![\"Batch](\"http:\/\/www.tomgrimshaw.com\/tomsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/Batch_Related_Adverse_Events-300x187.jpg\")
<\/p>\nThe Defender ran a story this week about a remarkable independent analysis published back in late March, in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, as a letter to the editor. Kudos to the journal for printing it at all. The researchers\u2019 conclusions, based upon Danish VAERS* data, confirmed yet another \u201cmisinformation\u201d \u201cconspiracy theory.\u201d<\/p>\n
(* Their reporting system is called something else, but for all intents and purposes works essentially the same way as our VAERS system.)<\/p>\n
The Danish government has a robust regulatory system that, in theory, tested and approved all that country\u2019s Pfizer jab batches, and then supposedly monitored the ongoing performance of the batches for \u201csafety and efficacy.\u201d So the researchers expected to see a \u201chomogenous rate and distribution of\u201d serious adverse events between batches. Meaning, no particular differences between the batches.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s not what they found at all. They found the reverse opposite of what they expected:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The informative chart above shows all the serious adverse events reported for Danish Pfizer shots. The researchers found the data organized itself into three distinct groups of batches. As you can easily see, one group, the blue group, or the \u201cdeath group,\u201d was particularly awful, with nearly 1 in 10 shots resulting in a serious adverse event. The second group, shown on the green middle line, was moderately dangerous \u2014 far more dangerous than any acceptable drug should be \u2014 with reported adverse events clocking in at around 1 in 400.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s bad enough. But the third group, including nearly a third of all doses injected into Danish citizens, was shocking, ringing alarm bells louder than if the dike had sprung a leak. Pfizer shots in the third group of batches, shown in yellow above, and tracking right along the bottom line of the chart, generated NO ADVERSE EVENTS AT ALL. None. Zip, zero, nada.<\/p>\n
The implications are massive. I\u2019ll offer four big ones.<\/p>\n
1) The only explanation for the third batch, the \u201czero batch,\u201d is that it must have been a placebo. Think saline. There is no other reasonable way to explain how NO adverse events at all could have been reported in that large sample.<\/p>\n
It gets even weirder, if that\u2019s possible. German researchers who followed up on the March study with public records requests would later tell the Daily Skeptic that \u201calmost none of the harmless batches, unlike the very-bad and not-so-bad batches, appear to have been subject to any quality-control testing at all.\u201d<\/p>\n
In other words, for some reason, the regulators ignored the \u201czero group\u201d shots.<\/p>\n
This lack of testing of the \u201czero\u201d group strongly suggests that the regulators must have known in advance these batches were placebos, and didn\u2019t need to be tested. How would they have known?<\/p>\n
2) The data also suggests the regulators didn\u2019t fail at their job of eliminating the most dangerous batches. They must have seen it in the data. The giveaway is how few of the death batch jabs were injected into patients \u2014 since the \u201cdeaths shots\u201d group included fewer than 5% of all injections.<\/p>\n
This data strongly suggests that the most deadly batches were quietly discontinued \u2014 without any warning or follow up for injectees who got the dangerous shots.<\/p>\n
Who has the juice to corral Danish regulators like this?<\/p>\n
3) The existence of three discrete groups of injections, with dramatically different results, raises even more questions. Was Pfizer \u2014 with willing cooperation by regulators \u2014 experimenting on the public with the different dosages? Or, were the placebos deployed to lower the average number of total adverse events, to hide how insidiously dangerous the shots are?<\/p>\n
I won\u2019t to go there, since I can\u2019t prove anything, but I\u2019ll just say the depopulation theorists will have lots of comments about these figures.<\/p>\n
4) In Denmark, as in the U.S., the voluntary reporting system is believed to drastically underestimate the number of adverse events. Historically, studies have shown VAERS represents only 1% of actual injuries. So the two bad groups were conceivably much, much worse than what the data shows.<\/p>\n
In a sane, non-clown world, these findings \u2014 easily reproduced by anyone who wants to check \u2014 would be international front-page news and also grounds for immediate suspension of the jab program. But that\u2019s not the world we live in. So, who cares, right?<\/p>\n
One wonders what the U.S. data looks like.<\/p>\n