Seeing Is Believing: What the Data Reveal about Deaths Following COVID Vaccine Rollouts around the World

DEBATES ON COVID - VACCINES, 16 Jan 2023

Gavin de Becker | The Defender – TRANSCEND Media Service

Why would so many countries big and small, rich and poor, in different parts of the world, some with congested cities, some sparsely populated, cold weather or hot weather, tropical or desert, high altitude or low altitude, small islands or landlocked — why would they all see increases in COVID-19 deaths after mass vaccination?

The Defender

9 Jan 2023 – I asked Ed Dowd if I could have space in his book, “‘Cause Unknown’: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,” for an article about what we saw around the world as mass vaccination commenced.

In light of Dowd’s stunning analysis, it is particularly instructive to look at data for those countries that did not have high numbers of COVID-19 deaths prior to mass vaccination, because they afford the simplest comparison:

  1. They had very low rates of death attributed to COVID-19.
  2. Then they commenced mass vaccination.
  3. Then they experienced huge increases in deaths attributed to COVID-19.

South Korea gives us a fast example among many: Prior to the country’s wide rollout of mRNA vaccines, Korea had almost no COVID-19 deaths. You see that nearly all their COVID-19 deaths occurred after mass vaccination.

2 daily new deaths south korea

Due to frequent supply problems, South Korea’s mass vaccination program really took off after the third quarter of 2021 when they borrowed hundreds of thousands of Pfizer doses from Israel. Their COVID-19 deaths soon followed. That wasn’t supposed to happen.

In November 2021, President Moon began a massive campaign to push boosters: “The vaccination can be completed only after receiving the third jab.” His citizens complied, reaching more than 90% of adults fully vaccinated — the chart shows the COVID-19 deaths that followed.

The same pattern repeats all over the world, and since seeing is believing, I’ll pause here and resume in more detail after some quick sample charts …

3 covid deaths mass vaccination thailand

4 covid deaths mass vaccination malaysia

5 covid deaths mass vaccination uganda

6 covid deaths mass vaccination nepal

7 covid deaths mass vaccination portugal

8 covid deaths mass vaccination mongolia

9 covid deaths mass vaccination zambia

10 covid deaths mass vaccination paraguay

11 covid deaths mass vaccination bahrain

12 covid deaths mass vaccination uruguay

13 covid deaths mass vaccination tunisia

14 covid deaths mass vaccination sri lanka

15 covid deaths mass vaccination afghanistan

16 covid deaths mass vaccination taiwan

Israel was the world’s poster child for Pfizer’s vaccine product: Like all these countries, Israel had the majority of its COVID-19 deaths after mass vaccination.

17 covid deaths mass vaccination israelAnd finally, Vietnam: They began mass vaccination in March 2021, purchasing five different vaccine products from around the world — and they saw no jump in COVID-19 deaths.

However, in early July 2021, the U.S. government began donating millions of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines — and that’s exactly when Vietnam experienced the massive spike in COVID-19 deaths you see in the chart.

18 covid deaths covid vaccines mass vaccination vietnam

Any way you think about it, those charts should not look like that if vaccination was effective.

Why would so many countries big and small, rich and poor, in different parts of the world, some with congested cities, some sparsely populated, cold weather or hot weather, tropical or desert, high altitude or low altitude, small islands or landlocked — why would they all see increases in COVID-19 deaths after mass vaccination?

That’s a question one imagines public health officials and media would be motivated to carefully analyze and answer. Instead, they’ve been united in keeping such facts out of public discourse.

The reality displayed on the graphs you’ve seen is undeniable, cannot be unseen and is available to anyone more interested and more industrious than media and government have been.

For curious minds, one explanation to consider is revealed through extensive pre-COVID-19 research establishing that people’s immune systems are weakened by some vaccines. Just a few examples among many:

  • 2011 study: Annual vaccination for influenza “may render young children who have not previously been infected with influenza more susceptible to infection with a pandemic influenza virus of a novel subtype.”
  • 2013 study: Vaccination may make flu worse if exposed to a second strain [as has been the case with COVID-19 for billions of people].
  • 2018 study: Acute respiratory infections increase following vaccination. This study compared vaccinated people to unvaccinated people.

More recently, a Danish study of healthcare workers showed a massive increase in COVID-19 infection in the two weeks after the first shot.

Aware of this Danish study, The BMJ published a letter calling for an urgent investigation:

“Given the evidence of white cell depletion after COVID vaccination and the evidence of increased COVID infection rates shortly after vaccination, the possibility that the two are causally related needs urgent investigation.”

The Danish study showed “a 40% increase in infections in the first two weeks after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination, despite not vaccinating in homes with recent outbreaks,” meaning they knew it wasn’t because people happened to already be infected at the time they were vaccinated.

The 40% number comes up again, in The BMJ letter:

“The original Pfizer trial demonstrated a statistically significant 40% increase in suspected COVID.”

Looking for a more comfortable answer to the sad riddle, some people might speculate that the deaths you’ve seen on all those graphs occurred because people became less cautious after vaccination.

The BMJ considered and discounted that theory, citing several studies that show increased infections in the weeks after vaccination, and pointing out the example of care home residents, who actually shielded more after vaccination:

“No one is suggesting there was a change of behaviour within care homes. However, care homes in every corner of the country saw outbreaks from December. What changed?”

Excellent question. Obvious answer.

If these new Pharma products had been bound by the same laws as all other Pharma products, their TV commercials would have to end with the familiar announcer hurriedly rushing through side effects:

COVID-19 vaccines will leave some people more vulnerable to infection and sickness. Some people will experience side effects including cardiac arrest, blood clots, stroke and sudden death.

It wouldn’t make for a very good sales pitch.

Of course, Pfizer and Moderna didn’t need any sales pitch for these vaccines — since the products were developed, ordered, purchased, promoted, defended, indemnified and even mandated by our own government.

_________________________________________________

This material is included in Edward Dowd’s new book, “‘Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022” It was written by Gavin de Becker, who also wrote the Afterword to “‘Cause Unknown.’”

 

Gavin de Becker – Best-selling author, “The Gift of Fear”

 

Go to Original – childrenshealthdefense.org


Tags: , , ,

 

Share this article:


DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


There are no comments so far.

Join the discussion!

We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.

Please solve this question to prevent spam, thank you!
+ 86 = 90

Note: we try to save your comment also when there are technical problems or a mistake in the Captcha. Still, for long comments we recommend that you copy them somewhere else as a backup before you submit them.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.