Afternoon Joel, I've banned you for one week and removed your latest comment because I want to keep this publication pure and simple, it being a statistical bulletin covering my research effort. Over on facebook I have a team of moderators doing this but on substack it's just me, and since I have zero time free for admin all I can do is quickly block or suspend people rather than explain everything every time. If the publication starts to get wild I'll have to disable all commenting for everybody and that would be a shame. We established a facebook group called John Dee's Cauldron to permit wider discussion and maybe you could share your information there. Many thanks.
A question for JD. If a government employed statto found something like this and reported it to their seniors, what procedures would be followed? How far up the chain of command would it go? Would it be reported to ministers?
In my personal experience of working within government from the lowest to the highest levels absolutely no analytical work is ever undertaken by anybody without that work being authorised. It never gets done. Period. If some enterprising individual decided to try something it would get squashed pretty low down in the pecking order, and I wouldn't fancy their chances of promotion after that! Nothing ever gets reported to Ministers that doesn't fall within the framework of the department; that is, only 'acceptable outputs' make it up through the very tightly controlled chain. You never tell a Minister anything that might compromise them, their department or the government as a whole.
Whenever I used to pop over to Westminster I used to go on a Friday because Friday was the day when the Assistant Secretary and his crew slipped away at lunch time to a local pub for a fish 'n' chip platter and a pint after the morning meetings. All manner of hush-hush gossip was shared and we'd howl at the antics portrayed in the programme because it was so incredibly close to the truth. In essence we were laughing at ourselves, and it was good medicine!
However if you send all your analysis to the committee of Safety of Medicines/ MHRA they have to log it and cant ignore it and should/must respond. When the enquiry eventually comes this will be on the record. They cant say " we did'ny ken, we did'ny ken", So I encourage you, Joel and Norman Fenton to send these analyses to these people. I would also send it to Pfizer UK and ask for response. Again they (Pfizer an all Pharma) are obliged to keep all safety information sent to them. For instance under the regulations they have to review the world literature for safety data on their products. They also have to keep records on their database of all spontaneous ADR reports sent to them. At the moment there is little in the literature because it is heavily censored by editors. But there is a mass of reports from individuals on social media eg twitter which they don't monitor and so is not on their databases. All they seem to be doing is checking their own spontaneous reports and those to EUDRA, yellow cards, VAERS etc which we know reflects huge under-reporting and then dividing by number vaccinated (calculated by their unit sales (ie 400 million in EU when there must be accurate data on true numbers vaccinated) and saying the incidence of particular ADR is extremely rare. I check the EMEA website for their periodic safety reports and it does seem that this is how it is done although I don't go into all the details. By the way do you follow the work of Denis Rancourt who has done amazing analysis of USA all cause mortality?
Cracking stuff! I've been logging absolutely every word and every analysis so can put together a sizeable portfolio. The trouble is finding the time to scan and edit +250k words to ensure what I submit is fit for purpose and devoid of anything that could be construed as libel.
I understand the problem. I will have a think about this. Maybe just a summary of the findings specifically related to benefit/risk of vaccines. Thus evidence from ONS data which suggests its ineffective and high risk.
It seems to me the issue is .. do the jabs cause damage systematically (Clots, myocarditis etc) that leads to death.. if so it should affect both covid and non covid deaths equally... the main confounding thing is that covid deaths typically have 3-4 other comorbidities..
Looking at non covid deaths eliminates not only covid but many of the other commodities and so naturally you would see a higherR2..
By looking at all cause mortality below age 60 you are also limiting the influence of multiple comorbidities (age being the biggest)
And so getting a more real sense of the systemic influence of the vac.....
we know myocarditis is higher in young males .. but clots maybe more important for the aged?
It’s Like unraveling spaghetti
The other factor is a favourite of mine.. that being: one co morbidity can perhaps kill 10% on it’s own...but add a similar co morbidity that on it’s own kills 10%, then the two together will kill 50% add another and you have 90%..
So coincidental stresses are something to look for ie seasonal peak in flu is a combination of cold stress, low VIt D, lack of ventilation, low humidity, and disease.. age as well...
That's a great summary of how tricky all this is. I've got analyses planned that look at all cause deaths and today I'll be using NHS staff absence records as a proxy for coincidental stresses for that particular subgroup. Lots more to crank the handle on!
This making my head hurt! A worry is that so much depends on the accuracy of the data, I have little confidence in what is written on death certificates. We live in interesting times, unfortunately.
As an aside John, as a subscriber am I right in thinking I get access to your climate work as well? If so, there is a glitch in the matrix as I can't seem to log in to it.
Yes, that dependency is a concern and I bring this up in the newsletter coming out tomorrow. I thought I had issued a comp for my climate corner but I'll just check that went through for you.
Just checked and if your email address starts with rov********* then you've most certainly been issued a comp. I can't sort login issues but it might be worth checking FAQs as well as Googling. Failing that you might try unsubscribing then subscribing again for free so I can issue a fresh comp.
I can't help wondering if Queen Elizabeths death was just a random event, or whether it follows the now standard time delay from her booster? After all, she had Covid itself, but appeared to be sprightly, fit and healthy before then, though admittedly she's had a very stressful year or two. She certainly declined very fast, and the only clue we have is that the back of her hand was very discoloured and bruised two days before she passed.
I can’t begin to express my gratitude to God--for pointing me in the right direction--and for people like you, the men and women who are in the trenches, DOING THE WORK! Thank you for the hours you’ve invested. I shared my concerns re: the sauce with friends and family from the beginning, and I continue to look for, and share, quality data. I wish I knew how to help break the trance!
Afternoon Joel, I've banned you for one week and removed your latest comment because I want to keep this publication pure and simple, it being a statistical bulletin covering my research effort. Over on facebook I have a team of moderators doing this but on substack it's just me, and since I have zero time free for admin all I can do is quickly block or suspend people rather than explain everything every time. If the publication starts to get wild I'll have to disable all commenting for everybody and that would be a shame. We established a facebook group called John Dee's Cauldron to permit wider discussion and maybe you could share your information there. Many thanks.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/johndeecauldron
A question for JD. If a government employed statto found something like this and reported it to their seniors, what procedures would be followed? How far up the chain of command would it go? Would it be reported to ministers?
In my personal experience of working within government from the lowest to the highest levels absolutely no analytical work is ever undertaken by anybody without that work being authorised. It never gets done. Period. If some enterprising individual decided to try something it would get squashed pretty low down in the pecking order, and I wouldn't fancy their chances of promotion after that! Nothing ever gets reported to Ministers that doesn't fall within the framework of the department; that is, only 'acceptable outputs' make it up through the very tightly controlled chain. You never tell a Minister anything that might compromise them, their department or the government as a whole.
and here’s me thinking Yes Minister was a parody.
Whenever I used to pop over to Westminster I used to go on a Friday because Friday was the day when the Assistant Secretary and his crew slipped away at lunch time to a local pub for a fish 'n' chip platter and a pint after the morning meetings. All manner of hush-hush gossip was shared and we'd howl at the antics portrayed in the programme because it was so incredibly close to the truth. In essence we were laughing at ourselves, and it was good medicine!
However if you send all your analysis to the committee of Safety of Medicines/ MHRA they have to log it and cant ignore it and should/must respond. When the enquiry eventually comes this will be on the record. They cant say " we did'ny ken, we did'ny ken", So I encourage you, Joel and Norman Fenton to send these analyses to these people. I would also send it to Pfizer UK and ask for response. Again they (Pfizer an all Pharma) are obliged to keep all safety information sent to them. For instance under the regulations they have to review the world literature for safety data on their products. They also have to keep records on their database of all spontaneous ADR reports sent to them. At the moment there is little in the literature because it is heavily censored by editors. But there is a mass of reports from individuals on social media eg twitter which they don't monitor and so is not on their databases. All they seem to be doing is checking their own spontaneous reports and those to EUDRA, yellow cards, VAERS etc which we know reflects huge under-reporting and then dividing by number vaccinated (calculated by their unit sales (ie 400 million in EU when there must be accurate data on true numbers vaccinated) and saying the incidence of particular ADR is extremely rare. I check the EMEA website for their periodic safety reports and it does seem that this is how it is done although I don't go into all the details. By the way do you follow the work of Denis Rancourt who has done amazing analysis of USA all cause mortality?
Cracking stuff! I've been logging absolutely every word and every analysis so can put together a sizeable portfolio. The trouble is finding the time to scan and edit +250k words to ensure what I submit is fit for purpose and devoid of anything that could be construed as libel.
I understand the problem. I will have a think about this. Maybe just a summary of the findings specifically related to benefit/risk of vaccines. Thus evidence from ONS data which suggests its ineffective and high risk.
Yes, it's a tricky one. I've got a fair few ideas to crunch through to see if we can better untangle matters.
It seems to me the issue is .. do the jabs cause damage systematically (Clots, myocarditis etc) that leads to death.. if so it should affect both covid and non covid deaths equally... the main confounding thing is that covid deaths typically have 3-4 other comorbidities..
Looking at non covid deaths eliminates not only covid but many of the other commodities and so naturally you would see a higherR2..
By looking at all cause mortality below age 60 you are also limiting the influence of multiple comorbidities (age being the biggest)
And so getting a more real sense of the systemic influence of the vac.....
we know myocarditis is higher in young males .. but clots maybe more important for the aged?
It’s Like unraveling spaghetti
The other factor is a favourite of mine.. that being: one co morbidity can perhaps kill 10% on it’s own...but add a similar co morbidity that on it’s own kills 10%, then the two together will kill 50% add another and you have 90%..
So coincidental stresses are something to look for ie seasonal peak in flu is a combination of cold stress, low VIt D, lack of ventilation, low humidity, and disease.. age as well...
That's a great summary of how tricky all this is. I've got analyses planned that look at all cause deaths and today I'll be using NHS staff absence records as a proxy for coincidental stresses for that particular subgroup. Lots more to crank the handle on!
Looking forward to it!
This making my head hurt! A worry is that so much depends on the accuracy of the data, I have little confidence in what is written on death certificates. We live in interesting times, unfortunately.
As an aside John, as a subscriber am I right in thinking I get access to your climate work as well? If so, there is a glitch in the matrix as I can't seem to log in to it.
Yes, that dependency is a concern and I bring this up in the newsletter coming out tomorrow. I thought I had issued a comp for my climate corner but I'll just check that went through for you.
Just checked and if your email address starts with rov********* then you've most certainly been issued a comp. I can't sort login issues but it might be worth checking FAQs as well as Googling. Failing that you might try unsubscribing then subscribing again for free so I can issue a fresh comp.
Thanks John. I've just tried again and I'm in so the glitch has righted itself.
Wha-hey!
I can't help wondering if Queen Elizabeths death was just a random event, or whether it follows the now standard time delay from her booster? After all, she had Covid itself, but appeared to be sprightly, fit and healthy before then, though admittedly she's had a very stressful year or two. She certainly declined very fast, and the only clue we have is that the back of her hand was very discoloured and bruised two days before she passed.
That went through my mind also.
Well, her Mum lived to over 100 ... and she led a clean and healthy life.
I can’t begin to express my gratitude to God--for pointing me in the right direction--and for people like you, the men and women who are in the trenches, DOING THE WORK! Thank you for the hours you’ve invested. I shared my concerns re: the sauce with friends and family from the beginning, and I continue to look for, and share, quality data. I wish I knew how to help break the trance!
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Me too - thanks for you kind words.