You may have to take over for Alex. He's in serious trouble with his substack subscribers. He basically threw Dr. Robert Malone under the bus on a segment with both of them on Fox TV.
I think the beauty in anonymity is even though I am working off the side of my desk, so to speak, and I know my articles could be much higher quality if I was doing this full time... I get the benefit of a single-mindedness that neither Alex nor Robert get. I can't imagine going on any news station and arguing about semantics when lives are being ruined by an ocean of dystopia left and right. If I had a large enough platform, I would hope I would spend every moment on-air yelling about how "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore".
To use a soccer terminology- You have your eye on the ball so to speak. Metatron's hospitalization data from early in the vaccination, Prof. Fenton/Neil's team work on all-cause mortality, and this specific exposition of 5-11 hospitalization- Mark my words, will prove pivotal in the future when we present the evidence in the court of public opinion or an actual one just how ghastly and degenerate their lies were and how costly it was to cover it up rather than provide it for all to see so that many postulates of Vanden Bossche or Kirsch could be proven.
I think a lot of us are mad as hell. I know I am. I appreciate all the work you are doing. Keep it coming please.
You might want to check out the latest video of Fauci trying to explain the unreliable results of those tests we have been using. The man is a psychopath.
You’re authentic and modest, great qualities for a writer. And you do an amazing and very professional analysis of the data…so glad you’re here to share with us. 🇨🇦
Your comment is quite timely. I terminated my paid subscription to Alex’s substack today after his ridiculous double down with The Daily Beast. I’m not paying for additional toxicity.
I’m hugely grateful to Jestre for this informative, insightful, thought provoking substack and will encourage others to subscribe 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Luckily I was never a paid subscriber. I am wondering if he's going to address this tomorrow or thinks it will all die down. I have no idea what his issues are but to see him do a takedown on such a qualified doctor like Dr. Malone is mind blowing. Maybe in the end he's just another reporter and puts his best interests first.
Unfortunately, I think one of the main purpose's of Alex's attack was to annoy users and in some way to discredit substack in general. As Malone said "Controlled Opposition"
Thank you for this. Have you seen the Scotland data? Shows vaxxed at substantially increased risk of hospitalization and death over unvaxxed. I never see anyone talking about this and they are among the few who post deaths divided by vaxxed status. Page 44 is hospitalizations and page 50 is deaths. I've seen this report referenced for cases but never looking at deaths.
Yes. Although, the argument could be, roughly, made that COVID patients are displacing other patients. One of the things I've noted throughout all this is "the hospitals are being overwhelemed" hysferia is most people don't understand that any appearance of that is merely the magnification of a long term trend. I wrote a paper on the topic of hospitalizations in Canada... I guess in 2015-2016? Back then the one defining feature of hospitals was long wait lists and not enough capacity. The true emergency if it exists is one of government mismanagement of resources over long periods of time.
It's okay though, because all they need are two more weeks to solve all the hospital issues... ! (sarcasm). That's why when Ford announced the newest restrictions in Ontario to preserve hospital capacity my thought was "Wait, haven't you had TWO YEARS to figure this out?" The problem is no one knows how to solve the longstanding endemic underfunding and mismanagement of the provincial health care system.
Not sure it's that people don't know how to solve it but there are regulatory barriers created by having a provincial health care system. Chaoulli v Quebec was a perfect example of how the provinces slow down progress
(not related to actual article) but wanted to pass on the 'criminality' occurring in the covid stats being reported in Canada now (Alberta in this example) See here: [not deliberately advertising other site but can't fit in comments here] https://freecanada.win/threads/10152/
"The peak does not occur until day 34 after vaccination."
perhaps worth considering the possibility that we're seeing something new in terms of lag because omi is a far more successful vaccine evasion variant and is likely actually being amplified by it.
so you get the clinically documented 2 week immunosuppression period (likely TLR based) dovetailing into higher susceptibility due to poor antigenic imprinting from a narrow therapeutic inoculant that trained for antibodies to the wrong spike protein. (OAS)
this is why mRNA vaccines are such a poor idea. they do not teach broad resistance, are unlikely to be sterilizing, and because they leak will rapidly select for escape and hoskins effect variants.
Indeed, but I think that's the point! Despite the fact we have a far more successful vaccine evasion variant, they are still continuing the vaccine rollout on children. Responsive health policy would see something completely novel and put on the brakes to get more information especially when the benefit cost analysis for 5-11 year olds was controversial in the first place.
Jestre, glad that you are interpreting the data for us and doing it in an objective manner. This issue is so politicized and polarized that the majority cannot or do not want to see what is going on, including members of my family with math degrees!!! I find it disheartening that in this day and age critical thinking and questioning has gone out of style.
Please keep up the good work fellow Canadian, and one day we shall reclaim our claim of being strong and free.
I went on to this website can any Doctors or nurses anyone answer and explain how many covid shots are in a batch? I just had a client her grandson checked out the website it said 20 died from the batch number. I am not understanding about the batch. Please explain?
To explain the change in curve for 5-11 yr old kids:
1. Dosage!?!? If this is Pfizer the 5-11 kids are getting 1/3 the dose (in absolute terms) that adults get?
2. Its all in the brand!?!? The teenagers and older folks got either Moderna or Pfizer? Moderna isn't approved for the 5-11 kids? If I recall correctly, Ontario used both brands and the data showed that Moderna was worse than Pfizer for myocardatis + pericarditis among teenage boys. But these graphs from Alberta may pool data from both Pfizer and Moderna?
1) Since children were vaccinated last, they were the least likely to have a shortage. Hence that might explain why nearly 100% of their cases (in red) seemed to be done by 45 days.
2) Note the second dose does have an obvious spike right afterwards. It is just smaller.
3) The second dose spike has a better causal case than the first (IMO). If that could be established, it would increase the likelihood that the first dose spike is also at least in part causal (conditional probability).
4) Survivorship bias, natural immunity gained between the doses, and vaccine immunity from the first dose might all attenuate the size of the second spike.
5) Indeed, there are no denominators in those charts. Though I suppose “seeding” the next covid wave could be the most significant issue in question, even if the spikes are not huge.
6) If either spikes were due to coincidental covid waves, you might not expect the spike peaks to overlap so perfectly by age group, and to do so in both doses. And yet they do. But in refutation of this, look 190 days after dose two. All the age group peaks line up there as well. That does not look natural to me, yet it is too far away from vaccines to be causal. Any clue why they line up so well there???
7) The only “normal” age group is kids less than 12. They *DO* look like what you ought to expect. Nicely spread out over 45 days.
8) There are no kids under 12 on the 2nd dose case chart. Could be their immune systems are more resilient to the vaccine. Or perhaps vaccines are 100% effective in kids. Or perhaps they just didn’t plot it.
9) First and second dose efficacies could kick in after 1 week, thereby reducing the peaks. Though I am skeptical. (How soon do they claim it kicks in?) The first dose had shortages and was probably given throughout that springtime covid wave. Thus, the second dose probably did not occur under any worse conditions. And two doses should give more protection than one. Yet by 30 days, dose one and two case counts are already heading the opposite directions.
10) Perhaps those with vaccine side effects think they have covid, and get more tests. Artefact of testing. But since second dose has more side effects than the first, one would expect the second spike to be even bigger if that were the cause. Also, since side effects are more or less immediate, one might expect the spike to be shifted even more to the left.
11) Both dose spikes occur at like 6 to 8 days. This makes me think those peaks are at least in part causal. Causal explanations could include immunosuppression, a testing artifact, or vaccine efficacy (VE) kicking in.
My conclusions:
I’m leaning towards a causal explanation, of which I can think of three. For the reasons mentioned, I am skeptical of a testing artifact or VE kicking in. That leaves immunosuppression. I don’t see anything explicit that refutes it.
This snapshot still has the charts being interactive:
For (1), it is just because they are still vaccinating and a very small amount have been vaccinated. They are about 45 days into vaccination (as of when the data for this graph was collected). For
(2-4), those were my initial thoughts when I saw this graph months ago. That said, it would take quite a large chunk of vaccinated to be unknowingly infected for this to be true. That is actually relatively plausible and testable, but no tests have been done on it.
(5) denominators can be found through the Alberta vaccination website.
(6) because it is causal, I feel confident in saying that as negative effectiveness has been well demonstrated from a wide variety of sources and different studies including a vaccine trial.
(7) you would expect a uniform distribution with a drop off after awhile, yes, but what we are seeing is a uniform distribution and maybe a lagged spike. not normal for a vaccine that is effective.
(8) there are some if you zoom in, but only a very few because only a very few have been vaccinated so far. That will change over time.
(9) peaks happen as late as 16 days, they claim it takes 14 days, we can look at this chart as it changes over time to see if it is wave induced but I feel confident in saying no.
(10) that is plausible and must be weighted against the ones that do not get tests because they think they have vaccine side effects, those who feel protected, etc. It is hard to tell the directionality there. It would be easy to set up a study on that but it was not done. They haven't even tried to test negative design they abuse so much
(11) They happen as late as day 16, which says to me the immunosuppression probably lasts for about 10 days (when accounting for the usual incubation period of the virus)...
Also, Saskatchewan has now changed its reporting, this is how it looks (Jan 17):
This is how Sask is reporting their hospitalizations under their new procedure:
As of January 17th, a total of 167 individuals are hospitalized; including 154 inpatient hospitalizations, and 13 ICU hospitalizations. Of the 167 patients, 57 (34.1%) were not fully vaccinated.
The SHA dashboard includes 167 hospitalizations: 154 residents are inpatient: of those, 67 inpatient hospitalizations are a COVID-19 – related illness, 52 are incidental, COVID infections and 35 have not yet been determined. 13 residents are in ICUs: of those, eight (8) are for COVID-19 – related illnesses, five (5) are for incidental, COVID infections.
Jestre, not related to this article but passing on that BC has changed the way it reports covid hospitalizations from Jan 14 - As some Provinces just started differentiating Covid hospitalizations between being entered because of it & just testing positive with it whilst being treated for some other reason, BC to start classing every patient in hospital who tests positive for COVID-19 to be included in daily numbers!!
That's interesting. I assume something malicious ie. Most of the unvaccinated in the hospital in the province are incidental... Otherwise I am not sure what their logic would be. Incidentally, no pun intended, hospitalization numbers aren't great metrics in the first place. There are many people sick enough to be in the hospital testing positive with COVID that are not included in those numbers. Ie. Those in LTC homes, which has been a big issue in BC in particular.
You may have to take over for Alex. He's in serious trouble with his substack subscribers. He basically threw Dr. Robert Malone under the bus on a segment with both of them on Fox TV.
I think the beauty in anonymity is even though I am working off the side of my desk, so to speak, and I know my articles could be much higher quality if I was doing this full time... I get the benefit of a single-mindedness that neither Alex nor Robert get. I can't imagine going on any news station and arguing about semantics when lives are being ruined by an ocean of dystopia left and right. If I had a large enough platform, I would hope I would spend every moment on-air yelling about how "I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore".
To use a soccer terminology- You have your eye on the ball so to speak. Metatron's hospitalization data from early in the vaccination, Prof. Fenton/Neil's team work on all-cause mortality, and this specific exposition of 5-11 hospitalization- Mark my words, will prove pivotal in the future when we present the evidence in the court of public opinion or an actual one just how ghastly and degenerate their lies were and how costly it was to cover it up rather than provide it for all to see so that many postulates of Vanden Bossche or Kirsch could be proven.
I think a lot of us are mad as hell. I know I am. I appreciate all the work you are doing. Keep it coming please.
You might want to check out the latest video of Fauci trying to explain the unreliable results of those tests we have been using. The man is a psychopath.
You’re authentic and modest, great qualities for a writer. And you do an amazing and very professional analysis of the data…so glad you’re here to share with us. 🇨🇦
Well, that's what Dr Malone has been doing for many months now.
Your comment is quite timely. I terminated my paid subscription to Alex’s substack today after his ridiculous double down with The Daily Beast. I’m not paying for additional toxicity.
I’m hugely grateful to Jestre for this informative, insightful, thought provoking substack and will encourage others to subscribe 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Luckily I was never a paid subscriber. I am wondering if he's going to address this tomorrow or thinks it will all die down. I have no idea what his issues are but to see him do a takedown on such a qualified doctor like Dr. Malone is mind blowing. Maybe in the end he's just another reporter and puts his best interests first.
And yes to Jestre. I just recently found him. Nice to have Canadian on board. We need more.
I stopped paying too. I wonder how many people did. Anyway nice post here as usual.
Unfortunately, I think one of the main purpose's of Alex's attack was to annoy users and in some way to discredit substack in general. As Malone said "Controlled Opposition"
Alex doesn't need to worry about his substack subscribers; he'll be a regular on cnn soon enough.
Good one. I can barely get this reply out because I can't stop laughing.
Thank you for this. Have you seen the Scotland data? Shows vaxxed at substantially increased risk of hospitalization and death over unvaxxed. I never see anyone talking about this and they are among the few who post deaths divided by vaxxed status. Page 44 is hospitalizations and page 50 is deaths. I've seen this report referenced for cases but never looking at deaths.
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
Yes. Although, the argument could be, roughly, made that COVID patients are displacing other patients. One of the things I've noted throughout all this is "the hospitals are being overwhelemed" hysferia is most people don't understand that any appearance of that is merely the magnification of a long term trend. I wrote a paper on the topic of hospitalizations in Canada... I guess in 2015-2016? Back then the one defining feature of hospitals was long wait lists and not enough capacity. The true emergency if it exists is one of government mismanagement of resources over long periods of time.
It's okay though, because all they need are two more weeks to solve all the hospital issues... ! (sarcasm). That's why when Ford announced the newest restrictions in Ontario to preserve hospital capacity my thought was "Wait, haven't you had TWO YEARS to figure this out?" The problem is no one knows how to solve the longstanding endemic underfunding and mismanagement of the provincial health care system.
Not sure it's that people don't know how to solve it but there are regulatory barriers created by having a provincial health care system. Chaoulli v Quebec was a perfect example of how the provinces slow down progress
(not related to actual article) but wanted to pass on the 'criminality' occurring in the covid stats being reported in Canada now (Alberta in this example) See here: [not deliberately advertising other site but can't fit in comments here] https://freecanada.win/threads/10152/
"The peak does not occur until day 34 after vaccination."
perhaps worth considering the possibility that we're seeing something new in terms of lag because omi is a far more successful vaccine evasion variant and is likely actually being amplified by it.
so you get the clinically documented 2 week immunosuppression period (likely TLR based) dovetailing into higher susceptibility due to poor antigenic imprinting from a narrow therapeutic inoculant that trained for antibodies to the wrong spike protein. (OAS)
this is why mRNA vaccines are such a poor idea. they do not teach broad resistance, are unlikely to be sterilizing, and because they leak will rapidly select for escape and hoskins effect variants.
Indeed, but I think that's the point! Despite the fact we have a far more successful vaccine evasion variant, they are still continuing the vaccine rollout on children. Responsive health policy would see something completely novel and put on the brakes to get more information especially when the benefit cost analysis for 5-11 year olds was controversial in the first place.
Jestre, glad that you are interpreting the data for us and doing it in an objective manner. This issue is so politicized and polarized that the majority cannot or do not want to see what is going on, including members of my family with math degrees!!! I find it disheartening that in this day and age critical thinking and questioning has gone out of style.
Please keep up the good work fellow Canadian, and one day we shall reclaim our claim of being strong and free.
I went on to this website can any Doctors or nurses anyone answer and explain how many covid shots are in a batch? I just had a client her grandson checked out the website it said 20 died from the batch number. I am not understanding about the batch. Please explain?
https://www.howbadismybatch.com/index.html
To explain the change in curve for 5-11 yr old kids:
1. Dosage!?!? If this is Pfizer the 5-11 kids are getting 1/3 the dose (in absolute terms) that adults get?
2. Its all in the brand!?!? The teenagers and older folks got either Moderna or Pfizer? Moderna isn't approved for the 5-11 kids? If I recall correctly, Ontario used both brands and the data showed that Moderna was worse than Pfizer for myocardatis + pericarditis among teenage boys. But these graphs from Alberta may pool data from both Pfizer and Moderna?
You know this is an extermination exercise, not a public health one, don't you? Why not call it for what it is and not debate the age brackets?
Crossposting my thoughts on this:
1) Since children were vaccinated last, they were the least likely to have a shortage. Hence that might explain why nearly 100% of their cases (in red) seemed to be done by 45 days.
2) Note the second dose does have an obvious spike right afterwards. It is just smaller.
3) The second dose spike has a better causal case than the first (IMO). If that could be established, it would increase the likelihood that the first dose spike is also at least in part causal (conditional probability).
4) Survivorship bias, natural immunity gained between the doses, and vaccine immunity from the first dose might all attenuate the size of the second spike.
5) Indeed, there are no denominators in those charts. Though I suppose “seeding” the next covid wave could be the most significant issue in question, even if the spikes are not huge.
6) If either spikes were due to coincidental covid waves, you might not expect the spike peaks to overlap so perfectly by age group, and to do so in both doses. And yet they do. But in refutation of this, look 190 days after dose two. All the age group peaks line up there as well. That does not look natural to me, yet it is too far away from vaccines to be causal. Any clue why they line up so well there???
7) The only “normal” age group is kids less than 12. They *DO* look like what you ought to expect. Nicely spread out over 45 days.
8) There are no kids under 12 on the 2nd dose case chart. Could be their immune systems are more resilient to the vaccine. Or perhaps vaccines are 100% effective in kids. Or perhaps they just didn’t plot it.
9) First and second dose efficacies could kick in after 1 week, thereby reducing the peaks. Though I am skeptical. (How soon do they claim it kicks in?) The first dose had shortages and was probably given throughout that springtime covid wave. Thus, the second dose probably did not occur under any worse conditions. And two doses should give more protection than one. Yet by 30 days, dose one and two case counts are already heading the opposite directions.
10) Perhaps those with vaccine side effects think they have covid, and get more tests. Artefact of testing. But since second dose has more side effects than the first, one would expect the second spike to be even bigger if that were the cause. Also, since side effects are more or less immediate, one might expect the spike to be shifted even more to the left.
11) Both dose spikes occur at like 6 to 8 days. This makes me think those peaks are at least in part causal. Causal explanations could include immunosuppression, a testing artifact, or vaccine efficacy (VE) kicking in.
My conclusions:
I’m leaning towards a causal explanation, of which I can think of three. For the reasons mentioned, I am skeptical of a testing artifact or VE kicking in. That leaves immunosuppression. I don’t see anything explicit that refutes it.
This snapshot still has the charts being interactive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220114005412/https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#vaccine-outcomes
And read this title!:
"USA, state-by state analysis: vaccinations increase COVID19 cases 3-6 days later"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/351451876_USA_state-by_state_analysis_vaccinations_increase_COVID19_cases_3-6_days_later
For (1), it is just because they are still vaccinating and a very small amount have been vaccinated. They are about 45 days into vaccination (as of when the data for this graph was collected). For
(2-4), those were my initial thoughts when I saw this graph months ago. That said, it would take quite a large chunk of vaccinated to be unknowingly infected for this to be true. That is actually relatively plausible and testable, but no tests have been done on it.
(5) denominators can be found through the Alberta vaccination website.
(6) because it is causal, I feel confident in saying that as negative effectiveness has been well demonstrated from a wide variety of sources and different studies including a vaccine trial.
(7) you would expect a uniform distribution with a drop off after awhile, yes, but what we are seeing is a uniform distribution and maybe a lagged spike. not normal for a vaccine that is effective.
(8) there are some if you zoom in, but only a very few because only a very few have been vaccinated so far. That will change over time.
(9) peaks happen as late as 16 days, they claim it takes 14 days, we can look at this chart as it changes over time to see if it is wave induced but I feel confident in saying no.
(10) that is plausible and must be weighted against the ones that do not get tests because they think they have vaccine side effects, those who feel protected, etc. It is hard to tell the directionality there. It would be easy to set up a study on that but it was not done. They haven't even tried to test negative design they abuse so much
(11) They happen as late as day 16, which says to me the immunosuppression probably lasts for about 10 days (when accounting for the usual incubation period of the virus)...
Also, Saskatchewan has now changed its reporting, this is how it looks (Jan 17):
This is how Sask is reporting their hospitalizations under their new procedure:
As of January 17th, a total of 167 individuals are hospitalized; including 154 inpatient hospitalizations, and 13 ICU hospitalizations. Of the 167 patients, 57 (34.1%) were not fully vaccinated.
The SHA dashboard includes 167 hospitalizations: 154 residents are inpatient: of those, 67 inpatient hospitalizations are a COVID-19 – related illness, 52 are incidental, COVID infections and 35 have not yet been determined. 13 residents are in ICUs: of those, eight (8) are for COVID-19 – related illnesses, five (5) are for incidental, COVID infections.
(5/8 down page)
https://dashboard.saskatchewan.ca/health-wellness/covid-19/cases
Jestre, not related to this article but passing on that BC has changed the way it reports covid hospitalizations from Jan 14 - As some Provinces just started differentiating Covid hospitalizations between being entered because of it & just testing positive with it whilst being treated for some other reason, BC to start classing every patient in hospital who tests positive for COVID-19 to be included in daily numbers!!
https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-s-covid-19-hospitalization-total-to-jump-as-province-changes-reporting-system-1.5740550
Or Archive link of article https://archive.ph/Zopad
That's interesting. I assume something malicious ie. Most of the unvaccinated in the hospital in the province are incidental... Otherwise I am not sure what their logic would be. Incidentally, no pun intended, hospitalization numbers aren't great metrics in the first place. There are many people sick enough to be in the hospital testing positive with COVID that are not included in those numbers. Ie. Those in LTC homes, which has been a big issue in BC in particular.