A major study has confirmed that Covid mRNA “vaccines” caused deaths to surge in nursing homes while offering no benefit to the elderly residents who survived.
The groundbreaking study used advanced machine learning to analyze whether mass vaccinating elderly citizens has provided any benefits.
However, the study found the opposite and revealed that the injections caused deaths to skyrocket.
The paper for the study, conducted by Professors Sourafel Girma and David Paton of the University of Nottingham in England, was published in the peer-reviewed European Economic Review journal.
The study reported a small but dubious short-lived benefit for nursing home residents in 2 of 3 metrics.
In other words, they couldn’t find a definitive benefit for the primary series of Covid injections and they found no benefit for additional shots.
Alarming, they found a highly statistically significant spike in COVID-19 mortality after the boosters were administered.
In the study’s paper, the researchers write:
“Indeed, in the later period, we find some evidence that higher vaccination rates are associated with higher Covid mortality.”
The results of the study were analyzed by MIT computer scientist and Vaccine Safety Research Foundation (VSRF) founder Steve Kirsch.
Kirsch argues that the results showing increased mortality directly conflict with the “safe and effective” narrative promoted by health officials and the corporate media.
“A safe and effective vaccine shouldn’t be even close to causing a conclusion like that,” Kirsch notes.
Additionally, vaccinating the nursing home staff also appeared to harm residents.
The impact on both COVID-19 deaths and all-cause mortality was 100% consistent in all 7 time periods and for each vaccine dose.
“It always made things worse, and for the primary series where every single one of the 14 measures was highly statistically significant (99% confident),” Kirsch explains.
“This is yet another paper showing continuation of Covid vaccination is nonsensical.
“But the data doesn’t seem to matter and nobody wants to talk about it.
“As usual, expect the mainstream media to ignore this paper as they do for any paper that shows that the health interventions were detrimental.”
In the “Conclusion” section of he study’s paper, the researchers write:
“Standard panel data regression estimates do not indicate that higher vaccination take-up reduced mortality in elderly care homes.
“In contrast, using the DDML approach, we are able to identify some evidence that vaccination may have reduced Covid-related mortality to some extent.
“This finding is, however, somewhat equivocal: it applies only to two of our three mortality measures and even for those two measures, the effect is only found for the period of the first course of COVID-19 vaccination (i.e. up to September 2021).
“Even using DDML, we are unable to identify strong evidence that vaccination rates amongst care home staff reduced mortality or that resident vaccination reduced mortality during the booster rollout period (from September 2021).
“Indeed, in the later period, we find some evidence that higher vaccination rates are associated with higher Covid mortality.”
Kirsch provides an “English translation” of the researchers’ conclusion, writing:
“Normal methods didn’t show a benefit, so we applied machine learning and found a small benefit (saving the lives of a few people per 100,000 vaccinated), but only in 2 of the 3 measures we used and ONLY in for the first dose and ONLY for residents.
“But going forward, it’s really clear there is no benefit whatsoever and it looks like it makes things worse so we are baffled as to why the healthcare authorities would still be pushing this junk.”
The data shows that the introduction of Covid mRNA “vaccines” had a massively negative impact on nursing home residents.
Tables 6a and 6b (below) show the death rates in nursing homes.
The figure is the rate per 1,000 people in the period.
A positive number means it made things worse.
The number in parens is the standard error.
If the standard error is small with respect to the value, it is statistically significant.
The number of asterisks (*) gives you the amount of statistical significance.
One star is low (90% confident), two stars means “statistically significant” (95% confident), and 3 stars means very highly statistically significant (99% confident).
All 14 data points for the primary course were highly statistically significant (99% confidence).
It shows that staff vaccination increased COVID-19 deaths and all-cause mortality among residents.
“This is stunning,” Kirsch remarks on the findings.
The booster data was similar with every single data point being positive.
Kirsch reveals that the data for boosters was “the single most devastating result of the study.”
Breaking down the data, Kirsch explains:
“Starting at 3 weeks, boosters made Covid deaths worse.
“At 4 weeks, the effect was statistically significant.
“At 5 weeks and beyond, the effect was highly statistically significant.
“Is there a more definitive study showing a benefit using the same or a more reliable dataset?
“I’m not aware of one,” he adds.
Any benefit for residents was very small and only for the first course.
The small benefit was only in 2 out of 3 measures, however.
If it was a significant effect, all 3 measures should have been triggered.
The results show that Covid deaths soared in people two weeks after they received the “booster” shot.
“Going forward, vaccination for staff or residents is nonsensical,” Kirsch concludes.
“We were assured that vaccination would reduce death, not increase it!
“This paper is yet another example that we were lied to.
“I have yet to find a single health authority in the world who is willing to have a public dialog on the evidence.”
No comments:
Post a Comment