Excess Mortality in Europe By Richard Miller (London)
Although the mainstream media make no mention of the role of the vaxxes, the excess mortality here in Europe is hard to hide, something seen right across hyper-vaxxed Europe. Since April 2022, the death rate has risen by an average of 11 percent, and is not related to Covid, according to the mainstream narrative. In July 2022, Spain registered almost 10,000 more deaths than in the same month of 2019, a phenomenon seen to various degrees in other parts of Europe. However, rather than undertaking a detailed forensic investigation, health authorities are putting a tight lid on things, saying privacy concerns prevent such an investigation. Me thinketh they have something grave to hide.
“European countries are currently experiencing an unusually high death rate, and coronavirus deaths are not the direct reason for this increase. Known as “excess mortality,” people are dying at an unusually high rate in the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Portugal, and Great Britain.
Since April, the death rate has risen sharply in Europe by an average of 11 percent. What is puzzling experts is that these deaths are not directly related to the coronavirus pandemic.
In the Netherlands, according to de Volkskrant, one of the top newspaper in the country, hundreds of people more are dying every week than usual. This means that since the spring, approximately 5,000 more deaths are being recorded compared to the period before coronavirus. Scientists are puzzled by the reason, but Dutch health agencies refuse to release data behind the cause of deaths due to what the agencies say is related to privacy concerns.
Some have criticized this approach, with popular Dutch commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek saying that matters of health privacy were universally suspended when the Dutch government decided to check everyone’s vaccination status before they began entering restaurants and shopping establishments.
However, excess deaths are even worse elsewhere, with Germany’s top-selling Die Welt newspaper reporting that the situation is especially drastic in Spain. In July 2022, Spain registered almost 10,000 more deaths than in the same month of 2019, while in Germany, the climbing death rate was not as dramatic but still a matter of concern.
To some extent, the rising death toll in Spain can be accounted for with coronavirus infections, but only 1,872 deaths were attributed to Covid-19, and another fifth were due to the extreme temperatures this summer, according to the statistics analyzed by the Carlos III Health Institute, which specializes in monitoring heat damage.
However, many of the deaths cannot be accounted for, a fact acknowledged by the Spanish government, which has ordered a detailed investigation with results expected in six months. Some experts say it is already clear the research should not focus on Covid-19 or the heat.
“Neither Covid nor heat waves explain what’s happening here,” said Salvador Peiró, head of research at the Fundación de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunidad Valenciana.
Peiró says the rising death toll is “incomprehensible,” above all because he sees many old and chronically ill people among the deceased. Despite this group being highly vaccinated on average, they were still the most at-risk individuals to die from Covid-19.”
“In the largest study to date on myocarditis deaths related to COVID-19 vaccination, researchers found that 100 people in England died of myocarditis soon after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.
The study, published Aug. 22 in the American Heart Association’s journal, Circulation, found more than half (51) of the deaths occurred within 1 to 28 days after receiving a dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine and just under half (49) of the deaths occurred within 1 to 28 days after a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
The AstraZeneca vaccine, not authorized for use in the U.S., uses an adenovirus technology similar to that used by Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J), or Janssen) COVID-19 vaccine, which is authorized for emergency use in the U.S.
Prior research has underscored the risk of fatal myocarditis associated with the mRNA technology used in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. This study showed the technology used in AstraZeneca’s vaccine poses a similar risk.
Dr. Peter McCullough, an internist and cardiologist in Dallas, Texas, in a Sept. 15 tweet highlighted the importance of the new study.
“This study confirms the risk of myocarditis extends to both mRNA vaccines and the adenovirus vaccines,” McCullough told The Defender.
The technology uses a familiar virus — adenovirus — which is a common cause of respiratory infections. The DNA in the adenovirus is modified so that when it enters the host cell, it causes the cell’s own machinery to produce the spike protein.
The adenovirus also is modified so it cannot replicate itself, which is why it is called a replication-defective recombinant adenoviral vector vaccine.
How the study was conducted
The team of 14 researchers — led by Martina Patone, Ph.D., a data scientist and medical statistician at the University of Oxford — analyzed data for people ages 13 and older who were vaccinated against COVID-19 in England between Dec. 1, 2020, and Dec. 15, 2021.
The authors evaluated the association between vaccination and myocarditis for different ages and sex groups by tracking hospital admissions and deaths from myocarditis by age and gender and in relation to how many doses of a vaccine the person received.
In England, the three COVID-19 vaccines given to people at that time were the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca vaccines.
Roughly 20 million people got the AstraZeneca vaccine, 20 million got the Pfizer vaccine, and just over 1 million got the Moderna vaccine.
Over the period of the study, 345 patients were admitted to the hospital for myocarditis within 1 to 28 days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, the authors said.
Among those admitted to the hospital for myocarditis who recently received the AstraZeneca vaccine, the researchers counted 40 deaths due to myocarditis within 1 to 28 days after a first dose and 11 deaths due to myocarditis within 1 to 28 days after a second dose.
For those who received the Pfizer vaccine, 22 individuals died of myocarditis within 1 to 28 days of receiving their first dose, 14 died of myocarditis within 1 to 28 days of receiving a second dose and 13 died of myocarditis within 1 to 28 days of receiving a third dose.
The researchers reported no cases of fatal myocarditis among those who recently received the Moderna vaccine.
However, when they used statistical methods to estimate an “incidence rate ratio” to describe how often people reported myocarditis following vaccination, they found an increased risk of developing myocarditis following all three vaccine types — especially after a second dose of the Moderna vaccine.
Following a second dose of the Moderna vaccine, they said, the increased risk ratio for developing myocarditis was 11.76 (95% CI, 7.25-19.08).
Men under age 40, as a group, showed a heightened increased risk of myocarditis following all three vaccine types.
After the first dose of the Pfizer vaccine, the increased risk ratio for men under 40 years old was 1.85 (95% CI, 1.30-2.62). It increased to 1.93 (95% CI, 1.51-2.45) after the second dose and was 1.89 (95% CI,1.34-2.67) after the third dose.
Similarly, the researchers reported a high increased risk ratio of 3.06 (95% CI, 1.33-7.03) after the first dose of the Modern vaccine for men under 40. The risk rose to 16.83 (95% CI, 9.11-31.1) after a second dose. After a third dose, the increased risk ratio was 3.57 (95% CI, 1.48-8.64).
Among men under 40 who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, the increased risk ratio for myocarditis after the first dose was 1.33 (95% CI, 1.03-1.72) and after the second dose was 1.26 (95% CI, 0.96-1.65).
The team said their findings will enable “an informed discussion of the risk of vaccine associated myocarditis.”
While this study is important because it presents the largest published series of fatal myocarditis cases and linked them to both mRNA and adenovirus COVID-19 vaccines, McCullough said another of its conclusions is “misleading.””