J 🐭🎱

[Jikkyleaks 🐭 @Jikkyleaks]

Jeffrey, this is disingenuous for the following reasons and needs to be responded to:

1⃣ Your sample size calculation assumes a tiny fraction of SIDS deaths are due to vaccination - but that is the point being tested. You have therefore committed a circular argument fallacy.
For a study of a drop of SIDS rate from 0.1% (US average SUID per CDC) to 0.067% (giving an IRR of 1.5) you only need 240,524 in your study. The 2.5 million comes from your assumption that the risk only accounts for 10% of the possible risk.

2⃣ The risk is not just at the time of dose 2 (in the US this is the first DTAP as babies have already been coerced into vaccination at birth). If vaccination overall increases the all-cause SUID mortality by 1.5x you only need the smaller number in your study, provided the groups are matched. You are assuming that nobody would agree to match 1:1, which would only happen if the assumption that vaccination improved all-cause mortality was true, yet it has never been tested

3⃣ Infant mortality in the US is 0.5%. It is multifactorial but even a tiny 10% overall rise in all-cause mortality would require a sample of 704,356 children - less than 20% of the annual births in the US, of which only half would need to be "unvaccinated" for a few months - including for birth dose HepB (which is a scandal in itself).

4⃣ I don't understand why you would want to quash the idea of a controlled trial. I mean, if infant vaccinations are such proven science to reduce all-cause mortality you would be able to prove the case for them within a year. There is not one RCT that shows that any of the vaccines on the infant schedule improve all-cause infant mortality. It's time to shine and show us just how good injecting a baby in the first 6 months of age with over 100 antigens (with cellular carriage agents) is for overall mortality. And at the same time you would get to prove Zervos wrong because you would have a huge cohort to show the impact on chronic disease.

5⃣ You make the same circular assumptions for a functional mSCCS as you do for the over-exaggerated sample size calculation. That is, you are assuming that the risk window only occurs in a few days post-vaccination. In which case, you don't have anything to worry about because any controlled trial will fail to show a signal. As I have shown, mSCCS can only work under certain assumptions and the sample size problem affects mSCCS just as much as a controlled trial. If you think the issue is 1:50,000 of the population, your mSCCS will only have that much of the population to work with. As we have seen, manipulating bins can hide any signal anyway so we understand why you are pushing this method.

6⃣ Another circular argument "you can't give infants placebo because it's unethical when vaccines reduce all-cause mortality" - that is the subject of the question. It's a disingenuous unscientific tactic and has no place in evidence based medicine. If you want to show first that any specific vaccine improves all-cause mortality show us the RCT that proves it. You can't, because you know damn well that the sample size figures you are crowing about being "unrealistic" equally apply to any pharma randomised trial. And they will never fund a 2 million baby study with a risk that their treatment ends up looking bad and shutting down the vaccine industry overnight.

7⃣ Just show us the data. No trial needed. Unmask every study that analysed SIDS data and concluded that the vaccines were not contributory (after smoking and formula feeding is excluded).
Alternatively you wouldn't even need a controlled trial of vaccination vs placebo because you could just run a registry. I guarantee there are enough angry parents that were lied to about the COVID vaccines and mandates that they will never take a vaccine again. Just ask them to agree to release their deidentified anonymised data - with an audit tag so that they can check their data has been recorded correctly. I bet you will get more than 300,000 babies registered. And you wouldn't be able to cheat because the parents could show that their baby's data was manipulated. There is zero chance you will agree to this.

8⃣ The exact same argument that you are hiding behind should have stopped the COVID vaccines being given to children at all. For a halving of death rate from 2 per million for children your trial would need 47 million children. Where did you ever say that the COVID vaccine was unsuitable for children because of the huge numbers needed to show a mortality benefit in this age group? Never. That's when.

If you really still disagree (you will) then I strongly recommend that you start advocating for the release of the datasets from such as your magical "Taiwan study" run by people with vested interest in vaccination. You won't, because you know those data sets cannot be verified.

Finally, if anybody wants to test these numbers they can go to an online power calculator like this one - no need for a biostatistician gatekeeper.
https://t.co/iy5Pd0BoHy

@MaryanneDemasi @DrJulieSladden @RWMaloneMD @delbigtree @AaronSiriSG @JesslovesMJK @DrJBhattacharya @Fynnderella1 @BrokenTruthTV @SabinehazanMD @dragonfishy

[Jikkyleaks 🐭 @Jikkyleaks]

Here you are @jsm2334 I've finally worked out how the "modified SCCS" technique to "find a safety signal for SIDS" was adopted by the pharma industry because it was so bad at finding a safety signal for SIDS.

Your data restrictions. Jittered vaccination dates. Death cohorts up to 800. Just as you demanded.

This simulation of 100 iterations of two scenarios failed to have sufficient power to find a signal:
Scenario1⃣: the effect of 1.5x increased risk of death is applied over 5 days.
Scenario2⃣: the effect of 1.5x increased risk of death is applied over 60 days.

In both scenarios the increase is applied as an exponential decline with half lives of 2 days and 15 days respectively.

In both scenarios the background rate of death in vaccinated children is also 10% higher than in unvaccinated children.

Yet none of these scenarios had enough power to detect the safety signal of up to a near 50% overall increase in death rate using the "modified SCCS" method espoused by Farrington (and Jeffrey Morris).

Prof Morris found a way to produce the best figures he could for his simulation - claiming that the method was robust - by adapting his "bins" to the type of simulation he was running. You can't do this in a real study because you don't know when the effect of the vaccine will hit, or how long for. That's why mSCCS doesn't have enough power to do this job.

What needs to happen to address this question is that for every country where SIDS deaths are reported and where vaccinations are administered in the first 6 months of live, every case of SIDS is published along with the dates of their last vaccination.

Then we would get to check the data - not institutions with vested interests and "trust us bro" denials of data availability.

It won't happen, because there is too much at stake.

@stkirsch @MaryanneDemasi @JesslovesMJK @AaronSiriSG @RWMaloneMD @uTobian @RetsefL

[Jikkyleaks 🐭 @Jikkyleaks]

https://t.co/b6H7PdcqJS

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@smallStateUK @CutMyTaxUK @Keir_Starmer Yes, and 11 million pounds of public money can be spent by an NHS Trust fighting a cardiologist and whistleblower trying to prevent these preventable deaths from happening in the first place 👇https://t.co/NyKOFNbsac

[Artur Nadolny @ArturNadol7566]

NHS SPENT 11 MILLION POUNDS TRYING TO PROVE ONE CARDIOLOGIST WAS WRONG

Dr Raj Mattu flagged 5 patients crammed into 4 bed cardiac bays at Walsgrave Hospital in 2001. A 35 year old died because staff could not reach him in time.

He told @BBC. The trust suspended him, reportedly hired private investigators, and sent over 200 complaints about him to @gmcuk. All 200 were rejected.

At the 2016 remedy hearing the trust's barrister called him greedy for wanting the compensation he was already owed, then suggested he retrain as a school teacher on 30,000 pounds a year.

He won. Around 1.22 million pounds, up to 2.5 million once tax was added. The legal fight cost the trust over 11 million in public money.

Patients died. He spoke up. The system spent a decade trying to prove him wrong instead of fixing the ward.

Sources: @BBC @Telegraph @itvnews @guardian

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@CutMyTaxUK @Keir_Starmer I would call it more than just a lousy service, it is claerly not fit for pupose. https://t.co/dTjswJckfK

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@BProudPatriot @WARHAMMERDADDY @NHS @NHSMillion Prochlorperazine is a foul and cheap first-generation antipsychotic. Can't believe the NHS prescribed you that. Ondansteron works much better for nausea, but it is much more expensive. So go figure why you were prescribed such a foul medication.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@hannahspierMD @JaniceFiamengo @JamesLNuzzo @trgolden Would be great to have your opinion on what is going on here 👇https://t.co/eofpqLzysc

[Janet Murray @jan_murray]

Apparently dads get postnatal depression now. And this brave chap is raising awareness of it via a Times article.

I’m not saying becoming a father isn’t a big adjustment for men. Of course they should get help if that leads to depression.

But it’s women whose bodies are, literally, changed by conception, pregnancy, birth and breastfeeding. Not just by the physical changes and challenges, but by the hormonal changes that go with them.

And this feels like just another example of women not being able to have anything for themselves - including the very thing only their bodies can do.

Not every aspect of female experience needs a male equivalent.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@jojo49547318 @richardhirschs1 @7NewsSydney Yes of course; "At 12 h after in vitro re-stimulation of the PBMC with pertussis toxin (PT) antigen, 14 immune response pathways, 33 allergy-related and 66 asthma-related genes were found activated." https://t.co/vOw30Mpj20

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@BillyBostickson 🤣🤣🤣

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@USAmbUK Both of you are looking very stylish. The orange dress is gorgeous on Harriet. Who is the designer?

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@williams_rje @UKLabour Starmer let rapists and paedophiles off with letters, but goes after veterans. Even US Congress is noticing👇https://t.co/AYovkTCofh

[Rep. Anna Paulina Luna @RepLuna]

.@Keir_Starmer let off rapists & pedos with warning letters. Where is @BBC on this?

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@JimWall84 @RollingHedge You sound vaccinated. https://t.co/e7oULSFLo9

[Secretary Kennedy @SecKennedy]

I sent this letter to the Editor-in-Chief of Toxicology Reports demanding a full explanation for the removal of a published article examining vaccines and sudden infant death.

Americans have a right to know why scientific papers are removed, who made those decisions, what evidence supported them, and whether the same standards are applied consistently.

We will restore trust in public health by insisting on transparency, accountability, and open scientific inquiry—not by asking the public to accept decisions behind closed doors.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@freddienew Wild, just wild.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@RollingHedge @freddienew Yeah, I know. Just saying no way to run a serious country. Like I know the Empire ended, but this is end stage Eastern Europe communism before the wall went down when the party apparatus ruled by appointing their mates as ministers.

[Secretary Kennedy @SecKennedy]

I sent this letter to the Editor-in-Chief of Toxicology Reports demanding a full explanation for the removal of a published article examining vaccines and sudden infant death.

Americans have a right to know why scientific papers are removed, who made those decisions, what evidence supported them, and whether the same standards are applied consistently.

We will restore trust in public health by insisting on transparency, accountability, and open scientific inquiry—not by asking the public to accept decisions behind closed doors.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@celestialbe1ng It looks good. Who was your surgeon? And what made you decide to use to that surgeon? Assuming you had consults with a few before picking one.

[J 🐭🎱 @JS36854901]

@AlistairCarns Do you have any pictures of you in uniform when you were younger? Shirtless ones are totally acceptable.