https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-07-17-study-74percent-deaths-caused-by-vaccines-deleted.html
In a study submitted to the journal The Lancet, researchers reviewed 325 autopsies after Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination. The results revealed that at least 74 percent of the deaths were caused by the COVID vaccine.
But because of blatant censorship, the study was removed within 24 hours.
The paper was awaiting peer-review and was written by respected cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, a Yale University epidemiologist, and their colleagues in the Wellness Company.
The paper was published online on July 5, on the pre-print site of The Lancet, a prestigious medical journal. Less than 24 hours later, the COVID-19 study was removed with the following note: "This preprint has been removed by Preprints with the Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology."
The study did not go through any part of the peer-review process, but the note suggests that it did not meet the journal's "screening criteria."
Most deaths occurred within a week from the last vaccine administration. COVID-19 vaccination was found to be directly linked to or significantly contributed to a total of 240 deaths (73.9 percent).
The research team added that continued study will help clarify their findings.
Many of the scientists who worked on the paper are respected in their fields, making it hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was inadequate to warrant removal at initial screening instead of being subject to full critical appraisal.
The incident is clear proof of the raw censorship of a paper that failed to meet the standards of the powers that be.
Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) still hasn't acknowledged a single death as being caused by the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.
Autopsy evidence, on the other hand, demonstrates the opposite of what the U.S. public health establishment wants to hear. (Related: Pfizer’s partner BioNTech faces LAWSUIT in Germany for "alleged harm" caused by its COVID-19 vaccines.)
Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-chair of the Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART) pandemic advisory group, believes that the approach taken in the study is sound.
Craig said the VAERS system is designed to alert people to potential harms but is not the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. She noted that evaluating the impact of the recorded deaths can be done by studying overall mortality rates in a country.
However, this is not the best method since a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious. Craig suggested that an alternative approach of auditing, like analyzing deaths through autopsy (which is what the study did), is sound.
Craig also said there may be bias in the research toward reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation could be exaggerated by that bias.
To illustrate, 19 of the 325 deaths were linked to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT), but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators’ willingness to acknowledge such deaths.
However, she believes that experts must try to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, instead of open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.
Dr. Harvey Risch, one of the study’s authors, said the deletion of the study could be considered "pure government-directed censorship, even after the Missouri v. Biden injunction."
Visit Vaccinedamage.news to read more articles about the injuries and deaths caused by COVID-19 vaccines.
Watch the video below for more about COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths.
In a study submitted to the journal The Lancet, researchers reviewed 325 autopsies after Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination. The results revealed that at least 74 percent of the deaths were caused by the COVID vaccine.
But because of blatant censorship, the study was removed within 24 hours.
The paper was awaiting peer-review and was written by respected cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, a Yale University epidemiologist, and their colleagues in the Wellness Company.
The paper was published online on July 5, on the pre-print site of The Lancet, a prestigious medical journal. Less than 24 hours later, the COVID-19 study was removed with the following note: "This preprint has been removed by Preprints with the Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology."
The study did not go through any part of the peer-review process, but the note suggests that it did not meet the journal's "screening criteria."
What the study found
The study revealed that the most implicated organ systems in COVID-19 vaccine-associated death were:
- The cardiovascular system (53 percent)
- The hematological system (17 percent)
- The respiratory system (eight percent)
- Multiple organ systems (seven percent)
Most deaths occurred within a week from the last vaccine administration. COVID-19 vaccination was found to be directly linked to or significantly contributed to a total of 240 deaths (73.9 percent).
The research team added that continued study will help clarify their findings.
Paper removed due to "pure government-directed censorship"
Because the staff who removed the paper didn't provide any details, it's difficult to confirm what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has.Many of the scientists who worked on the paper are respected in their fields, making it hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was inadequate to warrant removal at initial screening instead of being subject to full critical appraisal.
The incident is clear proof of the raw censorship of a paper that failed to meet the standards of the powers that be.
Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) still hasn't acknowledged a single death as being caused by the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.
Autopsy evidence, on the other hand, demonstrates the opposite of what the U.S. public health establishment wants to hear. (Related: Pfizer’s partner BioNTech faces LAWSUIT in Germany for "alleged harm" caused by its COVID-19 vaccines.)
Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-chair of the Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART) pandemic advisory group, believes that the approach taken in the study is sound.
Craig said the VAERS system is designed to alert people to potential harms but is not the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. She noted that evaluating the impact of the recorded deaths can be done by studying overall mortality rates in a country.
However, this is not the best method since a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious. Craig suggested that an alternative approach of auditing, like analyzing deaths through autopsy (which is what the study did), is sound.
Craig also said there may be bias in the research toward reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation could be exaggerated by that bias.
To illustrate, 19 of the 325 deaths were linked to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT), but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators’ willingness to acknowledge such deaths.
However, she believes that experts must try to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, instead of open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.
Dr. Harvey Risch, one of the study’s authors, said the deletion of the study could be considered "pure government-directed censorship, even after the Missouri v. Biden injunction."
Visit Vaccinedamage.news to read more articles about the injuries and deaths caused by COVID-19 vaccines.
Watch the video below for more about COVID-19 vaccine-related deaths.
