Did you receive the COVID shot and experience any adverse events? Do you know anyone that was injured or died unexpectedly after receiving the shot?
Mark Skidmore, an expert in public finance and policy evaluation, has been scouring reports from vaccine manufacturers and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System to get answers. He has even conducted a survey to pose the very questions above. His goal? To try to get a handle on just what the fallout has been (so far) from the COVID vaccination initiatives in the U.S. He communicates what he’s learned on today’s episode.
Visit Mark’s website: https://mark-skidmore.com/
Join the WAPF email list: https://bit.ly/WAPFupdates
Check out our sponsors: Second Spring Foods, https://secondspringfoods.com/
Optimal Carnivore https://www.amazon.com/optimalcarnivore
Listen to the podcast here
Within the below transcript the bolded text is Hilda.
Did you receive the COVID shot and experience any adverse events? Do you know anyone that was injured or died unexpectedly after receiving the shot? Our guest is Mark Skidmore, an expert in public finance and policy evaluation. Mark put his experience to work by looking into reports from COVID vaccine manufacturers, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, and a survey to pose the very questions I asked at the top.
His goal is to try to get a handle on what the fallout has been so far from the COVID vaccination initiatives in the United States. At the time of this interview in 2022, the official FDA and CDC position indicated that there had only been nine fatalities from the shot, but other sources suggest that the number is much higher, approximately 300,000 and growing.
Uncovering the truth can help us hold Federal agencies accountable and protect public health in the days ahead. Before we dive in, let me say that censorship is real. Let’s have a direct line of communication. Join the Weston A. Price Foundation email list to stay abreast of action alerts in your area along with important topics of interest, including food freedom, upcoming events, and more. Go to WestonAPrice.org and click on the yellow button on the home page to sign up.
Here’s a quick shout-out to Second Spring Foods. They use nourishing food traditions like sprouting and fermentation to revitalize the modern pantry with whole foods. Second Spring Foods is a family-owned and operated business with over 30 years of experience working with food, sprouting it, eating it, and sharing it. Dianne and Michelle Donaldson grew up surrounded by a strong agricultural community. Building on their family’s first business, they co-created Second Spring Foods with the goal of sharing sprouted food directly with individuals.
They sprout a wide variety of grains and beans while also offering whole grain flours milled in-house. Their products are all organic. Go to SecondSpringFoods.com to find your favorite sprouted pantry staples and use the code WISE for 10% off at checkout. There is free shipping to the United States and Canada on all orders over $65. Visit the Learn section at SecondSpringFoods.com for delicious sprouted recipes, information on sprouting, and their free sprouted sourdough eBook.
A quick note before we get into this episode. Mark Skidmore expresses some different opinions regarding viruses than those held by the Weston A Price Foundation. Though we may disagree on this point, we think it’s important to provide his information on statistics regarding the COVID shot fallout to you, the reader. Enjoy.
Visit Mark’s website: https://www.Mark-Skidmore.com/
Join the WAPF email list: https://bit.ly/WAPFupdates
Check out our sponsors: Second Spring Foods, Ra Optics, Optimal Carnivore
Welcome to the show, Mark.
It’s nice to be here, Hilda.
I’m so glad you’re here. I‘m curious. When did you start to become skeptical of the efficacy of the COVID vaccine?
I became concerned at the very beginning of this whole process with my background in Economics. When we had these massive lockdowns, at first, it was supposed to be just for a couple of weeks but then it got extended. I began to question the wisdom of that and wondered whether there were other motivations. That was the trigger mark for me, looking more carefully at this whole process of going through the COVID crisis, and then the great anticipation that we’ve got to hold on until we get the vaccines.
We know that these vaccines are a form of gene therapy. It’s a brand-new type of vaccine. We can talk more about the nature of this type of product as we move forward. It was a real question. I was sitting in with a group of concerned Doctors for COVID Ethics. They’re working through the mechanisms of potential harm with this type of gene-based technology. In the midst of all of that, a family member experienced a significant neurological problem. She can’t even walk very well right after she was vaccinated.
Another person that I know experienced pericarditis and got sick following the vaccine. My wife knows somebody who was in her 40s and had a heart attack and died right after the vaccination. The average age of a person who has a first heart attack in the United States is about 65 years of age. It’s uncommon for a 40-plus years old middle-aged woman to have a heart attack and then die. That made me wonder. If it is so rare, how is it that I know at least three people in my social circles who experienced an adverse event?
Is that where you got the idea to conduct a survey about adverse events and fatalities resulting from these shots?
We’re sitting on our weekly calls with Doctors for COVID Ethics. They can see individual cases of events occurring. The mechanisms of harm are outlined. We can see data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System that the Federal government tracks. We know that those data are only partial and that not all events get reported. We can’t verify if those events are caused by the vaccine, although it’s typically a medical professional that inputs those data, and they have to have the batch number for the vaccine and all kinds of information. It’s very cumbersome to fill out.
We have that and some other sources that were emerging indicators that there was harm occurring, but we didn’t know how much. We thought a survey could help us understand what was happening in a broader sense. It was a personal experience but also engaging with doctors who are very concerned about this type of vaccine technology.
How did you go about it? What was the scope of the survey?
It was an online survey of 3,000 people. It gives you a pretty good confidence interval. It’s still small relative to large medical studies, but it’s representative of the US population. We asked them a series of questions about their health experiences with the COVID illness, and then a balanced question about their health experiences with the COVID vaccine, whether or not they had been vaccinated, and whether or not they received any experience in adverse events. That information is helpful.
About 16% said they experienced an adverse event, which is pretty high. Most of it was, “I felt sick for a day or two,” but some people said, “I had a heart problem. I was sick for days. I had a neurological problem or a blood clot.” There were people in that group, but if you were sick or maybe you passed away from either the COVID illness or the COVID inoculation, you couldn’t complete this survey. It’s only partial.
The important part of this survey is where I ask questions about what happened to people you know in your family, your friend groups, and your immediate social network. That group turns out to be not too big because you have to know them well enough to know whether they have been vaccinated and whether they experienced direct harm from that. That has a much better chance of capturing the flavor of what’s happening around the country than just asking people about their experiences.
Did the results line up with your own experience in that people had seen adverse reactions among friends and family members and even fatalities at a greater rate than the numbers that we have seen from the CDC or the pharmaceutical companies were putting out?
If you go on the CDC website, the explanation is that these vaccines are safe and effective. They officially acknowledge that there have been nine fatalities from the vaccines, primarily from the J&J vaccination through blood clots. That’s it. If you go to the VAERS data system focusing on the US over the 2021 period or that first year of the vaccine rollout, you might have about 9,000 fatalities in the United States.
Why are those numbers so vastly different?
For some reason, we’re not looking closely at the VAERS-reported adverse events. Our government isn’t looking. They’re saying, “Those are just reports. We don’t really know if they’re caused by the vaccine. We’re not looking at it,” but if you go into the VAERS system and look at the explanations for blood clot, stroke, heart-related problems, heart attacks, myocarditis, pericarditis, and neurological problems, there’s a whole host of problems that match perfectly with some of the issues that Pfizer identified as potential problems, but we’re not looking.
We have about 9,000 fatalities in the official VAERS data through the first year of the vaccine. Pfizer documents, which were released by court orders, within the first two months, there were 1,200 fatalities recorded. It’s astounding that these data be restricted for 75 years. A group of doctors called Doctors for Transparency issued a FOIA request, which was denied. They went to court to get it. Fortunately, the judge said, “We’re not going to wait 75 years. You need to start releasing these data.”
Pfizer has been releasing incrementally a bunch of information about what they have been doing as part of the trials before the release of the vaccine as well as what happened in the first weeks of vaccination nationwide. In those studies, they are reporting 1,200 fatalities and tens of thousands of adverse events. For some reason, the total number of people that were being tracked had been redacted. You can’t work out the injury rates. We have this data, yet officially there are nine fatalities.
I don’t buy the, “We’re not paying attention to the other data.” It seems almost deliberate because it’s right there in black and white from Pfizer’s documents and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It‘s there in black and white. It’s one thing if a ten-year-old doesn’t see it. They missed it because they’re going to school, but these are people who are supposedly dedicated to public health.
They approved it for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds. If you look at the official government report, there have been only nine fatalities. Any adverse events are very minor and any serious ones are extremely rare. You go to the VAERS data and get a different story. The total number of deaths and fatalities exceeds the sum of all other vaccine adverse events for all types of vaccines since the system began in 1990, just in 2021 for the COVID vaccine. We can say, “We can’t verify all of those reports,” but just the change in 2021 for me is enough to be a huge red flag, yet it’s not.
Importantly, I’m thankful for people like you who are doing these shows and being open to talking about it. If you go to the mainstream media, you are not going to get this information. If it is, it will pop and then disappear. It’s not highlighted. If you go and dig, you can find this out but if you are super busy, you have a family, you’re busy working, and you turn on ABC or NBC, you’re not going to get any information about this. To me, that is a crime. We will talk about the survey estimates. It’s a fraud on a massive scale to tell people it’s safe and not give them the information.
It’s like a fraud on a massive scale to tell people something is safe and not give them the information.
It is unethical, which leads me to the fact that you presented the survey results to the Doctors for COVID Ethics Symposium 3. Talk to us about those results and what the response was from the doctors’ gathered data.
The gathering was all about the issues around this to try to help people become more informed about the potential risks of the vaccine. I’m not a doctor but I’ll briefly explain in my layman’s understanding of how this technology works. You have a nanolipid that delivers instructions that recode your cells to produce a piece of the Coronavirus called the spike protein. With a typical vaccine, the contents of the injection stay in the muscle of the arm where you’re vaccinated. The nanolipids were designed for gene therapy or cancer where you need to deliver something throughout the body.
These nanolipids deliver those instructions to produce spike proteins not just to the arm but throughout the whole body. You could end up with cells producing spike proteins in your heart, and then you get heart problems. You could end up breaking the blood-brain barrier and going into your brain or other parts of your neurological system. You end up with neurological problems. You could end up producing spike protein in your bloodstream or your circulatory system, resulting in clots and strokes.
All of these things are possible. If you go on the official side of things, those events are extremely rare according to them. My personal experience and what these doctors are saying is that it could be far more common than we realize. That was the motivation for the survey. You focus on the part about, “Do I know in my immediate social circle who experienced COVID illness and had problems? Who do I know who received a vaccination and experienced an adverse event?”
What we learned is that about 34% of the respondents indicated they knew somebody who had been ill from COVID and had problems. Maybe that’s not surprising. About 22% of the respondents said, “I know at least one person who experienced a significant health problem after vaccination.” We asked them, “What was it? What happened?” In the case of COVID illness, they might say, “That person died. They experienced ongoing respiratory problems. Their taste disappeared.” Some of those problems will likely resolve over time, and some are more serious.
It’s the same thing with the COVID vaccine. What happened? “My friend got a blood clot and had to have his leg amputated. They had heart problems. My cousin had a heart attack and died. So-and-so has neurological problems.” Think about this. This is a survey of 3,000 people where 22% said, “I know somebody who got inoculated. They had a problem.” What was it? Of that group, about 57 said the person they knew best died following inoculation. To put that in reference to the COVID illness, about 165 people said, “The person I knew best who had a problem died.”
The ratio of COVID inoculation death to COVID illness death is about 35%. Keep in mind the ratio of COVID inoculation deaths to COVID illness deaths. That’s high when you think about the fact that there were about 900,000 people who died from COVID. The government says only nine people died. The ratio is 9 to 900,000. It’s 0.0001% or whatever it is. If you take the VAERS data, which is not verified, it’s about over 900,000. If you compare 1% to 35%, that’s a huge difference. It’s a statistically significant difference.
The ratio of COVID inoculation deaths to COVID illness deaths is 35%.
That gives you a sense. Either my survey is off or the government data is off. I feel pretty comfortable with my data because it matches the US census data in terms of education, political affiliation, age, and income. All of the demographics match pretty well with the census. I feel I’ve done a pretty good job capturing a representative sample. There’s something wrong here. Is it the survey that’s wrong? Is it the government reporting on these injuries that’s wrong?
Coming up, Mark shares statistics on vaccine adverse reactions and suggests natural ways that we can take care of our health without the need to get vaccinated or boosted.
Go to RaOptics.com and use the discount code WISE at checkout for 10% off any order of any size.
Go to Amazon.com/OptimalCarnivore and use the code WESTON10 to save 10% on all products. They’ve got Brain Nourish, Grassfed Organ Complex, and a grass–fed beef liver.
What can we do? Number one, we can examine your inoculation decision, whether it depends on what you see in your social network. If you see somebody who got sick from COVID, you’re more likely to be inoculated because that’s scary. COVID has all kinds of problems, or maybe they died. That’s important, but what’s even more important is if there’s somebody in your social network who experienced an adverse event from the vaccine, or maybe they died. In that case, you’re far less likely to be inoculated because it hit you like, “This person got hurt. I don’t think I’m going to do this.”
Behaviorally, they’re responding to their experiences. The last thing I’ll say is that with this ratio of reported COVID vaccine deaths to COVID illness deaths, you can back out an estimate of the nationwide fatalities under the assumption that the survey is more accurate than the government reporting. If we do that, we get about 290,000 fatalities in the first year of the rollout of the vaccine.
Where you’re leading us is to consider all of the factors, not just the propaganda and the promotion of the vaccines but all of the factors and the risks related to getting the injection. People who do open their eyes would notice even in terms of people they don’t know that are getting hurt. I don’t know if you know this, but Justin Bieber is a popular singer. Half of his face is now paralyzed. He’s dealing with something. His wife had a stroke. Both of them are in their twenties.
We need to pay attention. People who are paying attention might see that what happened to them could be an adverse reaction to a vaccination. We have seen athletes since the vaccine was introduced simply fall over onto the field and be carted off. We don’t know if they had a heart problem or if it was a sudden stroke, but this is not behavior that’s typical of strong athletes who are usually in their prime in performance mode.
If you look within the soccer or football area, there are always a few athletes who collapse during a game. It could be that they had a heart issue they didn’t know about, or it was the heat and they collapse. Maybe a few would die over the course of a year. There has been over a 1,000-fold increase in the number of collapses and fatalities on the soccer field globally. It’s so in your face. It’s hard not to see it.
Is this true? Are they starting to say that there is a condition called Sudden Adult Death syndrome? They used to say there was Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, and now they’re labeling it Sudden Adult Death Syndrome. This doesn’t come out of nowhere. This is something that’s increasing. I want to invite the audience and all of us to open our eyes to pay attention to what’s happening and start to put 2 and 2 together.
There’s this normalization occurring or an attempt to normalize this idea that not just old people sometimes die of natural causes, that sometimes they will just collapse, and that this is a phenomenon that’s unrelated to the vaccine. If we’re willing to look honestly, we can make the connection to the vaccine. It’s very troubling. There are other ways of backing this out. The fifth-largest insurance company in America is called Lincoln. It had a 163% increase in death benefits. It’s a huge increase in payouts.
That means a lot more people in that working group. Old people typically don’t have life insurance. My kids are almost grown. My term life will come to an end in the next few years. I don’t need it anymore. It’s usually young people who have some form of life insurance so that if they pass away, their family is taken care of and that kind of thing. A 163% increase over previous years is phenomenal. That is happening. That’s another point to triangulate.
That’s interesting to contrast that with the number of deaths from COVID. In 2020, people are dying of COVID but the increase didn’t happen during the COVID time. The increase happened when the vaccine was already in place. A majority of the population, according to what we have been told, was getting inoculated. Why would there be more deaths then than in previous years?
If you look at 2019 and 2020, there’s a slight increase from ’19 to ’20. There’s a huge increase in ’21, the year of the vaccine rollout. You have to remember too that most healthy people who are under the age of 60 typically manage COVID. If you have health problems, it can get you and it can be a real problem, but it’s the older people who typically don’t have insurance who die from COVID. Something happened in 2021 that led to this change. The prime candidate is the vaccine.
If you look at government data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2021, there was an increase in three million people on disability. You have to ask the question, “Why the increase in 2021?” My estimate is that there are about 300,000 fatalities, about 1 million serious adverse events, and about 3 million adverse events of all types, including less serious ones like you were sick for several days.
I want to pivot now and ask you about the future. I want to ask you about what you foresee. We have approved in the US under emergency use authorization the shot for 6-month–olds to 5-year-olds. Are they going to still be promoting these shots in the US and around the world? Is it going to be incorporated into our normal vaccine schedule for children?
One of the goals is to work it in because that provides additional protection for the vaccine companies if it can get worked into the vaccine schedule and be normalized. I don’t think they’re going to change. If they acknowledge the problem, they have to acknowledge a crime and other motivations besides the well-being of the global population. We’re going to keep seeing it be pushed. I don’t know if that’s true. More people are experiencing adverse events. Fewer people are wanting to take the booster. It may be that the demand for it will go away unless they double down and try to mandate it or increase it.
The pressure is on mandates. Fewer people are wanting to take it. I want to offer a bigger picture about this mRNA technology because the idea and the vision that these companies have for this mRNA technology in terms of delivering different types of inoculations is that you can modify the programming, the code, or the instructions that could tell your body cells to produce something it wouldn’t normally produce. Right now, it’s a spike protein for the original Coronavirus that we experienced initially, and then we had Omicron and other types. The further away you get from the original, the spike protein design doesn’t match it as well, as I understand it.
An article came out in The New England Journal of Medicine, which is the prime medical journal. It showed that after six months, the vaccines give you negative efficacy. Any benefit that you receive goes to zero and negative, whereas if you get COVID and recover maybe with the help of effective antivirals, you have that lasting immunity. That came out in The New England Journal of Medicine. The idea of the mRNA technology is that you can offer modified content so that you can inject instructions to have your cells produce something a little bit different, maybe a new type of spike protein, or a new component from a different virus.
The vision of this technology is that you could address a whole variety of illnesses and provide treatments in a plug-and-play or almost like a reprogramming of your body to produce something like the spike protein but in other contexts. That’s the long run. What’s at stake in the medical pharmaceutical arena is, “Is this technology safe?” This was the first time it has been used population-wide. It’s a big experiment. Is it working? Everything is hinging on this because they have plans to do it over and over again in the future.
What do you mean they have plans to do it over and over again in the future?
If there’s another virus, a pandemic, or some other illness, then you can tweak the contents of the instructions and then move everybody in the direction of being inoculated with the contents of the modified instructions.
Have you ever encountered a skeptic who’s like, “I don’t buy what you’re saying. This was a warp–speed move to get vaccines.” People are getting COVID, even those who are vaccinated but honestly, it’s at least preventing them from going to the hospital. It’s the person who buys everything they have heard from the CDC and the World Health Organization. How do you respond to the skeptic who doesn’t even buy all these numbers that you’ve been throwing out?
It’s difficult to open the minds and hearts of somebody. If you have faith in a structure, a system, and the authorities, and you’ve emotionally committed to it, let’s say you went ahead and received the vaccine and everything was seemingly okay, and then you hear somebody like me or somebody who is far more qualified than me as a medical professional such as Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Ryan Cole, or Sucharit Bhakdi from Germany. These are all highly qualified and credentialed not just physicians but researchers. Even Luc Montagnier who is a Nobel Prize winner who passed away late in 2022 said, “This type of vaccine technology is unsafe.” Even Robert Malone who has patents on this mRNA technology has fought against this stuff.
It doesn’t persuade the person who already has a skeptical mindset.
I have talked with lots of people. I feel a responsibility to try to share information with others because their health is on the line. Whether I’m successful or not, I’m hoping that I can at least plant a seed so that if there’s something that triggers a question in their minds, it might help them. That’s a very difficult conversation to have. Sometimes people get quite upset about it. I don’t have a magic bullet in terms of sharing information. It’s a struggle.
It is for a lot of us. We want to help those around us but if they have already invested in the system and gotten inoculated, it’s very hard to see it in a different light because you’ve bought into that paradigm. You don’t want to think you were wrong. It’s hard to let go of your previous way of thinking unless you have a personal experience yourself or someone around you. That might have a greater influence.
We are grateful for the work that you’re doing in getting the word out on this important data that might help open some eyes. We do hope that is one of the results of this show. I want to pose to you the question I would like to pose at the end here. I pose it at the end of pretty much every show. If the audience could do one thing to improve their health, what would you recommend that they do?
Is this a broad question? Is this a question with regard to COVID? Maybe I’ll answer both. I love your website and the mission of the foundation because it invites people to live healthy lives, eat good food, and try to manage their health in a way that makes them more resilient to illness. My first piece of advice is to do your homework and then make a commitment to living a lifestyle that helps you move in the direction of greater overall health.
Adjust your weight and your diet if needed. Make sure that you’re receiving the proper nutrients. In the context of COVID, we know that vitamin C, vitamin D, zinc, and then other types of zinc ionophores like quercetin or hydroxychloroquine can help you not only get better if you are sick but help prevent you from becoming ill with COVID. Let’s do all of those things first to be healthier. Sometimes that may require a major commitment to change your lifestyle. That’s the first thing.
The second thing I would say is that there is growing evidence that there are effective antiviral treatments that help people deal with COVID if they do get sick. We know now that natural immunity is much stronger than anything the vaccine offered. We know now that the vaccine, after several months, any efficacy that it had goes away. It is even negative. We know now that there are clear mechanisms of injury and that they’re more common than what the government is acknowledging or what the companies are acknowledging or what we might see in the media. You have to do your work, try to study through it, collect information, and make a good decision for your family and yourself.
When someone in your family gets COVID, you have to do your own work, try to study through it, collect information, and make a good decision for your family.
I’m speaking as a layperson but after what I’ve seen, I will never get this type of vaccine. I’m not anti-vaccine all the way. I have learned much about vaccination over the period that I’ve studied all of this. I worry about the whole vaccine schedule and the heavy metals that could be introduced to people, but I’m all for a safe vaccine if it’s effective like tetanus. In this case, the risk-benefit is off the charts. That’s where I come down. I cannot speak as a physician or a medical professional. I can only look at these data and try to understand them.
Thank you for doing your homework and sharing your heart. We are so thankful for you, Mark. We appreciate your time.
Thank you, Hilda. I am glad to have a chance to meet you and talk with you.
Our guest was Mark Skidmore. Visit his website for more resources at Mark-Skidmore.com. I‘m Hilda Labrada Gore, the host and producer of this show for the Weston A. Price Foundation. You can find me at HolisticHilda.com. For a recent review from Apple Podcasts, Beebasd said, “Interesting. I don’t always agree with everything on this show but I always learn something new.“
That is high praise in my book. Thank you so much for leaving your review. You too are invited to leave us a review on Apple Podcasts. Go to the site, click on ratings and reviews, give us as many stars as you like, and tell people why you like the show. Thank you so much for tuning in, my friend. Stay well. Keep your feet on the ground and your face to the sun.
About Mark Skidmore
Mark Skidmore serves as Professor and Morris Chair in State and Local Government Finance at Michigan State University. He has joint appointments in the Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics and the Department of Economics, and is a Distinguished Scholar at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. He received his doctorate in economics from the University of Colorado in 1994, and his bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Washington in 1987. Professor Skidmore conducts research on public sector economics, regional economics and economics of natural disasters (including pandemics).
- Mark Skidmore
- Second Spring Foods
- Ra Optics
- Optimal Carnivore
- Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
- Apple Podcasts – Wise Traditions
🖨️ Print post
So is all hope lost for those of us who got the first two inoculations in 2021? I just listened to the podcast and it’s unclear to me whether people are dropping based on the first shots, two years later. OR if they are getting boosted and then dropping soon after. I’m one of those who won’t be pursing any more boosters, but it causes a ton of anxiety when the anti vax community throws fear about people dropping, without giving more info on how long ago they were injected, etc.
I was unable to listen to the Google Podcast. Looks like it is being blocked.
I’m a faithful WAPF’er, and I’m essentially at 100% compliance with the diet! I’m also totally on board with the WAPF’s official position on COVID…and everything else.
Unfortunately, I feel that the Wise Traditions podcast doesn’t always reflect those positions and actually runs counter to them, particularly the recent one, episode 405, on “COVID Shot Fallout” with Mark Skidmore, which also contains false and misleading information.
Mark Skidmore mentions his survey of people and how many they know that had the COVID illness. This is meaningless by any standard. We don’t even have a working definition of what COVID is and no test to determine who had it. And yet, in this survey, your average person on the street provides a diagnosis of his or her acquaintances.
Mr. Skidmore also asserts that 900,000 have died from COVID. Again, how is “COVID” defined, and how was that number arrived at except from meaningless government numbers? The ONLY thing we can truly know are statistics on mortality over time. As you know, we can’t even know what medical issues people died from because recorded causes of death have not been reliable and have been falsified.
Mr. Skidmore also talks about “the virus” and “Omicron and other types”. And it gets more confusing. One absurdity leads to the next.
Even if WAPF were to add a disclaimer to the podcast that there are other views about whether the virus exists, the other problems remain and are serious. It seems to me that air-time shouldn’t be given to misinformation.
Regarding the existence of “the virus”, it may seem reasonable to allow others to express different viewpoints on the show. However, in my opinion, this makes the discussion of the COVID situation fundamentally flawed, leading to confusion and absurdities. I think that anyone being interviewed on the matter should already be on board with the fact that viruses have never been proven to exist. I think this analogy could be made: Should we have a discussion with someone about how leprechauns play into our current health crisis? Anyway, it would be too awkward to challenge a guest once they already on the podcast, even regarding the misinformation let alone the virus paradigm.
By the way, I went to medical school and now see that we were taught a fantasy, and I came to that realization based mainly on the work of your affiliated scientists! ALSO, I can prove philosophically that viruses, as described by the medical establishment, cannot possibly exists and are a fantasy. But that’s a discussion for another time.
I agree with you, Kenneth! The survey’s questions and answers are based on a false narrative. For example, Mark Skidmore asserts that about 34% of the respondents indicated they knew somebody who had been ill from COVID and had problems. What is the basis of that diagnosis? A PCR test, which we know is useless? How do the people who answered know if it was COVID? And there are so many other problems with the content!
Honestly, I was fairly surprised that that this organization would publish this podcast. I was informed that this was the reasoning behind it, from the leadership:
“I think it is important information about all these deaths and how they misrepresent the numbers. That is the emphasis. I think it can open people’s eyes about people they know who have died and inspire them to ask why.”
I don’t think you all needed to have published this podcast, much of it is nonsense, to make the point that the jab isn’t safe. You could simply have published the numbers related to deaths people reported in their circle after the jab, share that the CDC’s numbers are very different, and call it a day. Why post all this misinformation to make that point? Did Tom Cowan see this? Isn’t he a board member? He approved of this? Did Sally approved of this?
Oops! Did Sally approve of this! Typo!
Got the vax and boosters. Also when growing up in 1960-70’s the required ones. Never had a problem. Smells like a lot of yakking about people who have sensitivities. It’s too easy to be absorbed by fear, and not look at the wider situation. chalk one up for the jab keeping one from getting gravely ill from covid.
Judy T says
These reader comments are a much needed counterpoint to Mr. Skidmore’s belief that viruses cause disease. Thinking, as he does, that his survey may motivate people to be skeptical about the risk/benefit ratio of Covid ‘vaccines’ is wishful thinking. Statistics are confusing and numbers are mysterious without a solid understanding of mathematics. Thus, the math deficient populace prefers to be told by EXPERTS, many of whom are profiting from the sale of vaccines, what the numbers mean, which makes the sheep easy prey for the wolves. Skidmore’s survey demonstrates how poor design and poor data produce poor results. And WAPF giving Skidmore airtime is questionable since being hosted by WAPF lends credence to the unproved theory that viruses cause disease and therefore vaccines are needed to kill them before they kill us.
For statistics that tell us what we need to know, read ‘Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022’ by Edward Dowd, former BlackRock fund manager and numbers whiz. Dowd analyzes the data on deaths and disabilities from insurance company claims and other sources, such as the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The insurance companies must be livid that they are paying for the injuries and deaths of the insured when the vaccine makers and their many enforcers who are responsible for this horror have no liability.
To Skidmore’s credit, he was skeptical of Covid from the beginning and thus began researching. And what he learned led to his decision to not be injected with Covid ‘vaccines.’ If the populace had done some research and read what the ‘misinformation spreaders’ were discovering, they would not have been brainwashed by Fauci, govt health officials, media, and their own doctors to get vaxxed. I agree with Skidmore that if a close friend or relative gets vaxxed and has a significant adverse event or dies, that dreadful reality will activate the critical thinking skills of the docile and obedient sheep and motivate them to reconsider leaping off the cliff. However, it didn’t require a survey to arrive at this common sense conclusion about how people make important decisions when they have to juggle what trusted authorities and ‘experts’ say vs knowledge derived from their own up close and personal experience.
The root cause of the public’s fear of Covid and other ‘viral’ diseases is ignorance of viruses. Viruses are probably, as Sally wrote in 2020, exosomes, part of our immune system keeping us free of disease. Knowing this is LIBERATING – it frees us from making health decisions that are harmful. I read articles on ChildrensHealthDefense.org for news and facts about Covid, as well as about the many lawsuits, and am annoyed that almost all the articles and even some of the court decisions parrot the theory that the never proved to exist Coronavirus causes disease. Also annoying are the vaccine hesitant, who in a futile attempt to avoid censure, preface their remarks by saying, “I’m not an antivaxxer, but …” which serves only to reinforce the belief that viruses are bad and vaccines are good. The insupportable belief in deadly viruses is so entrenched in the medical industry and so embraced by the populace that it is seemingly impossible at this time to destroy the Germ Theory and free ourselves from pharma drugs and vaccines and the tyranny of health authorities and our govt leaders.
Lastly, the disclaimer at the top of the transcript says: “Mark Skidmore expresses some different opinions regarding viruses than those held by WAPF. Though we may disagree on this point, we think it’s important to provide his information on statistics regarding the COVID shot fallout to you, the reader.” This disclaimer needs to be less polite. At the barest minimum, the word ‘may’ in ‘we may disagree on this point’ needs to be stricken as it is false – WAPF disagrees 100% with Mr. Skidmore about viruses.