I recommend uploading teasers to youtube only with links to other sites (Rumble, Odysee, Bitchute, etc) in the description. Even if they don't censor, keep driving users off their platform!
Very interestinginterview and thank you for your work Jessica!!! And by the way, If you ever come to Portugal I might be able to help you finding nice spots for surfing if you need so😉
Oh are you wanting to hear this---you should have been in this, as I think you'll likely readily agree. It begins with Part II of Dr Malone's interview, but where it goes from there is right smack dab within your purview. This will only be up for another 20+ hours, but you perhaps can get a viewing of it w/ your bona fides. If you see this in time, start it at around 44 minutes in. https://vrevealed.com/c19/viewing?utm_source=email
Excellent interview. I also watched your interview with Brian Hooker. I just wrote an affidavit on psycological harm to children. https://coronawise.substack.com/p/expert-psychological-opinion-for I saw that you also wrote an affidavit along with Steve Kirsch's for LA. Can I see a copy of yours and could you write one or 2 pages I can ad to mine about a scientific basis to claim children's innate immunity and how they do not transmit, in accessible language? Can we communicate directly? - ConsciousPoliticsDC@gmail.com
So in Ireland they now want to mask 9 year olds. 20 months into this shit show. And our Chief Medical officer stated this evening “In a very short period of time, we have seen a significant and rapid deterioration in the epidemiological situation, in the as-yet-unvaccinated 5 – 11-year-olds.” This horrific worldwide movement is a juggernaut, suffocating any dissent, constantly pushing the line of what’s acceptable and we the dissenters have been herded into our own cattle pen where we are just talking to ourselves. Any room under anyone’s floor boards in Texas?
May I suggest Steve, that if Craig’s work does not seem a blind alley to you, that you put up a post about it on your substack?
I was alerted to the first of these videos by John Knowalittle. I don’t know who he is, but for some time I have been on an email list that he uses, and much of the information he sends out is worth paying attention to.
Jessica you threw a wetblanket over some of the first iterations of this line of investigation. These later iterations by Craig go much further and are particularly striking.
In our present circumstances it is important that we not get too distracted by noise. If this email turns out to be noise I beg your forgiveness, but at this point I think it too patently an important signal for me to delay distribution in order to do any further double-checking of my own.
The following is the backstory to my interest in this:
I became aware of Steve Kirsch’s perspective when he was with Robert Malone on the Brett Weinstein show. Jessica Rose and Mathew Crawford were collaborating with Steve, so I began following them, subscribing to both their substacks. Sometime around then I became aware of the pattern in VAERS drawn attention to by Karl Denninger at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244109. Probably it was mentioned in some comment on one of Jessica’s, Mathew’s or Steve’s substacks.
Just before that last post of Andreas was put up, the following thread between Jessica and Tim Lundeen took place. It is here where you threw your wetblanket Jessica, and it caused me temporarily to avert my attention from this, but with Craig’s analysis my attention has returned. The thread is here,
It would be interesting to look at distribution of death/injury by days post vaccination, for both high and low-injury lots. I wonder if the distribution of AEs for low-injury lots is random (implying the vaccine was not causal), while the high-injury lots show high rates of AEs shortly after vaccination (implying causality).
Reply
Jessica RoseNov 5
AUTHOR
this isn't credible... sorry to be a wet blanket...
no it's not nefarious (one of the only things) it's just human error and humans having too much to do and not caring too much
Reply
Tim LundeenNov 6
No problem, I like to live in the real world, and we figure things out though discussion and analysis. So I appreciate your comment.
What do you see as the problems/issues that make it not credible? Their data analysis is easy to reproduce -- just download the data and attach the lot number to each event, sort by lot number. I know of three people who claim to have done this, and they all get the same answers.
Reply
Jessica RoseNov 6
AUTHOR
and therein... lies the problem :)
1Reply
Jessica RoseNov 6
AUTHOR
"it appears that they used VAERS data. they wrote an 'algorithm' to count the vax lots written in that market-ticker document but again, the problems that i described previously make claims about vax lots improbable due to sparse data.
again, i backup their assessment of the 'worst lots' for Pfizer and Moderna (almost precisely with numbers) but I don't think that it's worthy of horn-blowing due to the percentage of deaths imposed by each when calculated in the context of total deaths. 30% of all VAX_LOT fields have an "NA" (not applicable) entry and for the most part for the fields with entries, these entries are filled in 'incorrectly' (a notorious problem in VAERS which is why caution/precision must be used when using this data), and thus it is very difficult to make any claims about significant patterns.
Moderna -> vax_lot 039K20A has been associated with 86 deaths (2% of all deaths)
Pfizer _> EN6201 has been associated with 85 deaths (2.2% of all deaths)
Janssen -> 1805029 has been associated with 38 deaths (4% of all deaths)
again, one third of the death data has NO VAX LOT DATA tied to the VAERS ID.
i don't mean to be a persistent wet blanket but i don't think this floats. i would have been screaming from the rooftops to announce this finding back in ... if it did. i really did think this was going to work as a way to more precisely define why certain vax lots are more dangerous than others - i mean, defining this using analyzed VAERS data - but then i realized sparse data was an ongoing problem. to solve this problem, someone needs to go in to the source VAERS data and clean these entries up (at the filling in/vetting step) and they need to be filled in properly from the start. so there are levels of clean up that need to be achieved and probably never will be. VAERS is just problematic this way.
the really annoying thing here is that certain vax lots most definitely are more problematic with regards to SAEs than others. even if simply by contamination! but, to prove this... is another story. a difficult and ongoing one."
1Reply
Tim LundeenNov 6
Thanks, very much appreciate this explanation. I'll link to this from Karl's site.
I recommend uploading teasers to youtube only with links to other sites (Rumble, Odysee, Bitchute, etc) in the description. Even if they don't censor, keep driving users off their platform!
Jessica, thank you for being a courageous human being and a proper scientist thirsty for the truth. The truth will prevail, sooner or later!
Very interestinginterview and thank you for your work Jessica!!! And by the way, If you ever come to Portugal I might be able to help you finding nice spots for surfing if you need so😉
Very true! Excellent article.
Your interview with Frank was excellent, glad I was able to watch it.
Is there another place we can find this interview please 🙏
Oh are you wanting to hear this---you should have been in this, as I think you'll likely readily agree. It begins with Part II of Dr Malone's interview, but where it goes from there is right smack dab within your purview. This will only be up for another 20+ hours, but you perhaps can get a viewing of it w/ your bona fides. If you see this in time, start it at around 44 minutes in. https://vrevealed.com/c19/viewing?utm_source=email
Excellent interview. I also watched your interview with Brian Hooker. I just wrote an affidavit on psycological harm to children. https://coronawise.substack.com/p/expert-psychological-opinion-for I saw that you also wrote an affidavit along with Steve Kirsch's for LA. Can I see a copy of yours and could you write one or 2 pages I can ad to mine about a scientific basis to claim children's innate immunity and how they do not transmit, in accessible language? Can we communicate directly? - ConsciousPoliticsDC@gmail.com
So in Ireland they now want to mask 9 year olds. 20 months into this shit show. And our Chief Medical officer stated this evening “In a very short period of time, we have seen a significant and rapid deterioration in the epidemiological situation, in the as-yet-unvaccinated 5 – 11-year-olds.” This horrific worldwide movement is a juggernaut, suffocating any dissent, constantly pushing the line of what’s acceptable and we the dissenters have been herded into our own cattle pen where we are just talking to ourselves. Any room under anyone’s floor boards in Texas?
YouTube is Satan's intergluteal cleft.
Hello Jessica Rose, Mathew Crawford and Steve Kirsch,
Thanks so much for the work you and others do.
I had trouble finding emails for Jessica and Matthew, so I am posting this as a comment on your substacks. I have an email address for Steve.
I urge you to watch these two videos put out by Craig Paardekooper and give comment. They strike me as extremely important.
https://brandnewtube.com/watch/patterns-in-the-deployment-of-toxic-covid-vaccine-batches_x3LiCNOENb23dnk.html: Patterns in the Deployment of Toxic Covid Vaccine Batches
https://brandnewtube.com/watch/variation-in-the-toxicity-of-different-covid-vaccine-batches_dL2OVVSgmx9qXII.html: Variation in the Toxicity of Different Covid Vaccine Batches
May I suggest Steve, that if Craig’s work does not seem a blind alley to you, that you put up a post about it on your substack?
I was alerted to the first of these videos by John Knowalittle. I don’t know who he is, but for some time I have been on an email list that he uses, and much of the information he sends out is worth paying attention to.
Jessica you threw a wetblanket over some of the first iterations of this line of investigation. These later iterations by Craig go much further and are particularly striking.
In our present circumstances it is important that we not get too distracted by noise. If this email turns out to be noise I beg your forgiveness, but at this point I think it too patently an important signal for me to delay distribution in order to do any further double-checking of my own.
The following is the backstory to my interest in this:
I became aware of Steve Kirsch’s perspective when he was with Robert Malone on the Brett Weinstein show. Jessica Rose and Mathew Crawford were collaborating with Steve, so I began following them, subscribing to both their substacks. Sometime around then I became aware of the pattern in VAERS drawn attention to by Karl Denninger at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244109. Probably it was mentioned in some comment on one of Jessica’s, Mathew’s or Steve’s substacks.
I also discovered these posts on The Expose:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/11/04/88-percent-covid-19-deaths-among-fully-vaccinated/
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/31/100-percent-of-covid-19-vaccine-deaths-caused-by-just-5-percent-of-the-batches-produced/ and then Andreas Oehler’s take on the issue here: https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/falling-into-place-like-dominoes: Falling into Place Like Dominoes.
Further searches turned up:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/11/01/dr-mike-yeadon-just-when-you-though-things-couldnt-get-any-worse/ https://sarahwestall.com/analysis-100-of-deaths-following-covid-19-shots-are-from-only-5-of-the-manufacturer-lots-according-to-vaers/
Andreas Oehler put up a further post here: https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/exposing-the-expose-in-good-way: Exposing THE EXPOSE. Notice that the explanation put forward here by Andreas is at odds with Craig’s. There needs to be a reconciliation of the differences.
Just before that last post of Andreas was put up, the following thread between Jessica and Tim Lundeen took place. It is here where you threw your wetblanket Jessica, and it caused me temporarily to avert my attention from this, but with Craig’s analysis my attention has returned. The thread is here,
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/a-report-on-myocarditis-adverse-events/comments, as follows:
<Begin quote>
Tim LundeenNov 2
There is another safety signal, distribution of death/injury by lot number. https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244109
It would be interesting to look at distribution of death/injury by days post vaccination, for both high and low-injury lots. I wonder if the distribution of AEs for low-injury lots is random (implying the vaccine was not causal), while the high-injury lots show high rates of AEs shortly after vaccination (implying causality).
Reply
Jessica RoseNov 5
AUTHOR
this isn't credible... sorry to be a wet blanket...
2Reply
Tim LundeenNov 7
More details and thoughts on this at https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244109&page=19 scroll down to "Tourist"
Reply
Tim LundeenNov 7
Another explanation for this that makes sense: it is just suppressed reporting. https://live2fightanotherday.substack.com/p/exposing-the-expose-in-good-way
Reply
Jessica RoseNov 7
AUTHOR
no it's not nefarious (one of the only things) it's just human error and humans having too much to do and not caring too much
Reply
Tim LundeenNov 6
No problem, I like to live in the real world, and we figure things out though discussion and analysis. So I appreciate your comment.
What do you see as the problems/issues that make it not credible? Their data analysis is easy to reproduce -- just download the data and attach the lot number to each event, sort by lot number. I know of three people who claim to have done this, and they all get the same answers.
Reply
Jessica RoseNov 6
AUTHOR
and therein... lies the problem :)
1Reply
Jessica RoseNov 6
AUTHOR
"it appears that they used VAERS data. they wrote an 'algorithm' to count the vax lots written in that market-ticker document but again, the problems that i described previously make claims about vax lots improbable due to sparse data.
again, i backup their assessment of the 'worst lots' for Pfizer and Moderna (almost precisely with numbers) but I don't think that it's worthy of horn-blowing due to the percentage of deaths imposed by each when calculated in the context of total deaths. 30% of all VAX_LOT fields have an "NA" (not applicable) entry and for the most part for the fields with entries, these entries are filled in 'incorrectly' (a notorious problem in VAERS which is why caution/precision must be used when using this data), and thus it is very difficult to make any claims about significant patterns.
Moderna -> vax_lot 039K20A has been associated with 86 deaths (2% of all deaths)
Pfizer _> EN6201 has been associated with 85 deaths (2.2% of all deaths)
Janssen -> 1805029 has been associated with 38 deaths (4% of all deaths)
again, one third of the death data has NO VAX LOT DATA tied to the VAERS ID.
i don't mean to be a persistent wet blanket but i don't think this floats. i would have been screaming from the rooftops to announce this finding back in ... if it did. i really did think this was going to work as a way to more precisely define why certain vax lots are more dangerous than others - i mean, defining this using analyzed VAERS data - but then i realized sparse data was an ongoing problem. to solve this problem, someone needs to go in to the source VAERS data and clean these entries up (at the filling in/vetting step) and they need to be filled in properly from the start. so there are levels of clean up that need to be achieved and probably never will be. VAERS is just problematic this way.
the really annoying thing here is that certain vax lots most definitely are more problematic with regards to SAEs than others. even if simply by contamination! but, to prove this... is another story. a difficult and ongoing one."
1Reply
Tim LundeenNov 6
Thanks, very much appreciate this explanation. I'll link to this from Karl's site.
<End quote>
Thanks for your attention to this.