The thing that keeps niggling at me and that I thought VERY odd before the bad cat, or Berenson even wrote about this worry window, is I was looking at the provincial health ministries' data for my own (BC) and other provinces (esp Ontario and Alberta), and I saw those weird charts showing cases showing up post 1 and 2 dose in a wave on the Alberta site. That data was taken down once the big Substacks started commenting on it - probably because of all of the attention then focused on it. But - what WAS that then if not evidence pointing to the worry window?
It is still findable on the Wayback Machine. Scroll right down to the last set of graphs on the page, in rainbow colours. I could only get this link to open on the Brave browser, by the way...
I think it's a valuable service to point out flaws in skeptic-world arguments, for sure. Your efforts in this direction are greatly appreciated.
Speaking only for myself, I'm so tired of looking at charts and graphs and trying to make sense of numbers that could very likely be incomplete or fake anyway, I figure there's no point beyond getting the gist of your argument. It's obvious now that the "vaccines" are very likely doing more harm than good, so I'm going to stop there and spend time on more productive pursuits, like fixing my leaky water heater.
This is not a criticism! I'm glad you're doing this so I don't have to.
Brian is a bright guy and I wish I'd caught on to him earlier but is he actually under the impression that outright fraud did not occur in the Pfizer trials? He's not naive, is he? Just the Brook Jackson revelations alone prove some level of fraud. The way they manipulated data to exclude infections and adverse events by using their ridiculous definition of vaccinated was fraudulent. They were able to remove countless positive test results and AEs by not counting them if they occurred anywhere from the day of the first injection all the way through 2 weeks after the second one. This is fraud
Click on 'Data by Age Group' and then select the option with 'Covid-19 flagged' in the drop down menu on the left. I tried to make some sense of this data in a substack post, but would be the first to admit that my lay observations amount to little more than guesswork:
Like many, I've become rather cynical about government and industry-supported 'Covid' data, so it's always nice when (apparently) more neutral data is available to triangulate with. If this data has any value, clearly *something* quite dramatic happened in the Spring of 2021 in Ontario, whether or not I was aware of it through the anectodal grapevine. This isn't an argument against your 'worry window' anaylsis, Brian, which is much appreciated and stands on its own merits. It seems to me that the ACES data points to some kind of immune suppression happening after the first dose. But I'd love your take on this data. What exactly am I looking at?
Jan 19, 2023·edited Jan 19, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Hi Brian,
Am following this series with great interest. Admit I have been quite smitten with the worry window so this is challenging my priors - which is good. Couple of points:
1. To what extent were vaccinated no longer obliged (and inclined) to test after vaccination. I can only speak from my experience in Germany but here the vaccinated were mostly exempted from testing once jabbed.
2. To what extent were those vaccinated early on even concious of the fact that they could be infected? I recall Dr. John Campbell referencing Zoe and inferring that vaccinated if infected were more likely to be asymptomatic or have different symptoms to unvaccinated. In other words would a recently vaccinated even recognise and infection and/or seek a test.
Both of these points suggest the Case curves may not capture the true incidence within the vaccinated population.
3. There are some interesting curves of testing data for England available here:
There was a massive reduction (3.3M -> 0.9M) in the number of PCR tests administered in England from 1st Jan '21 to 1st Mar '21 (this could confirm my first point). Chicken-egg, which came first reduced cases or reduced testing?
==EDIT==
my bad, I was lookig at 21/22. positvity sank steadily from 1st Jan to 1st May in 2021 and testing remained relatively consistent.
==EDIT==
(Very noteworthy is how positivty basically tracked no. of tests in that 2 month period?)
4. Anecdotes: I only know people who got infected shortly after boosters in winter 21/22. Then again case rates were high (anyway?) in my region at the time. Although see points 1 & 2.
I never heard of the worry window. I always did think it was strange that they didn't count people as vaccinated until after 2 weeks. Looking at the UK waves, respiratory infections are seasonal. I think that's why they released the vaccine in November and December, because respiratory infections were likely to go down in the coming months.
Continuing my rant... if you have got your worry window exposition out of your system Brian.. I wish you could refocus your copius neurons on questions of immunology. What questions? Maybe you saw this piece; https://www.eugyppius.com/p/the-history-of-failed-hiv-vaccine
Title: The history of failed HIV vaccine trials confirms that overvaccination causes class-switching towards non-inflammatory IgG4 antibodies, reducing the effectiveness of the immune response
My sense is that there is something we are missing when it comes to the conditions that invoke IgG4. The Eugyppius post shows that we should have known, in some sense, that injecting epitopes isolated away from the viral whole was somehow a bad idea... and these (HIV gp120-related) proteins weren't even self-replicating.
Since the substack post is paywalled, the paper of interest is here;
These folks dance around the question, and basically admit we don't know why our immune systems treat "allergy" antigens differently (eventually invoking IgG4) vs. viral antigens.
"The uncharacteristic induction of high levels of IgG4 in the alum based VAX003 regimen may be related to the repeated administration of seven large doses of vaccine antigens in the absence of sufficiently potent adjuvant signals that may have driven excessive B cell receptor triggering. Allergy studies have similarly observed that continuous exposure to high doses of antigen can result in suppressed inflammatory responses through elevated levels of antigen-specific IgG4 (28). However, little is known about the mechanism by which vaccines tune Ab subclass selection."
The mRNA injections, no matter what vector flavor, have been a complete failure against their initially stated goal of some kind of herd immunity. I will admit it's hard to deconvolute the effects of the shots away from the crime of withholding early treatments. All that we can say for sure is that, were the US, or any other Western nation, to aggressively pursue application of an optimized early treatment cocktail for both sick people and (prophylactically) for close contacts, instead of immune addling shots, the waves of infection would have ended. We know this based on a tiny little experiment (n=230 million) called Uttar Pradesh, which did exactly what I described, against a low vax. background. The data is there, juxtaposed for us in this post from last August by my friend of 13 years, Dr. Chris Martenson;
The thing that keeps niggling at me and that I thought VERY odd before the bad cat, or Berenson even wrote about this worry window, is I was looking at the provincial health ministries' data for my own (BC) and other provinces (esp Ontario and Alberta), and I saw those weird charts showing cases showing up post 1 and 2 dose in a wave on the Alberta site. That data was taken down once the big Substacks started commenting on it - probably because of all of the attention then focused on it. But - what WAS that then if not evidence pointing to the worry window?
It is still findable on the Wayback Machine. Scroll right down to the last set of graphs on the page, in rainbow colours. I could only get this link to open on the Brave browser, by the way...
https://web.archive.org/web/20220101000507/https:/www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#vaccine-outcomes
I think it's a valuable service to point out flaws in skeptic-world arguments, for sure. Your efforts in this direction are greatly appreciated.
Speaking only for myself, I'm so tired of looking at charts and graphs and trying to make sense of numbers that could very likely be incomplete or fake anyway, I figure there's no point beyond getting the gist of your argument. It's obvious now that the "vaccines" are very likely doing more harm than good, so I'm going to stop there and spend time on more productive pursuits, like fixing my leaky water heater.
This is not a criticism! I'm glad you're doing this so I don't have to.
Brian is a bright guy and I wish I'd caught on to him earlier but is he actually under the impression that outright fraud did not occur in the Pfizer trials? He's not naive, is he? Just the Brook Jackson revelations alone prove some level of fraud. The way they manipulated data to exclude infections and adverse events by using their ridiculous definition of vaccinated was fraudulent. They were able to remove countless positive test results and AEs by not counting them if they occurred anywhere from the day of the first injection all the way through 2 weeks after the second one. This is fraud
What if we looked at another kind of 'wave'? Here in Ontario I've been puzzled by this graph for almost two years now:
https://www.kflaphi.ca/aces-pandemic-tracker/
Click on 'Data by Age Group' and then select the option with 'Covid-19 flagged' in the drop down menu on the left. I tried to make some sense of this data in a substack post, but would be the first to admit that my lay observations amount to little more than guesswork:
https://thoughtsonacrisis.substack.com/p/the-covid-vaccination-rollout-in
Like many, I've become rather cynical about government and industry-supported 'Covid' data, so it's always nice when (apparently) more neutral data is available to triangulate with. If this data has any value, clearly *something* quite dramatic happened in the Spring of 2021 in Ontario, whether or not I was aware of it through the anectodal grapevine. This isn't an argument against your 'worry window' anaylsis, Brian, which is much appreciated and stands on its own merits. It seems to me that the ACES data points to some kind of immune suppression happening after the first dose. But I'd love your take on this data. What exactly am I looking at?
Hi Brian,
Am following this series with great interest. Admit I have been quite smitten with the worry window so this is challenging my priors - which is good. Couple of points:
1. To what extent were vaccinated no longer obliged (and inclined) to test after vaccination. I can only speak from my experience in Germany but here the vaccinated were mostly exempted from testing once jabbed.
2. To what extent were those vaccinated early on even concious of the fact that they could be infected? I recall Dr. John Campbell referencing Zoe and inferring that vaccinated if infected were more likely to be asymptomatic or have different symptoms to unvaccinated. In other words would a recently vaccinated even recognise and infection and/or seek a test.
Both of these points suggest the Case curves may not capture the true incidence within the vaccinated population.
3. There are some interesting curves of testing data for England available here:
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/testing?areaType=nation&areaName=England
There was a massive reduction (3.3M -> 0.9M) in the number of PCR tests administered in England from 1st Jan '21 to 1st Mar '21 (this could confirm my first point). Chicken-egg, which came first reduced cases or reduced testing?
==EDIT==
my bad, I was lookig at 21/22. positvity sank steadily from 1st Jan to 1st May in 2021 and testing remained relatively consistent.
==EDIT==
(Very noteworthy is how positivty basically tracked no. of tests in that 2 month period?)
4. Anecdotes: I only know people who got infected shortly after boosters in winter 21/22. Then again case rates were high (anyway?) in my region at the time. Although see points 1 & 2.
I never heard of the worry window. I always did think it was strange that they didn't count people as vaccinated until after 2 weeks. Looking at the UK waves, respiratory infections are seasonal. I think that's why they released the vaccine in November and December, because respiratory infections were likely to go down in the coming months.
Continuing my rant... if you have got your worry window exposition out of your system Brian.. I wish you could refocus your copius neurons on questions of immunology. What questions? Maybe you saw this piece; https://www.eugyppius.com/p/the-history-of-failed-hiv-vaccine
Title: The history of failed HIV vaccine trials confirms that overvaccination causes class-switching towards non-inflammatory IgG4 antibodies, reducing the effectiveness of the immune response
My sense is that there is something we are missing when it comes to the conditions that invoke IgG4. The Eugyppius post shows that we should have known, in some sense, that injecting epitopes isolated away from the viral whole was somehow a bad idea... and these (HIV gp120-related) proteins weren't even self-replicating.
Since the substack post is paywalled, the paper of interest is here;
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260950633_Polyfunctional_Fc-Effector_Profiles_Mediated_by_IgG_Subclass_Selection_Distinguish_RV144_and_VAX003_Vaccines
These folks dance around the question, and basically admit we don't know why our immune systems treat "allergy" antigens differently (eventually invoking IgG4) vs. viral antigens.
"The uncharacteristic induction of high levels of IgG4 in the alum based VAX003 regimen may be related to the repeated administration of seven large doses of vaccine antigens in the absence of sufficiently potent adjuvant signals that may have driven excessive B cell receptor triggering. Allergy studies have similarly observed that continuous exposure to high doses of antigen can result in suppressed inflammatory responses through elevated levels of antigen-specific IgG4 (28). However, little is known about the mechanism by which vaccines tune Ab subclass selection."
Little is known indeed.
The mRNA injections, no matter what vector flavor, have been a complete failure against their initially stated goal of some kind of herd immunity. I will admit it's hard to deconvolute the effects of the shots away from the crime of withholding early treatments. All that we can say for sure is that, were the US, or any other Western nation, to aggressively pursue application of an optimized early treatment cocktail for both sick people and (prophylactically) for close contacts, instead of immune addling shots, the waves of infection would have ended. We know this based on a tiny little experiment (n=230 million) called Uttar Pradesh, which did exactly what I described, against a low vax. background. The data is there, juxtaposed for us in this post from last August by my friend of 13 years, Dr. Chris Martenson;
https://peakprosperity.com/wow-cdc-completely-reverses-course-its-over/
I have zero interest in mRNA apologetics. Let's instead focus on the crime at hand.