For the latest info, see my Substack article and the postings done after that.
I haven't had much time to update the numbers below.
However, other than the MRR numbers below, the info here should be basically correct.
See Czech Dashboard. This was done by Albert Benavides who is soley reponsible for the content.
For the first time in human history, the record level data of people who got vaccines in a country have been officially released. Over 10M records from the Czech Republic were obtained legally under FOIA and posted to the Internet four months ago. Each record has year of birth, date of death, date/brand of each COVID vaccine. Because the brands were distributed in the Czech Republic without any systematic bias (cluster randomized), we can compare the ACM over 1 year from the date the shots were given with different brands, we find large increases in all-cause mortality compared to the safest vaccine (Pfizer) where we had sufficient data. Even in the most optimistic scenario where Pfizer is 100% safe and does not increase all-cause mortality, the Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Jannsen vaccines were too deadly to be used. The Novavax vaccine appears to neglibly impact ACM but there was too little data available to be certain since death data after 2022 was not disclosed. Also, the dose of mRNA in the Moderna vaccine compared to Pfizer was from 1.7 to 3.3X higher than Pfizer, so there is biological plausibilty. Also, the Fraiman study showed Moderna had significantly higher adverse events than Pfizer. All 5 Bradford Hill causality criteria are satisfied for Moderna. There is no other explanation for the observed data that we are aware of. Vaccines are supposed to reduce ACM, not increase it. The medical community should be demanding equal levels of data transparency from governments worldwide. This analysis clearly demonstrates that withholding public health data from the public does not improve clinical outcomes.
Using gold-standard record level data supplied by the Czech Republic on over 10M citizens who based on availability at the time and place they went to were given either the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, we can compute a 1 year mortality risk ratio (MRR) between the two vaccines where the 1 year starts at the time of receipt of the shot.
We found that for virtually all ages below 92 years old, the Moderna shots were much more dangerous than the Pfizer shots. The younger the person, the higher the mortality increase. For those under 60 years old, the relative mortality was 50% higher.
This means that, even if the Pfizer vaccine was perfectly safe, the Moderna vaccine is a disaster and should be halted immediately since a 50% absolute increase in mortality is an unacceptable risk tradeoff compared to the absolute risk of dying from COVID.
However, we also know that Pfizer generated more vaccine-supected deaths and more serious adverse events than Moderna (counting only those people with 30 or more new serious adverse events after taking their shots) on an absolute basis (because there were more Pfizer shots administered). This suggests that the excess mortality caused by the Pfizer shots (excess over a placebo shot) must be at least half the relative mortality increase of Moderna shots.
In short, this gold-standard record-level data enables us to prove, for the first time, that both Pfizer and Moderna shots cause an unacceptable increase in all-cause mortality relative to the risk they are trying to mitigate and so therefore, even if the vaccines were 100% effective, they should never been used because the risk/benefit ratio is >1. The vaccines should be stopped immediately.
Also, the people who promoted these vaccines should admit that they were incapable of finding large safety signals and should not be trusted by the public in the future until those people who made the correct calls on these vaccines are promoted into positions of authority.
We need to end the liability waiver of vaccine manufacturers, we need to populate the outside committees of the FDA and CDC with only people who publicly spoke out against these vaccines, and we need to immediately stop mandating all vaccines worldwide because a mistake like this one calls all previous vaccine safety studies into question. We need to start making data on other vaccines public, just like the Czech Republic did for the COVID vaccine data. Hiding public health data from the public never improves health outcomes.
Look at this heatmap. This tells you in one chart everything you need to know. Ideally would be to see these heatmaps for each 5 year age band.
Second best, but easier to understand instantly is this chart of the ASMR for each vaccine vs. time. In times of no COVID, the vaccines should have identical mortality. They don't.
They tried to debunk this claiming Moderna was distributed to people with higher comorbidities (which is actually true I was amazed to see), but even when the comorbidities were 2X the other way, more people died from Moderna.
So uneven cluster randomization might play a role in the mortality rate, but it appears to be a minor factor.
See the comorbidity.py
file.
See my Substack for more info.
Brand | # recipients of Dose 2 in 2021 | # of deaths before 2023 | CMR |
---|---|---|---|
Pfizer | 5,319,895 | 86,334 | 1,623 |
Moderna | 496,965 | 16,461 | 3,312 |
Others | 440,266 | 22,067 | 5,012 |
Total | 6,257,126 | 124,862 | 1,996 |
age | MRR |
---|---|
90 | 1.21 |
80 | 1.21 |
70 | 1.47 |
60 | 1.54 |
50 | 1.67 |
Below age 50, there were too few total deaths to make accurate comparisons between vaccine types
We also did a time-series cohort analysis for those getting dose 2 which showed that mortality rate increased monotonically for around 35 weeks after the shot before leveling off, but there was also a near doubling in mortality starting immediately after the shots: a t=0, the MR of Moderna was nearly double that of Pfizer.
Indepdent validation of the same effect:
A good proxy for relative excess mortality is the number of very severe vaccine injuries relative to the number of shots given.
For example, if Pfizer was completely safe, 100% of the vaccine injury reports I received would have been from Moderna. But Pfizer out numbered Moderna 2:1. That means it wasn't anywhere close to being a placebo.
I did a survey of severe vaccine injuries in mid-2022 with over 1,000 responses. The last vaccine taken was Pfizer:Moderna with 2:1 odds. This has been in public view since that time. I don't know what the distribution was for the people who reported, so I can't compute any ratios for them.
So that means our conservative assumption that Pfizer was safe is mistken.
VAERS and V-safe data confirm this. Pfizer showed up extensively.
The MRR depends on age with the smallest harms in the elderly which explains why total ACM didn't skyrocket.
But it does suggest that the harms from both vaccines were comparable (within a factor of 2).
So if there was a conservative 4:1 distribution of doses, it means that Pfizer's excess deaths are at least half as many as Moderna since otherwise we can't get to a 2:1 ratio of injury reports.
So this suggests the true MRR vs. placebo vaccine for the COVID vaccines were something like in this table where the MRR is expressed relative to a saline vaccine instead of the Pfizer vaccine as in the previous table.
age | Pfizer MRR | Moderna MRR |
---|---|---|
90 | 1.10 | 1.32 |
80 | 1.10 | 1.32 |
70 | 1.23 | 1.81 |
60 | 1.27 | 1.96 |
50 | 1.33 | 2.22 |
Which means both vaccines were dangerous.
Only one country in the world has made publicly available record level data on COVID vaccine statistics: the Czech Republic (CR) aka Czechia.
All other countries use "privacy" as the excuse for not publishing record level data on vaccines given.
The way CR preserves privacy is brain dead simple: They only publish the YEAR of birth for a person. Everything else is an exact date.
This has everything we need to determine whether the COVID vaccines are safe.
The original CR source data can be downloaded here.
It was first made available on Github on Mar 29, 2024.
The file is compressed and expands to a .csv
file with header and entries like this:
Sex, Year of Birth, Date of Death, Vax1 date, Vax1 batch code, Vax1 Code, Vax1 Name, <repeat these 4 fields for 7 vaccines>
"F",1956,,2021-05-03,"EY3014","CO01","Comirnaty",2021-06-14,"FD0168","CO01","Comirnaty",2021-12-11,"1F1020A","CO01","Com
irnaty",2022-09-29,,"CO08","Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.1",2023-10-10,"HH0832","CO20","Comirnaty Omicron XBB.1.5.",,,,
,,,,
To get the repo including the 50M source data file:
git clone https://github.com/skirsch/Czech
To verify the source data file data/CR_records.csv.xz
:
ls -la data/CR_records.csv.xz && du -sh data/CR_records.csv.xz && md5sum data/CR_records.csv.xz
-rw-r--r--@ 1 user staff 52034168 Sep 14 14:15 data/CR_records.csv.xz
50M data/CR_records.csv.xz
5ddcec3311d80ebe5c3e57af503d0994 data/CR_records.csv.xz
To re-download:
cd code && \
make download
To generate all the MR stats and time series files:
cd code && \
make
The build time for all files is about 2 hours.
To just make the final analysis (45 minutes):
cd code && \
make analysis
To start over from scratch:
cd code && \
make clean
In the analysis directory are spreadsheets where you can dump the data you generated to verify the results.
The spreadsheets are pre-populated with the data, so you can either re-paste the data or verify the numbers there are what you generated.
The vaccination program in CR non-systematically assigned vaccines to people.
So it was a perfect real world clinical trial.
We compare all people who opted for the shots by comparing the results for each vaccine type.
If the mortality 1 year from the shot was the same for all vaccines, they are likely all safe.
We suspected going into this that Moderna would be MUCH worse than Pfizer since the mRNA dose is 3X higher (30 mcg for Pfizer; 100 mcg for Moderna). We had anecdotal reports, we had VAERS data, etc. all showing Moderna was a more dangerous shot. Use pfizer as control and assume it is perfectly safe.
Then easy to prove that Moderna has around a 50% or more increase in mortality for all but the very elderly.
Basically, you can think of Pfizer as the placebo. Then you compare the Moderna mortality rate and you see that for every single age the mortality rate at 1 yr from shot 2 is around 50% more for Moderna. IN The vaccines were randomized. That means even if Pfizer is safe, Moderna is not. And the fact that nobody noticed that Moderna was more deadly, says that the entire system for monitoring safety is completely inadequate. Which then puts Pfizer into the crosshairs as being unsafe as well, which it is since it triggered so many death reports in VAERS among other data. And we have biological plausibility because the dose of mRNA for Moderna was 3.3 times greater than for Pfizer. so it makes sense that the deaths were significantly higher for every single age group
Essentially, by randomizing the vaccine to people in the Czech Republic, they created the perfect clinical trial. And then they published the record level data. This has never been done before. It’s always been kept hidden from public view.
If both vaccines were safe, there should have been less than a 4% difference in ACM for the elderly and a much smaller difference for those under 60 years old.
Also, we have all these anecdotes of people dying right after the jab, which is unheard of. One of my friends had four of his friends die on the day that they got jabbed. That is statistically impossible if the shots are safe. I should never be able to find a single anecdote like that even if I talked to everyone on earth.
Dose 2 1 year mortality on each birth year
Why dose 2? No deaths in database after Dec 31, 2022 so to get 1 year follow up (to even out seasonality effects), limited to dose 2. Dose 1 would have been better but people could get a dose 2 shot of a different vaccine in 3 weeks. You couldn't get a booster for 8 months but that would be randomized between the groups getting the dose 2 shots so not material. We didn't need to filter these out.
If the vaccines were all safe, we'd expect to see nearly zero mortality difference between the two cohorts. This is because the vaccine fundamentally protect people by exposing them to an antigen. So the mechanism of action is nearly identical between both vaccines.
So if 20% of all deaths are from COVID and one vaccine is "magically" 20% better than another vaccine for reasons nobody can explain, you're looking at most a 4% mortality difference betwen the two vaccines for the elderly and perhaps a 10X smaller difference for younger people (since young people rarely die from COVID). So if you are under 60 years old, any ACM differences should be miniscule and unmeasurable.
But we've been claiming the vaccines increase all-cause mortality with Pfizer being the least deadly per shot, Moderna being about 50% more deadly, and the J&J shot was the deadliest. We've known that from early analysis of the VAERS data: there was a proportionally higher rate of death reports per dose for Moderna vs. Pfizer.
So we expected Moderna would have a higher death rate based on VAERS, other studies looking at the rate of side effects, and anecodetal observations of healthcare professionals who tracked vaccine type of the vaccine injured.
Around June 2021 when I was analyzing the VAERS data and publishing documents computing the URF of 41 for VAERS, I pointed out that Moderna was significantly more deadly on a deaths per shots given basis. Anyone can verify this from the VAERS data. We can also do a statistical analysis of vaccine injury reports and look at the percentage from Moderna vs. Pfizer in the injury reports compared to doses administered. This should have been a huge red flag. If the vaccines were safe, there shouldn't have been proportionally more Moderna reports.
To make a determination of causality, we have to show biological plausibility.
We have that here in spades.
Moderna was 100mcg of mRNA vs. 30mcg for the Pfizer shot. Moderna was only 50mcg for some cases. So that is a near perfect match to the 50% increase in mortality.
guy who got data CZ team who wrote the papers clare craig norman fenton fraiman on confounders paul marik pierre kory, aseem malhotra andrew briden: fraiman paper
Sir Ian Diamond, head of the UK ONS
for ignoring the requests of UK MPs to do a more thorough analysis of the data
Te Whatu Ora
for pressing criminal charges against Barry Young who was just doing his job to protect the people of New Zealand
Santa Clara Department of public health CDC for refusing to talk to me about any data FDA for refusing to engage on this data Former FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock for blocking me LinkedIn for giving me a lifetime Wikipedia for giving me a lifetime ban Medium for giving me a lifetime ban The OLD Twitter for giving me two lifetime bans
fraiman link on from Google doc on randomized CZ paper on vax vs unvaxxed