of time.
The FDA banned the Flu vax in the seventies after only a few dozen deaths.
But this type of vax vs. unvax data has been discouraged in the scientific literature, as many are paid to represent their pharma-research grant status.
One remembers the shenanigans to scrap someone from the medical register for even trying to compare unvaxxed blood to vaxxed blook.
If it says mRNA, then I suggest you leave before they jab you. The results show 5X increased all-cause mortality. That is unacceptable. Ban this.
You might still be ok with traditional 'single' vaccines. I wouldn't trust the 'cocktails' as in triple or quadruple barrel ones - like MMR or DTAP, as those mixtures usually have not been tested in synergy. It's like having four jabs at once, basically.
In my opinion, buyer beware.
I saw great results in an elderly person receiving B12 shots. But I would never recommend any 'vaccines' for anyone. Do what you will.
The good news, as pointed out by a person sitting next to me, is that 300 or so days after the last dose, it appears that all-cause deaths are normal again. (the vaxxed and unvaxxed lines agree with each other)
this was an issue for many, when asked how long before you can say we are safe? For those who managed to get pressured into, say, one jab, and regretted it.
The answer, up until now, has been "We don't know"
I think that this data (especially the all-cause mortality first one) shows it quite clearly:
You will be safe 300 days after the last jab, according to this study of 18M subjects. But the risk is higher, and earlier, every time you get another jab.
All that I can say is that everyone I knew who only got the first two are still around today and in seemingly good health but who knows how many of them really got placebo's in the first rounds*. It's only those who took boosters who have been perpetually sick every month and such.
I’m still hoping this is correct. Way too many people I know took them.
“Being right” isn’t worth it.
Well, 18 Million data points is something.
It both is and isn’t, per the placebo comment.
It’s should still be quite obvious that taking vaccines is a bad proposition at this point.
so say after 5 jabs- you’re still only safe 30 days after? Then all the other days after that your more likely to die? im trying to follow..
That's in the second graph, where they sector and compare the number of jabs - against death.
What happens in the first graph (the all-cause mortality, vax vs. unvax one), is that there is a spike of deaths ( a hump) in the vaxxed, at around 100 days. Then, it tapers off. < So that could be considered the danger zone - say 90 - 120 days after the jab enters your arm.
Significant, is that the all cause mortality is about 5X the unvaxxed rate at that time. < This means one is 5X more likely to die if one is vaxxed at 90 - 120 days after said jab.
Next is the second graph: Remember this is an analysis of peaks, and the graphs count 'day 0' as the day u get a jab.
The peaks, or bumps, of vaxxed deaths appear sooner and harder, after each dose. < This means that the more jabs, the faster u die.
But the point I was making is: Say you have a change of heart, and don't get any more jabs - After 300 days, one can say, with statistical confidence now, that one is 'back to normal' - in terms of risk of death. (Provided there are is no lasting damage). And it significantly tapers off after 200 days.
It's looking for the silver lining in this damning report. May be of some use -
can this be compared to flu, pneumonia vaccines in regards to increase in deaths ?
Don't know, but I do know that they let this experiment run for an unaceptable amount of time.
The FDA banned the Flu vax in the seventies after only a few dozen deaths.
But this type of vax vs. unvax data has been discouraged in the scientific literature, as many are paid to represent their pharma-research grant status.
One remembers the shenanigans to scrap someone from the medical register for even trying to compare unvaxxed blood to vaxxed blook.
No-one wants to know how bad things really are.
Also, read the inserts.
If it says mRNA, then I suggest you leave before they jab you. The results show 5X increased all-cause mortality. That is unacceptable. Ban this.
You might still be ok with traditional 'single' vaccines. I wouldn't trust the 'cocktails' as in triple or quadruple barrel ones - like MMR or DTAP, as those mixtures usually have not been tested in synergy. It's like having four jabs at once, basically.
In my opinion, buyer beware.
I saw great results in an elderly person receiving B12 shots. But I would never recommend any 'vaccines' for anyone. Do what you will.