https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/TS/openDocument/6d95f1701409a6bea0a8778d75e36f0d/20230525
DERECHO TRIBUTARIO Y CONSTITUCIONAL DERECHO Y NUEVAS TECNOLOGIAS ACTUALIDAD JURIDICA Y ECONOMICA MEDIOAMBIENTE
https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/TS/openDocument/6d95f1701409a6bea0a8778d75e36f0d/20230525
• We are moving into a multipolar reserve-currency world where the dollar will be challenged by the renminbi and the euro for reserve currency status.
• These currencies, especially the renminbi, would not necessarily be used as a reserve currency, but rather to settle trade. Gold could play an increased role here.
• The fact that China is running current account surpluses does not exclude their currency from becoming a global reserve currency. In fact, the US ran surpluses post-WW2, and this led the dollar on its global reserve currency path.
• The Chinese are using swap lines to settle international trade accounts. This is a fundamentally different approach from the dollar reserve framework and would mean that trade can occur in renminbi without nations needing to hold vast reserves of the currency.
• The various crises that today’s financial market participants have witnessed were easily solved by throwing money at whatever problem arose. The current inflation problem is different.
• This situation is also vastly different from the late 1970s, when Paul Volcker curbed inflation by prolonged high interest rates. Chronic underinvestment in the resource sector and labor issues will cause inflation to remain sticky.
• The traditional 60/40 portfolio allocation will struggle in this environment. Zoltan recommends a 20/40/20/20 (cash, stocks, bonds, and commodities).
#TURKEY https://t.co/Xoo2s0Grv8
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 26, 2023
LA ADAPTACIÓN AL #NUEVO #ORDEN #MUNDIAL (#ZOLTANPOZSAR, 26-04-2023 (#IGWT REPORT)) https://t.co/tzG9yF3Wel
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 26, 2023
(1)
I also find it comical that central banks in the West are trying to do CBDCs because that’s how they want to take the wind out of Bitcoin’s sails or something
Comical?
(2)
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 26, 2023
I guess they don’t get it that the people that buy Bitcoin don’t buy it because it’s digital, they buy it because it’s outside of state control and it cannot be printed#zoltanpozsar
They (CB) precisely got it#CBDCs https://t.co/0M61tQVxqd
The #G7 must accept that it cannot run the world https://t.co/SQ99kLcB0c #martinwolf
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 24, 2023
“Goodbye G7, hello G20.” That was the headline on an article in The Economist on the first summit of the Group of 20 in Washington in 2008 which argued that this represented “a decisive shift in the old order”. Today, hopes of a co-operative global economic order, which reached their zenith at the G20’s London summit of April 2009, have evaporated. Yet it is hardly a case of “Goodbye G20, hello G7”. The earlier world of G7 domination is even more remote than that of G20 co-operation. Neither global co-operation nor western domination look feasible. What might follow? Alas, “division” might be one answer and “anarchy” another.
At 19,000 words, this reads like a manifesto for a world government. In contrast, the communiqué of the London G20 summit in April 2009 was just over 3,000 words. This comparison is unfair, given the focus at that time on the economic crisis. But an unfocused wish list cannot be useful: when everything is a priority, nothing is.
Moreover, both the “unipolar” moment of the US and the economic dominance of the G7 are history. True, the latter is still the most powerful and cohesive economic bloc in the world. It continues, for example, to produce all the world’s leading reserve currencies. Yet, between 2000 and 2023, its share in global output (at purchasing power) will have fallen from 44 to 30 per cent, while that of all high-income countries will have fallen from 57 to 41 per cent. Meanwhile, China’s share will have risen from 7 to 19 per cent. China is now an economic superpower. Via its Belt and Road Initiative it has become a huge investor in (and creditor of) developing countries, though, predictably, it is having to deal with the consequent bad debts so familiar to G7 countries. For some emerging and developing countries, China is a more important economic partner than the G7: Brazil is one example. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva may have attended the G7, but he cannot sensibly ignore China’s heft.
Yes, the G7 must defend its values and its interests. But it cannot run the world, even though the world’s fate will also be that of its members. A path to co-operation must be found, once again
You tell me.https://t.co/chFvOntM28
— Financelot (@FinanceLancelot) May 20, 2023
The unwind is going to be brutal.https://t.co/FQUZXdc38m
— Financelot (@FinanceLancelot) May 20, 2023
I have been pondering Stan Druckenmiller's recent interviews.
— Chris Close (@soclose2me) May 20, 2023
So here are the numbers.
We are currently 31 Trillion in debt nationally.
The FED's balance sheet sits at 8.5 Trillion.
The US government collected 4.9 Trillion in tax receipts in 2022.
The US spent 6.267…
This is the most important trading video you'll ever see: pic.twitter.com/CzlbMtALP6
— Sven Henrich (@NorthmanTrader) May 22, 2023
Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh https://t.co/F6lFkTJtuR
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 19, 2023
Holding: Plaintiffs’ allegations that the social-media-company defendants aided and abetted ISIS in its terrorist attack on a nightclub in Instanbul, Turkey fail to state a claim under 18 U.S.C. § 2333(d)(2)#SCOTUS
Tomorrow morning! It will be too early for a cigar but that means I'll also try to be on my best behavior. :)@nakedhedgie @AMercouris https://t.co/mNnDoFx5U2
— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) May 19, 2023
EL #INFORMEDURHAM (ACTUACIONES DE #INTELIGENCIA (#ELECCIONES PRESIDENCIALES #USA);12-05-2023) https://t.co/W8qWsNFcL3
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 16, 2023
EL CONSEJERO ESPECIAL CONCLUYE QUE EL #FBI NUNCA DEBIÓ HABER INICIADO LA INVESTIGACIÓN #TRUMP- #RUSSIA
Anarcho-Tyranny.
— Tom Luongo (Head Sneetch) (@TFL1728) May 16, 2023
In other news, it's Monday. https://t.co/13FOUP9fik
May 12, 2023 TO: ATTORNEY GENERAL MERRICK B. GARLAND
FROM: H. DURHAM PECIAL COUNSEL
SUBJECT: REPORT ON MATTERS RELATED TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES AND INVESTIGATIONS ARISING OUT OF THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGNS
The attached report is submitted to the Attorney General pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 600.8(c), which states that, "[a]t the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he ... shall provide the Attorney General a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel." In addition to the confidential report required by section 600.8(c), the Attorney General has directed that the Special Counsel, "to the maximum extent possible and consistent with the law and the policies and practices of the Department of Justice, shall submit to the Attorney General a final report . .. in a form that will permit public dissemination."1 This two-part report (Unclassified Report and Classified Appendix) is presented in fulfillment of these requirements and sets forth our principal findings and recommendations concerning the matters that were the subject of our review. The principal report is confidential, but contains no classified information based on thorough, coordinated reviews of the information contained therein by the appropriate authorities within the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. The Classified Appendix likewise has been coordinated with those same agencies for classification purposes.
Our review and investigation, in turn has focused on separate but related questions, including the following:
•
Was the opening of Crossfire Hurricane as a full investigation on July 31, 2016 consistent with how the FBI handled other intelligence it had received prior to July 31, 2016 concerning attempts by foreign interests to influence the Clinton and other campaigns?
• Was there adequate predication for the FBI to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation from its inception on July 31, 2016 as a full counterintelligence and Foreign Agents
•
Similarly, did the FBI properly consider other highly significant intelligence it received at virtually the same time as that used to predicate Crossfire Hurricane, but which related not to the Trump campaign, but rather to a purported Clinton campaign plan "to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services," which might have shed light on some of the Russia information the FBI was receiving from third parties, including the Steele Dossier, the Alfa Bank allegations and confidential human source ("CHS") reporting? If not, were any provable federal crimes committed in failing to do so?
•
Was there evidence that the actions of any FBI personnel or third parties relating to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation violated any federal criminal statutes, including the prohibition against making false statements to federal officials? If so, was that evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
•
Was there evidence that the actions of the FBI or Department personnei in providing false or incomplete information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ("FISC") violated any federal criminal statutes? If so, was there evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
Our findings and conclusions regarding these and related questions are sobering.
World Economic Forum puppet and Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, becomes visibly nervous after being confronted about his close association with WEF founder, Klaus Schwab, by Gideon van Meijeren.
— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) May 15, 2023
Source: https://t.co/v3J2EXLEoa#WEFPuppet #WEFPuppets… pic.twitter.com/CGIDVAV9QK
(6) The crime of treason can be committed only by subjects or citizens, people who have—either tacitly or through an explicit contract—transferred all their right to the State. A subject is said to have committed treason if he has in any way tried to seize the right of the supreme power for himself or to transfer it to someone else Why do I say ‘has tried’? Because if the traitor succeeds, it’s then too late for the State to charge him with treason because by then it has lost its power to do anything about it. ·That’s why nearly all active prosecutions for treason concern attempts, not successes·. Why do I say so strongly ‘has tried in any way’ to seize the right of the supreme power? I want the definition of treason to cover both attempted power-grabs that •harm the State and ones that perfectly clearly •work to the advantage of the State. Even in a case of the latter kind, the person has committed treason and is rightly condemned.
(...)
[203] This lets us conceive the right and authority of the State to be pretty broad, but it will never be broad enough to give the government power to do absolutely anything that it wants to do. I have already shown this clearly enough, I think. And I’ve said that it’s not part of my plan to show how, ·despite this limit on State power·, a State could be formed that would be securely preserved for ever. Still, my plan does require me to discuss ·a part of that large topic, namely· what the main things are that supreme powers ought to grant to subjects, in the interests of the greater security and advantage of the State
(...) That’s how it comes about that the people can often change tyrants but can’t ever destroy tyranny, changing a monarchic State into one of a different form. The English people have given us a deadly example of this truth, when they tried to find reasons to justify deposing their king [Charles I]. When they had removed him, they were utterly unable to change the form of the State. After much blood had been spilled, they reached the point where they hailed a new monarch under another name [Oliver Cromwell, whose title as a ruler was ‘Lord Protector’], as if the whole issue had only been about the name! The new monarch could survive only if he •wiped out the royal family, •killed the king’s friends and anyone suspected of friendship, and •launched a war ·against the Dutch·. He needed the war so as to •disturb the tranquillity of peace that is so conducive to murmurings of discontent, and to •confront the common people with urgent new crises that would steer their thoughts away from royal slaughter. The people didn’t realize until it was too late that in trying to further the well-being of their country they had achieved nothing except to violate the right of a legitimate king and make things worse than ever. So as soon as they could, they decided to retrace their steps, and didn’t rest until they saw things restored to their original condition.
(...)
As for the Estates of Holland, so far as we know they never had kings, but only counts, who were never given the rights of government. . . . [..228] They always reserved for themselves the authority to advise the counts of their duty, and held onto the power to •defend this authority of theirs and the freedom of the citizens, to •punish the counts if they degenerated into tyrants, and to •keep them under control in such a way that they couldn’t get anything done without the permission and approval of the Estates [= governing committees, not elected democratically but representative of the people as a whole.] Thus, the Estates always held the right of sovereignty—a right that the last count tried to usurp. So there was nothing wrong with their ·getting rid of him and· restoring their original State, which had almost been lost. These examples completely confirm my thesis that the form of each State must necessarily be retained, and that it can’t be changed without risking ruin for the whole State.
Treatise on Theology and Politics Showing that piety and civil peace are not harmed by allowing freedom of thought, but are destroyed by the abolition of freedom of thought. Benedict (or Baruch) Spinoza
📢SAVE THE DATE
— CEO (@corporateeurope) May 11, 2023
For too long Big Tech has monopolised the internet.
On 🗓️31/05 @X_net_ will present its proposal for a democratic digitalisation of Europe in the @Europarl_EN
Interested? Confirm your attendance 👉contact@xnet-x.nethttps://t.co/zrlTR7eSj9
https://t.co/8zhPj94y7E#Procedimiento de #recaudación.#Derivaciónderesponsabilidadsubsidiaria. ¿La responsabilidad tributaria subsidiara contemplada en el artículo 43.1.a) de la #LGT posee #naturalezasancionadora, en lo relativo a la deuda tributaria objeto de derivación?
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) May 11, 2023
"...when you have free money, people do stupid things. When you have free money for 11 years, people do really stupid things. So there's stuff under the hood, it's starting to emerge. Obviously the regional banks recently, we had Bed Bath and Beyond.
But I would assume there's a lot more bodies coming."
He also criticized US fiscal policy.
“We wasted all our bullets” in an economic expansion, he said, worrying about the fiscal situation.
“It’s a scary cocktail that we’re being presented with.”
He added that he wouldn’t be surprised if the “bean counters” a year from now find that the recession started in the second quarter.
“I don’t know that, but I do this for a living and I’ve got to have a forecast,” he says.
Druckenmiller took a shot at the talking heads endlessly repeating that this is nothing like 2008, pointing out that he doesn’t remember them predicting the crash then either.
“It’s naïve not to be open-minded to something really bad happening,” Druckenmiller says.
I have been pondering Stan Druckenmiller's recent interviews.
— Chris Close (@soclose2me) May 20, 2023
So here are the numbers.
We are currently 31 Trillion in debt nationally.
The FED's balance sheet sits at 8.5 Trillion.
The US government collected 4.9 Trillion in tax receipts in 2022.
The US spent 6.267…
Monetary Tightening and U.S. Bank Fragility in 2023:
Mark-to-Market Losses and Uninsured Depositor Runs?
We analyze U.S. banks’ asset exposure to a recent rise in the interest rates with implications for financial stability. The U.S. banking system’s market value of assets is $2.2 trillion lower than suggested by their book value of assets accounting for loan portfolios held to maturity. Marked-to-market bank assets have declined by an average of 10% across all the banks, with the bottom 5th percentile experiencing a decline of 20%. Most of these asset declines were not hedged by banks with use of interest rate derivatives. We illustrate in a simple model that uninsured leverage (i.e., Uninsured Debt/Assets) is the key to understanding whether these losses would lead to some banks in the U.S. becoming insolvent-- unlike insured depositors, uninsured depositors stand to lose a part of their deposits if the bank fails, potentially giving them incentives to run. We show that a bank’s survival depends on the market beliefs about the share of uninsured depositors who will withdraw money following a decline in the market value of bank assets. If interest rate increases are small such that the bank’s decline in asset values is relatively small, there is no risk of a run equilibrium. However, for sufficiently high increases in interest rates, we have multiple equilibria in which uninsured depositor run making banks insolvent (i.e., a “bad” run equilibrium) becomes a possibility. Banks with smaller initial capitalization and higher uninsured leverage have a smaller range of beliefs supporting a “good” no run equilibrium, increasing their fragility to uninsured depositor runs. A case study of the recently failed Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) is illustrative. 10 percent of banks have larger unrecognized losses than those at SVB. Nor was SVB the worst capitalized bank, with 10 percent of banks having lower capitalization than SVB. On the other hand, SVB had a disproportional share of uninsured funding: only 1 percent of banks had higher uninsured leverage. Combined, losses and uninsured leverage provide incentives for an SVB uninsured depositor run. We compute similar incentives for the sample of all U.S. banks. Even if only half of uninsured depositors decide to withdraw, almost 190 banks with assets of $300 billion are at a potential risk of impairment, meaning that the mark-to-market value of their remaining assets after these withdrawals will be insufficient to repay all insured deposits. If uninsured deposit withdrawals cause even small fire sales, substantially more banks are at risk. Regions with lower household incomes and large shares of minorities are more exposed to the bank risk. We also show that decline in banks’ asset values eroded the ability of banks to withstand adverse credit events – focusing on commercial real estate loans. Overall, these calculations suggest that recent declines in bank asset values very significantly increased the fragility of the US banking system to uninsured depositor runs.
Keywords: Monetary Tightening, Uninsured Depositors, Runs
JEL Classification: G2, L5
Suggested Citation:
Note: this is a summary of my historical analyses of vax batches. Batches or lots of pharmaceutical products are supposed to be single production runs with traceability of all intermediate steps and raw materials all the way back to specific production lines and suppliers.
Recently, the FDA "authorized" (fake-authorized as they do not regulate countermeasures) the continuous (non-batched) mRNA products. I noted that Pfizer have been producing non-batched “batches” even in 2022, such as lot FL0007 was produced over 6 months, has several expiration dates and 12+ million doses. That’s not a batch, that’s a production that is operating for several months where everything is labeled with the same number. Therefore, going forward we will not have the batch analysis method of finding manufacturing fraud anymore. The FDA has destroyed the consumer protections and nobody should trust them ever again with any product, until we can hold them accountable for their actions.
While I no longer focus on CDC VAERS database, I did a lot of data analyses in 2021 and 2022 identifying manufacturing inconsistency and lack of compliance with the current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) observable immediately post the mRNA/DNA injections rollout. I used VAERS database to study variability of serious adverse events (life-threatening, disability, miscarriages, hospitalizations, ER visits or doctor visits) and deaths based on lot numbers. Lot or batch numbers represent vials produced and filled in a single production run (batch) and are printed on vials, and are supposed to be recorded on the vax cards and in vax injury reports. People do not always have the vax card when filling VAERS reports, so often they are missing. In many cases they appear to be mistyped. I say “appear” because many investigators, including myself detected algorithmic manipulation of VAERS data and it is likely that CDC changes the lot numbers to further obfuscate the detection of safety signals.
Around that time, I met Craig Paardekooper a pharmacy student from the UK who had to leave the university due to the vax mandates. We collaborated with a few other database/software/data analysts under the name “Team Enigma”. Our work focused on trying to understand the relationship between the adverse event data and manufacturing lots of the injections being deployed worldwide.
We now know it is a weaponized tech in a vial, but back in 2021 we were still naive and thinking this was supposed to be a pharmaceutical product. Craig put up a website How Bad Is Your Batch (www.howbad.info) to present the data to the public. It has since grown to a very successful educational and data resource, with a record 13 million visits in January 2023 and over 110 million visits since inception. The website presents a huge amount of collective research and record of the worldwide genocide unfolding.
BACKGROUND:
CPG Sec. 420.100 Adulteration of Drugs Under Section 501(b) and 501(c) of the Act. *Direct Reference Seizure Authority for Adulterated Drugs Under Section 501(b)*
Section 501(b) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) deems an official drug (i.e., a drug purported to be or represented as a drug the name of which is recognized in an official compendium) to be adulterated if it fails to conform to compendial standards of quality, strength or purity. Compendial tests or assay methods are used when determining such conformance under 501(b); the standards are stated in individual monographs as well as portions of the General Notices section of the USP/NF. Standards and test methods have been established for such characteristics as potency, sterility, *dissolution*, weight variation and content uniformity.
If an official drug fails to conform to one or more compendial standards of strength, quality or purity, but plainly states on the label how it differs from the standard, then the drug is not deemed to be adulterated under Section 501(b).
Section 501(c) of the Act deems *a drug that is not recognized in an official compendium to be adulterated if it fails to meet the strength, purity or quality which it purports or is represented to possess. The applicable quality standards for a drug not recognized in an official compendium can be determined from such sources as the labeling of the drug (or drug product), the manufacturer’s written specifications, and new drug applications. (Test methods are usually contained in the written specifications or new drug application).*
POLICY:
Any official drug which, when tested by compendial methods, fails to conform to compendial standards for quality, strength, or purity, is adulterated unless the differences from such standards are plainly stated on the drug’s label.
Any *drug which is not recognized in an official compendium is adulterated if its strength differs from, or its purity or quality falls below that which it purports or is represented to possess, when tested by scientifically sound methods.*
RELEVANT CASES:
FDA Warning Letters for Batch Variability / Deviations from Good Manufacturing Practices – Adulterated Drug
Firm in question failed to thoroughly investigate any unexplained discrepancy or failure of a batch or any of its components to meet any of its specifications, whether or not the batch has already been distributed (21 CFR 211.192).
Charges of Conspiracy to Defraud the FDA due to Adulterated Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient:
Settlement of $600M Civil Settlement Plus $150M in Criminal Fines from GlaxoSmithKline Due to Adulterated Drug Product from Issues Related to cGMP:
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/financial-crimes-report-2010-2011
The dataset was downloaded from the VAERS website (as of December 10, 2021), limited to the reports submitted from the United States only. Summary of findings:
The total number of adverse events, serious adverse events and deaths reported in lots of COVID-19 vaccines over the period of <12 months were much higher than the total number of these events reported in lots of seasonal flu vaccines over the total available time (approx. 30 years). A very large difference exists for every assessed category: total as well as maximum and average per lot adverse events, serious adverse events, and deaths.
Excessive variation of adverse events, serious adverse events, and deaths between lots of COVID-19 vaccines appears to stand in stark contrast to much lower variation of adverse events associated with the lots of the seasonal flu vaccines reported over a 30-year period. This finding indicated that the manufacturing process for Covid 19 vaccines is not compliant with the current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) laws.
These results indicate unusual and alarming data patterns in the adverse event and deaths reporting from covid vaccines associated with specific lot numbers. These findings are easy to detect and obvious, yet no regulatory or public health agency have “detected” these signals to date. This willful inaction speaks even louder than my numbers do.
Results:
The datasets after data downloaded from VAERS.
*Unvalidated – i.e. lots that are present in VAERS database, raw output which contains many apparently mistyped lots. This does not matter when comparing with the flu vaccine datasets that have the same signal/noise issue - apparently large percentage of “mistyped” lot numbers. This issue does not affect the lot numbers that are associated with high numbers of adverse events and deaths.
**Numbers of events reported to VAERS in each category. Remove “unknown”, “none”, reports with missing data and some obvious typos.
As of December 3, 2021, the data comparing COVID-19 vaccine lots to seasonal flu vaccine lots from over 30 years showed the following. This data was included in Senator Johnson’s oversight letter sent to the FDA and CDC officials in December 2021 (he subsequently sent 40+ letters which were mostly ignored or given dishonest, gaslighting responses):
I found that over 30 years, the seasonal flu vaccine has never had more than 137 total (including non-serious) adverse events reported for a single lot. However, according to VAERS data, in less than one year, 5,297 adverse events were associated with one lot of the COVID-19 vaccines (Moderna 039K20A). The analysis further shows that approximately 80% of U.S.-only adverse events reported on VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines are associated with approximately only 1% of vaccine lot numbers, and approximately 80% of serious adverse events (those involving emergency room visits, hospitalization, or death) are associated with approximately only 5% of vaccine lot numbers.
Lot-to-Lot Variability for Covid-19 Injections vs Seasonal Flu Vaccines
This part of my analysis was primarily concerned with manufacturing quality, stability, reproducibility, and other factors that relate to the consistency of the manufactured product lot-to-lot.
Vaccine manufacturing is a regulated industry. It is nonetheless expected that the products are manufactured in a high-quality manufacturing environment with conformity of the product lot-to-lot.
Pharmaceutical product batches are expected to fall within certain narrow limits of variability on a set of controlled parameters between production lots. There is expectation and assurance from the manufacturers and regulators that the product sampled from different production lots will be essentially the same. In addition, there is assurance from manufacturers and public health authorities that Covid-19 vaccines can be used interchangeably from different manufacturers. There are no clinical studies demonstrating this, however, the public is expected to take the manufacturers’ and health authorities’ word for it.
To investigate the lot-to-lot variability for Covid-19 vaccines in comparison to the seasonal flu vaccines, I first plotted Serious Adverse Events for all manufacturing lot numbers in the Seasonal Flu dataset, sorted alphabetically:
Seasonal Flu Vaccines, All Lots with Non-Zero Serious Adverse Events
Next, I created the same plot for the Covid-19 Vaccine dataset, looking at the Serious Adverse Events/manufacturing lot, sorted alphabetically.
Covid-19 Injections Dataset Lot-to-Lot:
To summarize the differences in manufacturing lot-to-lot variability between these datasets, I compared coefficient of variation for each dataset. The coefficient of variation (CV) is a relative measure of variability that indicates the size of a standard deviation in relation to its mean. It is a standardized, unitless measure that allows one to compare variability between disparate groups and characteristics. It is often expressed in percentages. The results demonstrate that the Covid-19 dataset the CV is up to 12 times greater that that for the seasonal flu vaccines dataset.
In conclusion, the Covid-19 vaccines do not demonstrate consistency in manufacturing lot-to-lot. This result puts in question whether manufacturing for these products that are being injected into millions of people, including young healthy adults, children and pregnant women are compliant or consistent with manufacturing quality standards expected from medicines. The public is under assumption that these vaccines are safe, effective, and produced with the highest standards of quality. My analysis demonstrates that this is not the case based on the real-world outcomes data. These findings are very alarming and require investigation.