By Steve Kirsch
Steve Kirsch’s newsletter

July 31, 2024

Executive summary

In an earlier article (which has links to all the Czech Republic articles I’ve written), I showed that gold-standard record-level data (showed the mortality rate ratio (MRR) between Moderna mortality rate and Pfizer’s was often over 30% and disproportionately impacted younger people. What this means is Moderna is too unsafe to be used. And other data shows Pfizer must be unsafe as well.

Since then, others have replicated my work showing both mRNA vaccines are too deadly to be used.

Using Czech data alone, we don’t have 100% proof that all the COVID vaccines were deadly. The findings could possibly be attributed to unknown confounders from an uneven distribution e.g. due to differences in socioeconomic status (SES). One product could be accidentally given to the sick and those more likely to die.

However, a thorough analysis of the Czech data shows why these explanations are very highly unlikely and why they are insufficient to explain the data that was observed. But critically there are many other data sources we can also use to build a full picture and greatly increase the confidence in our hypothesis.

Taking everything into account, there is simply no other remotely plausible explanation to explain what this gold-standard official government data shows. It’s devastating to the narrative for this reason.

Three key points:

1. None of the attacks provided a credible alternative hypothesis.
2. None of the attacks could point out anything in the Czech data that would preclude the vaccines from being deadly.
3. None of the attackers can explain a simple 100% verifiable anecdote like Jay Bonnar’s story. Within 2.5 years post vaccine rollout, Jay lost 15 friends unexpectedly, all vaccinated and 4 died on the same day as their vaccines (and 3 of the 4 were 30 years old or younger). He lost just one friend from COVID. This anecdote is statistically impossible if the Pfizer vaccine is safe (probability of around 5.63e-22). Nobody has ever explained how this story could have happened if the COVID vaccines are safe.

In this article I will:

1. List people who independently confirmed what I found
2. List the new attack vectors and explain in detail why each attack fails
3. Explain the techniques that people use to deal with the cognitive dissonance when they are confronted with data showing they are wrong.

This is a long article, but it’s important to address all the criticisms head on.

There is no viable alternative explanation

All of the attacks that have surfaced to date provide no plausible explanation for the observed data. They are all designed to create FUD. None provide an alternative explanation for the Czech data that is consistent with “safe and effective.” That should be very troubling for anyone supporting the narrative.

The data is too consistent and there was no brand specific systematic bias in vaccine distribution in the Czech Republic.

Consider this excerpt from the time-series “brand” spreadsheet which shows no matter what age you are, and what time period you observe after you got your shot, Moderna is consistently more deadly than Pfizer:

Figure 1. Excerpt from the summary tables in the time series brand spreadsheet. This is for doses 1 to 3 combined over variable observation time windows. As you can see the numbers are remarkably consistent.

They claimed that higher rates of comorbidities in the Moderna group could explain the findings.

We examined this as a possible explanation for the observed higher MRR for Moderna, and found that comorbidities are NOT correlated with the MRR so the hypothesis must be rejected.

In fact, I easily (in my first try) found 4 consecutive months where Moderna was getting higher comorbidities, yet the MRR was dropping. If comorbidities was a strong factor explaining the data, the slopes would be aligned, but they were opposite suggesting if there was any effect, it was minor. Also, people with high comorbidities were the first to be vaccinated so we looked at the MRR mid-year and found the same numbers when people with fewer comorbidities were vaccinated.

Also, the attackers never constructed a model of comorbidities that correlates to the MRR. Why didn’t they? Because they can’t because it doesn’t.

So by far, the most plausible hypothesis is that the reason for the MRR being >1 is because the Moderna vaccine killed more people per dose than the Pfizer vaccine. There isn’t any viable other hypothesis left standing that can explain the data.

And if they can’t explain this data, they have the additional problem of no chance of explaining the other data that confirms this data (such as from v-safe, VAERS, Yellow Card system, and the randomized trials).

Additional Support for findings

1. Quotes from reviewers
2. Articles validating the results
3. Other evidence from the Czech Republic that the vaccines are deadly
4. Denis Rancourt found a similar ratio in VAERS
5. No evidence of bias in policy
6. Consistency of MRR

New attack vectors

1. All of this was because Moderna got people with higher comorbidities
2. Socioeconomic Factors
3. It was all COVID
4. You didn’t look at all the combinations of dose and death

What the reviewers said

“My conclusion is the same as the others. Using Pfizer as a “placebo” (effectively assuming that it is safe), then all other “vaccines” are harmful – deadly in fact. Now, if you believe that Pfizer is, therefore, the only one that is not deadly, unfortunately, you have failed to grasp the implication of this. What it actually means is that they are all deadly, just some are more deadly than others.”
— Joel Smalley, data scientist, excerpt from Analysis of the Important Czech COVID “Vaccine” Mortality Data

“Unless someone can provide compelling evidence of Moderna having been given to those more likely to die in every age group and throughout the vaccination time period, then this is compelling evidence that it was more deadly.”
— Clare Craig, excerpt from Moderna was more deadly than Pfizer

“Given that today it is unknown if the mRNA COVID vaccine products offer any benefits, in conjunction with the fact they are known to cause serious harm and death, while evidence continues to build supporting these products cause additional serious harms that are still unconfirmed.  Taking this information together it should be obvious these products should be withdrawn from the market.

The Czech data set you present is clearly concerning and supports prior studies which have suggested Moderna is more harmful than Pfizer, as has been consistently identified in various manners as you refer to in your Substack post.

The Czech data you present is your best work to date, and you should be proud of it.”

— Joseph Fraiman, MD

Read the Whole Article