Epidemiological Analysis of Vaccine Impact

I was thinking, well, as an epidemiologist,

how would they look at this data? What would they do?

What tools would they use? How would they analyze it?

So I went through,

did all the coding for it, got the nice graphs,

charts, analysis numbers, confidence intervals,

Poisson scores, all the p-values, all that stuff to work out

the probabilities and all the rest of it, work out if it was dangerous, SMRs,

standardized mortality rates,

you know, one is normal,

SMR of one should be one to one mortality rate before and after the vaccine.

You've got the same number of people alive, same number of people alive after the vaccine, that's an SMR of one.

If it's SMR higher than one,

you've got more people dying after the vaccine than should die after the vaccine.

SMR less than one, there's more people living, vaccines working, great.

So that's how it works, that's the SMR.

So anyway, I did all of that analysis and provided it for multiple sites across New Zealand.

So I was doing it specifically by site.

So I've done the work for the whole data in general,

which shows excess mortality, but I also did it for certain sites in New Zealand,

some bad ones, some not so bad, some very, very good,

just to show that my analysis was whole and correct and valid, and validated

everything. Because some sites I looked at,

mortality was not elevated, it was actually less than expected, which is like, okay, it proves my method works, it's accurate.

It is picking out the bad ones, the really bad ones, it's also picking out some good ones as well.

But there are far fewer good ones than there are bad ones.

And the key thing to see here,

and I don't think I've discussed this,

the key thing to realise is that the good one, the really good one, the star of the show in the whole of New Zealand,

the best site was in Wellington Central itself,

the seat of the government,

the heart of the city.

So go figure,

why did that have the best mortality statistics in the whole entire database?

Barry, that's extraordinary.

Yeah, it just... Just let that drop into people.

What we are saying here is the jab,

I call them the poison shots,

the shots were not the same across the country.

There were certain areas that seemed to get

much stronger shots that had a much more significant and immediate effect,

maybe over the next six months. We're talking about deaths here,

but if we could analyse the on turbo cancers,

on heart conditions, we could see, if we could really do a deep,

deep dive, if this government were open and caring about the people,

we could see that certain parts of the country had been much harder hit than others.

That's the job of the government, that's safety monitoring, that's what they should be doing.

And we are saying that near Parliament in Wellington and Central Wellington,

that jab centre was the safest.

It's a bizarre coincidence.

It probably had something like a saline solution, could have been a possibility.

We don't know until we investigate, but the question mark remains.

Could have been the safest vaccine in the world.

That is just so cynical.

It is a bizarre, bizarre coincidence.