Has the source of bias been found?

The new ONS data seems to have a bias such that deaths in the unvaccinated are more likely to be included in the ONS sample, whereas deaths in the vaccinated have the opposite bias and are more likely to be excluded from this dataset. Oddly, the bias is different for covid deaths. Differences with the accuracy of record matching could be enough to explain the bias.

The ONS data is based on only a sample of the population, albeit a large one. If it were representative we would find the mortality rates in the population included and excluded from the sample to be the same. But it turns out this is not the case.

For simplicity, going forward those excluded from the sample are referred to as the "ghost population". Analysis which compares the mortality rates (per 100,000 people) between these groups shows a systematic bias.

The documentary film, "The Invisible Extinction," is sounding the alarm that the human microbiome is endangered, putting humans at risk. "Bacteria have been the dominant life form on Earth. Everything about human life depends on bacteria," the film begins.¹

Researchers are only beginning to tap the surface when it comes to unveiling the complex relationship microbes have with human health and disease. But it's known that microbial diversity in your gut is a good thing, while decreased diversity in the gut microbiome has been linked to chronic conditions such as obesity and Type 2 diabetes.

In general, gut microbial diversity decreases with age,² but even younger people are being affected. The documentary homed in on three likely reasons why — the overuse of antibiotics, elective C-sections and processed foods, which they say are "driving the destruction of our inner ecology."³

Imidazole dipeptides (IDPs), which are abundant in meat and fish, are substances produced in the bodies of various animals, including humans, and have been reported to be effective in relieving fatigue and preventing dementia. However, the physiological mechanism by which IDPs exhibit these activities had not been determined previously.

Exposure to "forever" chemicals can put children and young adults at higher risk for a broad range of diseases, including diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer, according to a study published Wednesday in Environmental Health Perspectives.

Researchers at the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California found that PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — used in a wide variety of consumer products — disrupt key biological processes.

Human beings could be used as part of an electromagnetic radiation (EMR) antenna system by wearing a special copper-coiled bracelet, according to a team of researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands.

The researchers said they developed a low-cost way to "harvest" the radiofrequency (RF) radiation that gets "leaked" during visible light communication (VLC) — a technology they said is likely to be used in the "coming 6G networks."

But some critics allege that using human beings as RF antennas for 6G is disrespectful to the human body and may have unknown health implications.

Scientists in Germany have found that mRNA vaccination, not COVID-19 infection itself, caused brain and heart damage in an older adult with underlying conditions.

This study was published in October 2022 in the journal Vaccines: "A Case Report: Multifocal Necrotizing Encephalitis and Myocarditis after BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination against COVID-19." It examined the situation of a 76-year-old German man with Parkinson's disease.

The patient died three weeks after receiving his third COVID-19 injection.

The first vaccine he received in May of 2021 was the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. That was followed by two more injections in July and then December of the same year. His two subsequent vaccines were both made by Pfizer.

After the second vaccine, the patient's family noticed marked changes in his behavior. He started experiencing more anxiety, became more lethargic, and did not want to be touched. He became withdrawn, even from close family members, and the symptoms of his pre-existing Parkinson's disease worsened considerably.

Given the ambiguous clinical symptoms prior to his death, his family requested an autopsy.

Has COVID-19 caused excess deaths? This might seem an odd question, as most people do not doubt that the answer is yes. However, a growing number on the sceptical side of the aisle have been questioning this recently. This is not necessarily because they don't believe in viruses - most of them do - but sometimes because they think there is nothing special about SARS-CoV-2 and invariably because they think interventions such as lockdowns, faulty treatment protocols and vaccines are responsible for any deaths out of the ordinary.

The first thing to be said in response to this is that there definitely is something special about SARS-CoV-2. Namely, that it is the only known SARS-like virus with a furin cleavage site - likely a feature it was given in a lab - which makes it unusually infectious. This essentially makes it like SARS-1 but with aerosol transmission, and so far more transmissible.

A second thing to underline is that no one has yet shown any convincing relationship between policy interventions and deaths. Studies based on real-world data rather than modelling show that restrictions made little or no difference to outcomes. Here are five examples:

• "Full lockdowns and wide-spread COVID-19 testing were not associated with reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality." "A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions, country preparedness and socioeconomic factors on COVID-19 mortality and related health outcomes" by Rabail Chaudhry, George Dranitsaris, Talha Mubashir, Justyna Bartoszko, Sheila Riazi. EClinicalMedicine (Lancet) 25 (2020) 100464, July 21st, 2020.
• "We find that shelter-in-place orders had no detectable health benefits, only modest effects on behaviour, and small but adverse effects on the economy." "Evaluating the effects of shelter-in-place policies during the COVID-19 pandemic" by Christopher R. Berry, Anthony Fowler, Tamara Glazer, Samantha Handel-Meyer, and Alec MacMillen, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA, April 13th, 2021.
• "Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate." "Covid-19 Mortality: A Matter of Vulnerability Among Nations Facing Limited Margins of Adaptation" by Quentin De Larochelambert, Andy Marc, Juliana Antero, Eric Le Bourg, and Jean-François Toussaint. Frontiers in Public Health, November 19th, 2020.
• "Comparing weekly mortality in 24 European countries, the findings in this paper suggest that more severe lockdown policies have not been associated with lower mortality. In other words, the lockdowns have not worked as intended." "Did Lockdown Work? An Economist's Cross-Country Comparison" by Christian Bjørnskov. CESifo Economic Studies March 29th, 2021.
• "While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs." "Assessing Mandatory Stay‐at‐Home and Business Closure Effects on the Spread of COVID‐19" by Eran Bendavid, Christopher Oh, Jay Bhattacharya, John P.A. Ioannidis. European Journal of Clinical Investigation, January 5th, 2021.

The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses — including Covid-19 — was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.

"There is just no evidence that they" — masks — "make any difference," he told the journalist Maryanne Demasi. "Full stop."

But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks?

"Makes no difference — none of it," said Jefferson.

What about the studies that initially persuaded policymakers to impose mask mandates?

"They were convinced by nonrandomized studies, flawed observational studies."

What about the utility of masks in conjunction with other preventive measures, such as hand hygiene, physical distancing or air filtration?

"There's no evidence that many of these things make any difference."

I am pleasantly surprised to see the mainstream German publication Die Welt openly reporting that clinical trials of the Pfizer Covid vaccine were rife with alleged fraud. What a change!

The article explains that Pfizer unblinded and removed numerous patients who suffered adverse events from the Covid vaccine trial. It also gives examples of Pfizer subjects whose deaths appear to have been covered up. One of the victims described by Die Welt is Pfizer subject C4591001 1162 11621327, whose story I unearthed in July of 2022.

Welt has documents according to which patient no. 11621327 was found dead in his apartment three days after the second dose, apparently a stroke. Patient #11521497 died 20 days after vaccination, diagnosis of cardiac arrest. "According to the current state of science, these two cases would be assigned to the vaccination," says the Berlin pharmaceutical specialist Susanne Wagner, "especially since the U.S. health authority CDC is currently investigating strokes in vaccinated people."

As you remember, Pfizer's investigators implausibly ruled these deaths unrelated.

According to a new study, British toddlers (children between two and five years old) have possibly the worst diet in the world among their age cohort, with the highest rate of processed-food consumption on record. Nearly two-thirds of British toddlers' average calorie intake comes from processed foods, which have been linked to a wide variety of serious health problems - from obesity to cancer, and even autism. Under-5s in the US and Australia hardly fare much better, with 58 percent and 47 percent, respectively, of their calories coming from this garbage. This is a problem throughout the developed world, whether you're in Brazil or Belgium, Pittsburgh or Paris.

Doctors warn, on the basis of a growing body of scientific evidence, that children who consume such diets are likely to go on consuming them for the rest of their lives. Of course, we hardly need scientific studies to tell us that children who pick up bad habits are often stuck with them, to their own detriment and the detriment of those around them. What we really need to know is, why are our children being set up to fail?

Before we go any further, it's worth saying exactly what processed foods are. The easiest working definition is foods that are prepared in a factory, wrapped in plastic and contain ingredients you wouldn't find in a normal home kitchen - things like emulsifiers, stabilisers, humectants (to maintain moisture) and preservatives. In some stores, that would be virtually everything on the shelves.