Discussion about this post

User's avatar
ExcessDeathsAU's avatar

Dear Readers,

Thanks to your efforts, as of June 12 this article has now been seen 4k times (an increase of 500 from when I sent out the email).

However, I looked at my dashboard and saw the following:

2% social media views.

This means that sharing this on social media is useless - no one is seeing it due to shadowbanning. Re-Stacking this is futile - we are in an echo chamber - people do not even know that Substack exists, and we are siloed within Substack.

So, if you are motivated, please:

-email this to one friend, and one person in the media/government.

If you are not interested, that’s ok. Thanks for reading.

Expand full comment
ExcessDeathsAU's avatar

And please see:

Quantitative evaluation of whether the Nobel-Prize-winning COVID-19 vaccine actually saved millions of lives By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD, and Joseph Hickey, PhD.

https://denisrancourt.substack.com/p/quantitative-evaluation-of-whether

Abstract

Fantastic statements that the Nobel-Prize-winning COVID-19 vaccines saved millions (and tens of millions) of lives are based on the theoretical scenarios of Watson et al. (2022), published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases. Watson et al. (2022) theoretically inferred massive mortality reductions distributed globally, occurring solely during vaccine rollouts. We calculated the quantitative consequences of Watson et al. (2022)’s low-value (14.4 million lives saved) theoretical scenario on all-cause mortality by time (by week or by month, 2020-2022) in 95 countries. Our calculations provide graphical proof that the theoretical proposals of Watson et al. (2022) are untenable, compared to measured all-cause mortality. Therefore, the characteristics of the COVID‑19 vaccines (efficacies in preventing infection or serious illness, duration of protection, waning, etc.) and of COVID-19 spread input by Watson et al. (2022) must be invalid.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts