The thing that causes me the most concern is that Govts won't acknowledge any excess deaths yet statisticians, insurance actuaries and whistle-blowers are indicating something is happening. Until there is a recognition of a change happening, no-one can determine any underlying causes. Simply denying there is an issue is highly suspicious. I'm old enough to remember times when anyone claiming there was an issue with anything, evidence would be produced to prove them wrong. Nowadays, problems seem to be answered by saying 'no, there's not'.
I'm in the UK also, my view is that the Govt won't accept the situation. One MP has raised the matter in Parliament several times and been shouted down each time and had to part company with the political party he was with over the matter. Do you have a link to where the Govt has accepted excess deaths and what they're doing about it?
This is where our paid off Media have let us down. I used to enjoy watching Holmes and Campbell expose anything suspected to be fraudulent for public scrutiny. So sad to see how it has changed so much for the worse. I doubt Fair Go would even listen LOL
If NZ authorities don't release the complete data - and I doubt they will - then surely that adds weight to the theory that the stuff that has been released by the whistleblower does in fact tell the story, albeit in the form of a short story rather than a complete novel. And by implication that would suggest Steve Kirsch is basically correct even though he may be "overegging the pudding" by claiming the partial data is the "smoking gun"
I would say the release of the nothing burger with the theatre surrounding it is there to provide an excuse for the NZ government to never release this data. Why do they have to? "Look at what Steve Kirsch did when some data was released, it feeds dangerous misinformation". NZ was the primary voice in the rush to "ban disinformation and non-government approved speech". This Kabuki theatre is perfect fodder for them, coincidentally.
Thanks for the reply although in truth I don't follow the logic of that argument. Why would the partial release of data mean the full data is less likely to be released? In a sense the opposite is more likely. If the partial data is a "nothing burger" as some say then it'd be the perfect chance for NZ to release the full set to stop the online spotlight on the whistleblower stuff, but they'd only do that IF it showed the whistleblower release is wrong and/or misleading. So by not releasing it they're implying there's something in the data they want to hide., which of course supports Kirsch's position
I don't really need the individualised Vax data to show a link between excess deaths and the jab. If you simply take 2020 as the datum, a year in which NZ closed its borders and kept out winter disease and compare it to 2021 when the same conditions prevailed, you will see in the older cohorts a dramatic increase in death rates over that of 2020, beginning around week 17 and continuing until week 47. This coincides with the vaccine rollout to the elderly, beginning around week 15. Then, in 2022 we see an even more dramatic rise in deaths above the 2020 datum, coinciding with booster rollout in late January and the latter stage of the primary course for the younger cohorts over 18,, driven by mandates in the workplace, that kicked in in November 2021 . I personally know of one work colleague, 54 who died 3-days after his booster taken in late January. Another, this time only 50, had a debilitating stroke that left him as an invalid after his second jab in December 2021. Unbelievably, he got a booster in late March and went down hill even further. If you use 2015-2019 as your reference data, you have to factor in the bad flu years of 2017 and 2019. They are outliers compared to 2020. A compromise would be to take 2018 death rates and compare them to the pandemic years years. One can do this via the shinyapp at the HMD.
I saw that you used 2013-2019 data to create a linear regression fit. I saw that your basic methodology relied on the extrapolation of that regression line. I saw your conclusions. I saw that you assumed the death trend for all cohorts would remain constant according to pre-pandemic years in order to create a life expectancy for each cohort. I will study your graphs a little closer to see if I've missed something, But if my initial interpretation is correct, in that you have assumed a constant background rate of rising deaths, then I believe my method is more accurate. Note that when the prevailing conditions are favorable, it is possible for the raw deaths in the older cohorts to drop, despite the population cohort increasing, thereby reducing the death rate noticeably. We saw this in the end of year figures for 2020 when the death rates dropped to the lowest on record despite the population's marginal increase. I have produced many graphs to support this, based on Stats NZ data. Note that their weekly death rate data is current up to week 49 of 2023 so one can see the most recent trend. Deaths are higher than one would expect for summer months.
The first part of the article used the linear trend. It was merely to demonstrate that the perceived increase in mortality relates to a change in demographic rather than being clearly related to the vaccine rollout. There are questions to be asked about the trend, for instance why is the death rate increasing and not decreasing and why is the demographic shift so marked. The second part of the article is modelled based on the most recent data available from 2021 to Sept 2023, which was conveniently just released.
Thank you for the details. Yes, if you show earlier years data, say from 1991, you see a declining death rate in all cohorts, particularly the over 70's. People are living longer, or should I say, less people are dying prematurely. I think it would useful to show weekly trends, as opposed to monthly, or even annual trends, to look for any correlation with vaccination numbers. I believe you have done so in a recent update, but when I do so, I see something happening outside the usual seasonal cylcles. That is why I use the weekly rate data on the Covid 19 portal at Stats NZ, broken down by age. and compare the targwt year with other years. The STMF method presents nice graphical plots of the same data, with orange regions representing higher death rates. I prefer to use all the available weekly data from Stats NZ, which began collecting it in 2011, as opposed to 2013, as you have.
If you run off to fight in the Great War, you're liable to get your butt shot off. A mandate is a voluntary request for unpaid action. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mandate
If a "mandate" isn't for something you're already willing to do, just say "Not even if you paid me for it." Firing you for not volunteering is rather backhanded (def. 3 American, 2 British).
4-5% of deaths amongst the elderly in New Zealand-increases in rates of death per 1,000 in elderly cohorts around 20% - were there more than twice the vaxx deaths?
Using my approximate population adjusted mortality rates, there is a very large increase in excess deaths amongst the elderly over 2022, which - from a prior article - occurred specifically in the the NZ sutumn/winter of 2022
(The other article with unadjusted for population deaths by month is here:
I’m just wondering, with the absolutely crazy lockdown and visa requirements to even enter NZ, how did the elderly population increase so drastically? Did so many of the population age into it? Or are there some weird changes going on in the data?
Dec 26, 2023·edited Dec 26, 2023Liked by Dr Ah Kahn Syed, OpenVAET
My comment seems to have been deleted?
Shame, I am a Kiwi but perhaps had too much to say about Liz and Kirsch and their scam and yes, Im a avid member of the community fighting for freedom myself and am disgusted with this BS expose. I am totally onto this global agenda and how they are doing it and have a pretty good idea on who our own infiltrators and Controlled Operatives are.
Perhaps one thing I can say is that Kirsch made out his server was taken down and that he was "ghosted" by wasabi, when in fact I had accessed it multiple times, even when I saw him claim it had been closed and have the screenshot that shows me clearly logged in.
We dont need this drama from Liz and Kirsch. Where Liz was clearly also targeting Winston Peters. I wont go into what I was talking about in the comment that didnt get through. Other than to say she seems to make it suddenly an urgent matter that he didnt respond to. When he was in fact behind closed doors making coalition deals AND Barry had already been sitting on this "data" and working with other groups for at least 8 months? AND just prior to this, she also set up another political party NZL that had a hickup with registration and failed getting anywhere, why? to take votes from the real threat NZ First?
Anyway, Our truther community did NOT need this drama from Liz. Seems shes only out to cause chaos and division IMHO posing as a truther. Lucky Winston still got in despite the votes she stole and he is making clear changes which includes a public inquiry that will include the efficacy and safety of these vaccines. Im sure he will have experts in their fields already who have expert "qualified" evidence. There was also a recent article by another substacker that shows far more reliable evidence of vaccine damage and possible deaths via our own VAERS.
Your articles are briliiantly written, amongst the best I have read.
I have come to the conclusion that not many properly understand time-series cohort analysis and I think Steve Kirsch has a valid point that the criticisms of his analysis are based on ignoring the fundamentals of time-series cohort analysis and going off and doing something else. The first set of doses seems to have been administered mostly over a 9 month period from 17/7/21 to 18/3/22 which is a time interval that extends significantly past the Winter. I would assume the younger age groups were vaccinated later than the vulnerable/ older age groups and that would have been past the Winter when ACM rates would be expected to fall dramatically for them. But the mortality rates rose persistently higher after vaccination for all age groups. To me this would be a clear signal of vaccine harm unless there was some other non-seasonality confounder.
I salute both you and Steve - you are both inspirations to me and warriors in this fight. None of us can truly divine the motives of each other as that is a mental phenomenon. I regard both of you with the utmost integrity. I regard this dispute as friendly fire and hope the debate will be confined to the data and its analysis rather than personalities or motives.
Thank you for your insight. I do try to avoid personal attacks and tend to ignore single attacks on myself. When they are persistent however I respond. Sometimes this is merely to highlight the motives of the person going on the attack.
For this reason I won't be entertaining any more of Steve's claims. His follow-up article made false statements about what I had posted in my article, attributing statements that OpenVAET had made in a separate article to me. I did give him a chance and pointed out the inaccuracies in his "response" article but he did not correct them and doubled and tripled down. That is his prerogative but it means, because fraud vitiates everything, nothing he can say for me can now be believed. In addition his links to DARPA and the WEF with the many other players on the CETF can no longer be ignored for me after this. I had no intention of picking a fight with Steve but if he was genuine he would have looked at our analysis. He chose not to, instead choosing to spend his time disparaging us and lying about me on his substack.
So, where the "time series analysis" is concerned I choose not to waste my time. There is nothing that can be taken from this data that can possibly show a significant relationship between dosage and death. If there was, there would have been a higher death rate in the cohort than the background rate. We have shown that the overall cohort has a 14% lower death rate than the NZ background rate for that time period which is therefore approximately equivalent to the death rate for 2018-2019. There is no possibility of finding a damning signal from this data without a subgroup analysis to suit which by nature would be flawed due to bias. It is a waste of my time but if anybody else wishes to do it, they should feel free. I have not seen another corroboration of Steve's claim.
My conclusion is that this data was released purposefully with that property. The fact remains that the NZ govt allowed that data to be released. In the process good people were targeted and anybody discussing or hosting that data threatened vicariously through Barry Young who has not been vetted I suspect by any of the people sending me hate mail.
The thing that causes me the most concern is that Govts won't acknowledge any excess deaths yet statisticians, insurance actuaries and whistle-blowers are indicating something is happening. Until there is a recognition of a change happening, no-one can determine any underlying causes. Simply denying there is an issue is highly suspicious. I'm old enough to remember times when anyone claiming there was an issue with anything, evidence would be produced to prove them wrong. Nowadays, problems seem to be answered by saying 'no, there's not'.
Agreed
I think here (UK) they do admit that there are excess deaths.
Then they say it’s lack of access to healthcare and other such nonsense that is driving it.
I'm in the UK also, my view is that the Govt won't accept the situation. One MP has raised the matter in Parliament several times and been shouted down each time and had to part company with the political party he was with over the matter. Do you have a link to where the Govt has accepted excess deaths and what they're doing about it?
100% agreed.
Denis Rancourt certainly adds to the conversation.
This is where our paid off Media have let us down. I used to enjoy watching Holmes and Campbell expose anything suspected to be fraudulent for public scrutiny. So sad to see how it has changed so much for the worse. I doubt Fair Go would even listen LOL
If that’s the case, they won’t mind releasing the rest of the data
If NZ authorities don't release the complete data - and I doubt they will - then surely that adds weight to the theory that the stuff that has been released by the whistleblower does in fact tell the story, albeit in the form of a short story rather than a complete novel. And by implication that would suggest Steve Kirsch is basically correct even though he may be "overegging the pudding" by claiming the partial data is the "smoking gun"
I would say the release of the nothing burger with the theatre surrounding it is there to provide an excuse for the NZ government to never release this data. Why do they have to? "Look at what Steve Kirsch did when some data was released, it feeds dangerous misinformation". NZ was the primary voice in the rush to "ban disinformation and non-government approved speech". This Kabuki theatre is perfect fodder for them, coincidentally.
Thanks for the reply although in truth I don't follow the logic of that argument. Why would the partial release of data mean the full data is less likely to be released? In a sense the opposite is more likely. If the partial data is a "nothing burger" as some say then it'd be the perfect chance for NZ to release the full set to stop the online spotlight on the whistleblower stuff, but they'd only do that IF it showed the whistleblower release is wrong and/or misleading. So by not releasing it they're implying there's something in the data they want to hide., which of course supports Kirsch's position
You're not paying attention and still harbouring a mindset that the NZ govt are acting with probity.
If Barry Young is a whistleblower how has he ended up in jail? It would be against the law to prosecute him.
https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/publications/protected-disclosures-act-2022/
Try to keep it civil
There is nothing un-civil in my question. Try to keep on track. Thank you
I don't really need the individualised Vax data to show a link between excess deaths and the jab. If you simply take 2020 as the datum, a year in which NZ closed its borders and kept out winter disease and compare it to 2021 when the same conditions prevailed, you will see in the older cohorts a dramatic increase in death rates over that of 2020, beginning around week 17 and continuing until week 47. This coincides with the vaccine rollout to the elderly, beginning around week 15. Then, in 2022 we see an even more dramatic rise in deaths above the 2020 datum, coinciding with booster rollout in late January and the latter stage of the primary course for the younger cohorts over 18,, driven by mandates in the workplace, that kicked in in November 2021 . I personally know of one work colleague, 54 who died 3-days after his booster taken in late January. Another, this time only 50, had a debilitating stroke that left him as an invalid after his second jab in December 2021. Unbelievably, he got a booster in late March and went down hill even further. If you use 2015-2019 as your reference data, you have to factor in the bad flu years of 2017 and 2019. They are outliers compared to 2020. A compromise would be to take 2018 death rates and compare them to the pandemic years years. One can do this via the shinyapp at the HMD.
I'm not sure you read the article
I saw that you used 2013-2019 data to create a linear regression fit. I saw that your basic methodology relied on the extrapolation of that regression line. I saw your conclusions. I saw that you assumed the death trend for all cohorts would remain constant according to pre-pandemic years in order to create a life expectancy for each cohort. I will study your graphs a little closer to see if I've missed something, But if my initial interpretation is correct, in that you have assumed a constant background rate of rising deaths, then I believe my method is more accurate. Note that when the prevailing conditions are favorable, it is possible for the raw deaths in the older cohorts to drop, despite the population cohort increasing, thereby reducing the death rate noticeably. We saw this in the end of year figures for 2020 when the death rates dropped to the lowest on record despite the population's marginal increase. I have produced many graphs to support this, based on Stats NZ data. Note that their weekly death rate data is current up to week 49 of 2023 so one can see the most recent trend. Deaths are higher than one would expect for summer months.
The first part of the article used the linear trend. It was merely to demonstrate that the perceived increase in mortality relates to a change in demographic rather than being clearly related to the vaccine rollout. There are questions to be asked about the trend, for instance why is the death rate increasing and not decreasing and why is the demographic shift so marked. The second part of the article is modelled based on the most recent data available from 2021 to Sept 2023, which was conveniently just released.
Thank you for the details. Yes, if you show earlier years data, say from 1991, you see a declining death rate in all cohorts, particularly the over 70's. People are living longer, or should I say, less people are dying prematurely. I think it would useful to show weekly trends, as opposed to monthly, or even annual trends, to look for any correlation with vaccination numbers. I believe you have done so in a recent update, but when I do so, I see something happening outside the usual seasonal cylcles. That is why I use the weekly rate data on the Covid 19 portal at Stats NZ, broken down by age. and compare the targwt year with other years. The STMF method presents nice graphical plots of the same data, with orange regions representing higher death rates. I prefer to use all the available weekly data from Stats NZ, which began collecting it in 2011, as opposed to 2013, as you have.
If you run off to fight in the Great War, you're liable to get your butt shot off. A mandate is a voluntary request for unpaid action. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mandate
If a "mandate" isn't for something you're already willing to do, just say "Not even if you paid me for it." Firing you for not volunteering is rather backhanded (def. 3 American, 2 British).
https://rumble.com/v3b5ib2-mandates-are-not-law-we-do-not-comply.html
https://americasbestpics.com/picture/mandate-legal-definition-blacks-law-dictionary-11th-ed-mandate-4-vOWnF1KB9
I have been checking out mortality data in NZ over the pandemic in the last year.
This is from a top-down perspective, not trying to break down vaxx v unvaxx causes.
I think there is an issue amongst men and women over the age of 75 years.
What do you think of this?
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/deaths-with-c19-present-were-around
4-5% of deaths amongst the elderly in New Zealand-increases in rates of death per 1,000 in elderly cohorts around 20% - were there more than twice the vaxx deaths?
Using my approximate population adjusted mortality rates, there is a very large increase in excess deaths amongst the elderly over 2022, which - from a prior article - occurred specifically in the the NZ sutumn/winter of 2022
(The other article with unadjusted for population deaths by month is here:
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/zooming-in-on-nz-mortality-data-80
-84 year olds by month and gender – what happened in the autumn and winter of 2022?
I'm glad someone is looking at this. There is an unexplained demographic shift in NZ the last two years.
PS I've also replied on your comment on OpenVAET's substack
I’m just wondering, with the absolutely crazy lockdown and visa requirements to even enter NZ, how did the elderly population increase so drastically? Did so many of the population age into it? Or are there some weird changes going on in the data?
I don't need data or anything else to tell me what I know.
Agreed. Except in order to make a case you have to be able to prove the case.
BINGO!
Its the data John West reject that makes John West the best.
Ha, ha. Nice one!
DARN IT!
And we were so close to busting this thing wide open just like last year with JORDON WALKER AND DIRECTED EVOLUTION! 😅
The function of a rodeo clown is to divert the bull with jackassery so the bullrider can get up and run away.
A wise person posted this..... makes a lot of sense......
https://sagehana.substack.com/p/the-1969-day-tapes-predicted-the
The published interview seemed completely contrived, rehearsed. I said as much right away, bad smell.
Probably take ten years of data from the experiment to work anything out, I see dead people!
Oh i love the teamwork!
🙏🙏
SAFE and EFFECTIVE.
SAFE and EFFECTIVE
My comment seems to have been deleted?
Shame, I am a Kiwi but perhaps had too much to say about Liz and Kirsch and their scam and yes, Im a avid member of the community fighting for freedom myself and am disgusted with this BS expose. I am totally onto this global agenda and how they are doing it and have a pretty good idea on who our own infiltrators and Controlled Operatives are.
Perhaps one thing I can say is that Kirsch made out his server was taken down and that he was "ghosted" by wasabi, when in fact I had accessed it multiple times, even when I saw him claim it had been closed and have the screenshot that shows me clearly logged in.
We dont need this drama from Liz and Kirsch. Where Liz was clearly also targeting Winston Peters. I wont go into what I was talking about in the comment that didnt get through. Other than to say she seems to make it suddenly an urgent matter that he didnt respond to. When he was in fact behind closed doors making coalition deals AND Barry had already been sitting on this "data" and working with other groups for at least 8 months? AND just prior to this, she also set up another political party NZL that had a hickup with registration and failed getting anywhere, why? to take votes from the real threat NZ First?
Anyway, Our truther community did NOT need this drama from Liz. Seems shes only out to cause chaos and division IMHO posing as a truther. Lucky Winston still got in despite the votes she stole and he is making clear changes which includes a public inquiry that will include the efficacy and safety of these vaccines. Im sure he will have experts in their fields already who have expert "qualified" evidence. There was also a recent article by another substacker that shows far more reliable evidence of vaccine damage and possible deaths via our own VAERS.
I don't delete comments, unless providing a back-up screen ; it's more likely you're referring to the one Ark' pinned on the main post : https://open.substack.com/pub/openvaet/p/the-new-zealand-whistleblower-data?r=1ltk77&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=46074368
ahh, thank you for clarifying, much appreciate it.
Again, thank you for the great article!
Gaslight attempt possibly? Before the next push. Share prices falling.
"Well, that just tears it !!" My old fading memory isn't certain if that was ~Frank Burns, from M.A.S.H,
Your articles are briliiantly written, amongst the best I have read.
I have come to the conclusion that not many properly understand time-series cohort analysis and I think Steve Kirsch has a valid point that the criticisms of his analysis are based on ignoring the fundamentals of time-series cohort analysis and going off and doing something else. The first set of doses seems to have been administered mostly over a 9 month period from 17/7/21 to 18/3/22 which is a time interval that extends significantly past the Winter. I would assume the younger age groups were vaccinated later than the vulnerable/ older age groups and that would have been past the Winter when ACM rates would be expected to fall dramatically for them. But the mortality rates rose persistently higher after vaccination for all age groups. To me this would be a clear signal of vaccine harm unless there was some other non-seasonality confounder.
I salute both you and Steve - you are both inspirations to me and warriors in this fight. None of us can truly divine the motives of each other as that is a mental phenomenon. I regard both of you with the utmost integrity. I regard this dispute as friendly fire and hope the debate will be confined to the data and its analysis rather than personalities or motives.
Thank you for your insight. I do try to avoid personal attacks and tend to ignore single attacks on myself. When they are persistent however I respond. Sometimes this is merely to highlight the motives of the person going on the attack.
For this reason I won't be entertaining any more of Steve's claims. His follow-up article made false statements about what I had posted in my article, attributing statements that OpenVAET had made in a separate article to me. I did give him a chance and pointed out the inaccuracies in his "response" article but he did not correct them and doubled and tripled down. That is his prerogative but it means, because fraud vitiates everything, nothing he can say for me can now be believed. In addition his links to DARPA and the WEF with the many other players on the CETF can no longer be ignored for me after this. I had no intention of picking a fight with Steve but if he was genuine he would have looked at our analysis. He chose not to, instead choosing to spend his time disparaging us and lying about me on his substack.
So, where the "time series analysis" is concerned I choose not to waste my time. There is nothing that can be taken from this data that can possibly show a significant relationship between dosage and death. If there was, there would have been a higher death rate in the cohort than the background rate. We have shown that the overall cohort has a 14% lower death rate than the NZ background rate for that time period which is therefore approximately equivalent to the death rate for 2018-2019. There is no possibility of finding a damning signal from this data without a subgroup analysis to suit which by nature would be flawed due to bias. It is a waste of my time but if anybody else wishes to do it, they should feel free. I have not seen another corroboration of Steve's claim.
My conclusion is that this data was released purposefully with that property. The fact remains that the NZ govt allowed that data to be released. In the process good people were targeted and anybody discussing or hosting that data threatened vicariously through Barry Young who has not been vetted I suspect by any of the people sending me hate mail.
💜💜💜🙏🙏🐭🐭😃😃😘😘😘