Actuarial and statistical problems around the Covid phenomen

Neuro-biologist JJ Couey, reviews Nick Hudson’s Oct 11th presentation to the Actuarial Society of South Africa. A plain version can be watched on


Copied from the Pandata substack. Contains an Addendum responseding to some questions he was asked on the day…

Continue reading Actuarial and statistical problems around the Covid phenomen

Digesting JJ Couey

I’d been aware of him for a while. But, regrettably, no more so than any of the other scientists speaking out about the COVID scam.

Recently though, something about his interactions with Jessica Hockett and Denis Rancourt drew me back to explore his views more thoroughly.

It’s been painful. Slowly coming to realise, acknowledge and admit…

… I had been skilfully played and fallen for The Scooby-Doo myself and…

… that many who I hoped and believed were gonna save us, aren’t…

… because they are (probably unconsciously in many cases) fostering an illusion of consensus that protects and perpetuates The Faith. Like myself at times since my first article here in 2021.

It’s also been humbling. To realise that I wasn’t as awake as I considered myself – and acknowledge thinking myself superior to others who weren’t awake. Plus, to face the possibility that these latest learnings about this great awful deception might not be my last.

I’m not quite yet able to ‘elevator pitch’ these new understandings. But JJ Couey is honing his presentations all the time and I’m finding his analogies increasingly helpful.

Like the train mime…. (from c 27:00 in his recent talk with Medical Doctors for COVID Ethics International) 1Yes that’s Irishman Dr. Gerard Waters you hear during the preamble | PubMed

  • 1
    Yes that’s Irishman Dr. Gerard Waters you hear during the preamble

Vaccine Experts Under Oath:

Shocking Revelations in the Fight for Transparency And Truth

Last Thursday’s Highwire episode features a presentation given by Del Bigtree and Aaron Siri at Freedom Fest in Memphis earlier this year.

If you have not yet seen Aaron Siri’s testimony to the Arizona Senate in May, this is a pretty good summary.

“… Everything you thought you knew about vaccines, is wrong. Listen to Del and Aaron take you through court depositions and cross examinations of the world’s leading vaccine experts. Listen to shocking admissions by these experts, in their own words, when they are compelled to tell the truth, under oath…”

The Highwire |

Vaccinated Rat and Human Heart Cell Study Shows How Hearts Get Damaged

Mathematician Igor Chudov reviews a research letter submitted to The British Journal of Pharmacology by a German/Hungarian team of scientists.

“We already know, based on cardiac damage markers in humans, that COVID vaccines cause heart damage, sometimes hidden, that is far from rare…

What is not as clear is: what exactly does happen to the hearts that raises biomarkers of damage?

Since scientists cannot remove and slice the hearts of living humans, the mechanism of this damage remains mysterious…

To explore this issue they…

“… used cell cultures to conduct an experiment unaffected by the many complications of testing the hearts of living organisms. They had proper control groups – Petri dishes with heart cells that did not receive the mRNA injection.

… and found…

The heart cells… underwent deleterious changes after in-vitro “vaccination.” Compared to the control group, the vaccinated heart cells malfunctioned in various ways…

But not because the immune system was attacking heart cells

Much of the discussion of “myocarditis” involves hypotheses of the heart being damaged by our body’s immune rejection of heart cells.

The Schreckerberg study we are discussing purposely excluded such immune reactions because it used cell cultures without any immune cells. And yet, they detected deleterious effects on heart cells (cardiomyocytes). There are more causes of heart damage than immune reactions could explain, authors show by excluding any immune-related factor.

We must appreciate the authors’ intent to concentrate on one particular aspect of vaccination.

“Here’s the most amazing part…

“… rarely seen in peer-reviewed studies published in official journals. The authors do not mince words and say we must re-evaluate giving people mRNA vaccines due to their cardiotoxic effects!

Igor Chudov

Read Chudov’s review in full, with extracts from the letter, here.

Risk Assessment Summary for SARS CoV-2 Sublineage BA.2.86

What do you take from this August 23rd statement by the CDC?

Putting aside that this is an acknowledgement that the ‘vaccines’ are useless (so you’ll need a booster which we’ll license soon), doesn’t this amount to saying “pretty much everyone” ?

… BA.2.86 may be more capable of causing infection in people who have previously had COVID-19 or who have received COVID-19 vaccines…

CDC1Archived. Archived.

The same release also says:

  • existing expensive pharmaceuticals “appear to be effective” against it
  • “this updated vaccine will be effective at reducing severe disease and hospitalization” (nice bit of confident predicting there!)
  • and it is transmitting internationally because there are 9 cases across Denmark (3); South Africa (2); Israel (1); United States (2) and United Kingdom (1)..

Yes. 9 cases.

In the world.

The entire world.

Of c. 8,000,000,000 people.

But… in case you might be tempted to relax and not worry… they note reduced genome sequencing means “more variants may emerge and spread undetected for longer periods of time” … so they’ll keep an eye on everything and will update their assessment when they have more data.

Preprint: Forensic Analysis of the 38 Subject Deaths in the 6-Month Interim Report of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trial

For those still inclined to Trust The ScienceTM

… found no significant difference between the number of deaths in the vaccinated versus placebo arms for the first 20 weeks of the trial, the placebo-controlled portion of the trial. After Week 20, as subjects in the Placebo were unblinded and vaccinated, deaths among this still unvaccinated cohort of this group slowed and eventually plateaued. Deaths in the BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects continued at the same rate. Our analysis revealed inconsistencies between the subject data listed in the 6-Month Interim Report and publications authored by Pfizer/BioNTech trial site administrators. Most importantly, we found evidence of an over 3.7-fold increase in number of deaths due to cardiovascular events in BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects compared to Placebo controls. This significant adverse event signal was not reported by Pfizer/BioNTech…

Of the 38 deaths reported in the 6-Month Interim Report… 14 subjects died from a cardiovascular event, over one-third of all deaths (36.8%). Of these 14, 11 were from the BNT162b2 vaccinated trial arm and 3 from the Placebo only trial arm. This represents a 3.7-fold increase in cardiovascular events in subjects who received the BNT162b2 vaccine. Thomas et al. [7] and Pfizer/BioNTech’s Summary Clinical Safety [11] do not identify or remark on this clear serious adverse event signal…

Michels, C.; Perrier, D.; Kunadhasan, J.; Clark, E.; Gehrett, J.; Gehrett, B.; Kwiatek, K.; Adams, S.; Chandler, R.; Stagno, L.; Damian, T.; Delph, E.; Flowers, C. Forensic Analysis of the 38 Subject Deaths in the 6-Month Interim Report of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trial. Preprints 2023, 2023090131.

Oh, and once the trial was unblinded, one participant had a Moderna injection after Pfizer Doses 1 and 2. His death a few weeks later was reported as an unvaccinated Placebo Death!

Continue reading Preprint: Forensic Analysis of the 38 Subject Deaths in the 6-Month Interim Report of the Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trial

What Is A Model? We need to know…

… to test between good and bad science

all models only say what they are told to say.

Models are lists of statements of the form “If this, then that”. No matter how large they grow, or how sophisticated, or how mathematical, or how computerized, or how much data that is put into them, or from what sources, their natures are not altered. They are always lists of “If this, then that.”

… Here is a simple, common, and most useful model, used by casinos the world over: “If this die has six sides, then the probability any side is up in a throw is one in six.”

That model says exactly what we want it to say, and only what we told it to say. It is an accurate model, too. It matches reality well; indeed, it makes beautiful predictions…

The model says nothing, not one thing, about what causes any side to be up on any toss. Efficient cause cannot be inferred from examining the model. No cause was built into the model. That is, none of the “If this, then that” statements (and there is only one) mentioned cause (except part of the formal cause, that the object has six sides). But the model is still good.

We conclude that models can be good and useful yet be silent on cause. The opposite is also true: a model can perform well in practice, but we cannot from that good performance conclude it has identified the cause of things. Ensuring cause has been identified is a much more difficult task…

Since all models only say what they are told to say, we can always create a model to say anything we want…

We have the freedom to specify the “If this” parts of the model, from which we sometimes can deduce, and sometimes must guess, the “Then that” parts. Or we can work backward, starting from desirable “Then that”, and picking compatible “If this” parts.

We have the freedom to say which and how much and from where the “data” goes into the model, and what “If this, then that” they are married to. We have the freedom to embrace any simplifications or approximations we want. We can, and an increasing minority even do, cheat…

This freedom comes with a cost. Since any model can be made to say anything at all, it means models can’t really be trusted until they are tested against reality.

Models certainly cannot be trusted because of the authority of who builds, or rather creates, them. That is a fallacy. And they can’t be trusted because “We need to do something and there is nothing else.” That is also a fallacy: there are always other options… [full article]

William M Briggs

Related: COVID: Lockdown Mistakes

Pandemic of the Vaccinated – Original Antigenic Sin in Covid Hamster Study

… one of the concerns with using vaccines against coronaviruses is the concept of Original Antigenic Sin (OAS). This phenomenon is where the immune system is trained on the variant in the vaccine but upon encountering a new but similar version of the virus, it responds based on its memory of the original virus rather than the new one.

So, if you were vaccinated at the beginning of the pandemic and your body was trained on the original Wuhan spike protein, the hypothesis is that when you encounter a new variant, your body produces a response against the Wuhan virus and not the new variant. This could mean you have a less effective immune response to the new variant, if any at all.

On the other hand, if your immune system is primed through natural infection, it is trained on all the different parts of the virus, not just the spike protein. You still get OAS but this time, if the spike protein has mutated into a different variant, your body will still produce an appropriate response because it will still recognise other parts of the virus that mutate much more slowly.

But this has just been theory. A group of researchers wanted to investigate whether the theory held up in practice and have recently published their report… The hamsters were given a three-dose mRNA vaccination, similar to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine used in humans. After the vaccinations, the hamsters were exposed to different variants of SARS-CoV-2.

The researchers then measured various outcomes, such as the amount of viral RNA in the hamsters and the ability of the hamsters’ immune systems to neutralize the virus.

These are the results, which I will explain below…

Naked Emperor

Full article on Substack

All-cause Death Numbers Show The Truth

Note: Rancourt’s work seems to confirm Jonathan Engler’s “Lombardy Analysis

… Dr. Reiner Fuellmich talks with scientist, social theorist, and researcher at the Ontario Civil Liberties Association and former professor of physics at the University of Ottawa Denis Rancourt…

… about the power of numbers, their creation and subsequent misuse throughout the so-called ‘Corona Pandemic’ to create fear and panic among the population. This was then used to order and implement an inhumane and unhealthy madness of measures that was subsequently responsible for an increase in disease and death rates. Based on valid data, it is clear that there were no significant increases in mortality rates in the spring of 2020, the day the global ‘pandemic’ was declared.

Denis Rancourt agrees that there would also have been no increase if governments had acted as they have in every past winter and flu season to date.

He cites the improper application of treatments in hospitals to so called ‘corona patients’ as the cause of an increase in illness and mortality rates, but also the severe adverse health consequences of the disproportionate measures taken to ultimately make people physically and psychologically ill or even, in quite a few cases, drive them to suicide.

With vivid visuals, he points out a massive and alarming explosion in excess mortality data from many countries only after mRNA injections began. He cites India and Israel as particularly affected, but also many other countries whose data he has analyzed and statistically processed…

Related: testimony to the National Citizen’s Inquiry (17th May) |

The Once Elusive Vaccine Debate Goes Mainstream

Key proponents of vaccines won’t debate with sceptics – tending to withdraw at the last minute.

They also seem unable to cite or defend the ‘settled science’ in courtrooms.

Could it be because…

No studies have ever compared the total health outcomes of the CDC’s vaccine schedule between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. No system is in place or body of scientific investigation in the books to assess who may be more susceptible to adverse reactions to preempt injuries…

Jefferey Jaxen

Jaxen’s article on the issue will tell you more.

Jessica Rose – PhD Computational Biologist -Talking Covid, Vaccines & more with Viva Frei Live

If you have a long journey ahead this good-humoured, wide-ranging conversation between two Canadians might help.

Covid response was never about health. PCR is not a test. VAERS soaring numbers are not because we’re injecting so many. Peer review is untrustworthy. The virus was created. Finding solutions is a priority.

People are fighting their own cognitive dissonance right now… go easy on them…

Live Q&A with VSRF Founder Steve Kirsch & Pfizer Whistleblower Melissa McAttee

Q&A with Michelle McAttee begins at 25:45… aborted foetal cell lines… deliberate withholding of info from public… Covid injections made in China… Remdesivir (aka Veklury) made by Pfizer for Gilead1which the WHO recommends AGAINST using for Covid-19

Vaccine Safety Research Foundation | How Bad Is My Batch?

US Federal Aviation Authority has very quietly tacitly admitted that the EKGs of pilots are no longer normal

On October 24, 2022, the FAA quietly, without any announcement at all, widened the EKG requirements necessary for pilots to be able to fly.

The PR (a measure of heart function)1Helpful info & graph here. used to be in the range of .12 to .2.

It is now: .12 to .3 and potentially even higher.

This is a very wide range; it accommodates people who have cardiac injury. Cardiologist Thomas Levy is appalled at this change:

We discuss his article Myocarditis: Once Rare, Now Common.

Basically, the vaccines are causing heart injury in at least 2.8% of people who get the shot. So 7M Americans now have hearts damaged by the COVID vaccine. He admits the number could be over 100M. The fact that the FAA *quietly* changed the EKG parameters for pilots suggests that the vaccine is causing a huge number of pilots to fail their screening. This is a tacit admission of a huge problem.

Swiss study of 777 people post-vaccine

Continue reading US Federal Aviation Authority has very quietly tacitly admitted that the EKGs of pilots are no longer normal