This story is a few very courageous researcher at Columbia College who co-authored a paper on dangers related to COVID vaccination (“vaccine-induced fatality charge”), in October 2021.
The researcher’s title is Spiro Pantazatos, Ph.D. He’s an Assistant Professor of Medical Neurobiology (Psychiatry) at Columbia College. He’s additionally Analysis Scientist on the New York State Psychiatric Institute. The title of his paper (a preprint) is “COVID vaccination and age-stratified all-cause mortality threat”:
“Correct estimates of COVID vaccine-induced extreme adversarial occasion and dying charges are essential for risk-benefit ratio analyses of vaccination and boosters towards SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus in numerous age teams. Nonetheless, current surveillance research aren’t designed to reliably estimate life-threatening occasion or vaccine-induced fatality charges (VFR).
Right here, regional variation in vaccination charges was used to foretell all-cause mortality and non-COVID deaths in subsequent time intervals utilizing two impartial, publicly out there datasets from the US and Europe (month-and week-level resolutions, respectively).”
At the moment Dr. Pantazatos is attempting to fund a house for this paper however all journals the place he submitted it have declined up to now.
Dr. Pantazatos was interviewed for the “Views on the Pandemic” sequence, and in my view, the interview got here out gorgeous (with a disclaimer that the subject is grotesque, so it’s a shocking interview a few horrible factor). Dr. Pantazatos’ presentation is so sleek and even-headed that it may very well be “the” video to ship to your folks who’ve been calling you loopy all this time!
Dr. Pantazatos’ Preliminary COVID Place Was 100% “Mainstream”
Early within the pandemic, Dr. Pantazatos was very moved by the vivid photos that the media was feeding us — and, in consequence, he turned frightened of the virus. His preliminary plan was to lockdown inside his home till the vaccines got here out.
What Compelled Him to Get Extra Skeptical
However then he began information offered by scientists like John Ioannidis, for instance, and he shortly realized that the state of affairs was completely different from the one painted by the media.
Then Dr. Pantazatos’ co-author on this paper, Herve Seligmann, got here up with an evaluation of European information displaying a constant pattern the place a vaccination marketing campaign appeared to be accompanied by a rise in all-cause mortality through the month following the vaccination marketing campaign.
Dr. Pantazatos didn’t like that conclusion very a lot because it implied the unthinkable, and so he determined to do his personal evaluation primarily based on the U.S. information (vaccinations and all-cause mortality), printed by the CDC. And when he did his evaluation utilizing the U.S. information, it confirmed the identical pattern. His evaluation of the CDC information confirmed that following a vaccination marketing campaign in a given locality, there was a rise in all-cause mortality throughout the next month, adopted by a lower.
In Dr. Pantazatos’ opinion, the danger related to COVID injections is corresponding to the danger related to getting COVID — if the danger related to COVID is assessed on the excessive, early-in-the-pandemic degree. And provided that the 2 dangers are comparable, and the injection dangers appear to extend with every subsequent does — and the pharma corporations are pushing for boosters from right here into the horizon — he believes that we actually want to debate the VFR.
Why Rejection From the Journals Then?
Curiously, Dr. Pantazatos talked about within the interview that even earlier than 2020, he was nicely conscious of the truth that the method of getting scientific works printed in prestigious journals was tainted. He referred to the 2005 article in “PLOS Medication” known as, “Medical Journals Are an Extension of the Advertising and marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Firms” that talked about how precisely the journals are incentivized by pharma corporations.
Moreover, scientists themselves have developed a behavior of buying and selling complete integrity of analysis for the status and advantages of getting their works printed — and so even earlier than 2020, it was not unusual for researchers to “therapeutic massage” the angle and so on. with a purpose to slot in. From myself, I wish to add the next quote from the Lancet:
“A lot of the scientific literature, maybe half, might merely be unfaithful. Troubled by research with small pattern sizes, tiny results, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of curiosity, along with an obsession for pursuing trendy traits of doubtful significance, science has taken a flip in direction of darkness,” wrote Richard Horton, the Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet in 2015.
By the way, I wrote an article about corruption within the medical institution final 12 months, in case you might be curious.
The Significance of Talking Out
Dr. Pantazatos just isn’t shy in any respect about sharing his evaluation, and he’s additionally tremendously sleek and humble when presenting it. Personally, I’m very impressed by Dr. Pantazatos’ scientific integrity and his skill to really “observe the science” — in addition to by the grace with which he presents this moderately ugly matter.
He believes the problem is vital, and talking out is essential. His message for different scientists is to seek out their voice and cease being silent.
Full transcript of the interview.
Concerning the Writer
To search out extra of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure you try her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.