Deaths in Western Australia increased sevenfold after the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, with Port Hedland experiencing a significant rise in funerals.

Natural News

<p>The claim that deaths in Western Australia increased sevenfold after the COVID-19 vaccine rollout has been circulating, particularly in the context of a Port Hedland Town Council meeting. According to Councilor Adrian McRae, the town has gone from one funeral a week to more than one funeral a day since the COVID-19 injections were rolled out. This claim is based on anecdotal evidence and lacks robust scientific data to support it.</p>
<p>McRae also mentioned the construction of a new cold body storage facility in Port Hedland, attributing the need for this facility to the increase in deaths. However, the correlation between the vaccine rollout and the increase in deaths is not established through any peer-reviewed studies or official health data.</p>
<p>The claim further suggests that the COVID-19 injections are contaminated with synthetic DNA, specifically the cancer-causing simian virus 40 (SV40). This assertion is based on a report by Canadian molecular virologist and epidemiologist Dr. David Speicher, who allegedly identified SV40 DNA sequences in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 injections. While SV40 contamination in vaccines has been a historical concern, particularly with polio vaccines in the 1950s and 1960s, there is no current evidence to support the presence of SV40 in COVID-19 vaccines.</p>
<p>The Port Hedland Council passed a motion to suspend the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, citing the findings of Dr. Speicher. However, the scientific community has not widely accepted these findings, and they have not been corroborated by other independent studies.</p>
<p>Western Australia Premier Roger Cook responded to the council's motion by stating that it was based on an unverified claim. This response underscores the lack of credible evidence supporting the claim of increased deaths due to the vaccine rollout.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that deaths in Western Australia increased sevenfold after the COVID-19 vaccine rollout is not supported by reliable scientific evidence. The assertion of SV40 contamination in COVID-19 vaccines also lacks credible backing. It is crucial to rely on peer-reviewed studies and official health data when evaluating such claims.</p>

Claim Review: Deaths in Western Australia Increased Sevenfold After COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout

<h2>Claim Review: COVID-19 Vaccine Complications and Efficacy</h2>
<p>The claim that the COVID-19 vaccine has a significantly greater rate of complications than the disease it prevents and that its efficacy rapidly declines is partially true. However, the assertion that the vaccine makes things worse is not supported by comprehensive data.</p>
<p>The COVID-19 vaccines have been a subject of intense debate and scrutiny since their rollout. The claim that the vaccines have a significantly greater rate of complications than the disease they prevent is based on various reports of adverse events. According to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there have been numerous reports of severe reactions, including anaphylaxis, myocarditis, and even deaths. However, it is important to note that VAERS data is self-reported and does not establish causality.</p>
<p>The efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines has been shown to decline over time. Studies have indicated that the protection offered by the vaccines wanes after several months, necessitating booster shots. This decline in efficacy has been observed in various countries, including the United States and Israel. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has acknowledged this waning immunity and has recommended booster shots for eligible individuals.</p>
<p>The assertion that the vaccine makes things worse is more contentious. While there have been reports of breakthrough infections and concerns about vaccine-induced immune escape, comprehensive data from large-scale studies and real-world observations do not support the claim that the vaccines make the pandemic worse. On the contrary, vaccination campaigns have been associated with reductions in hospitalizations and deaths, particularly in vulnerable populations.</p>
<p>It is crucial to consider the broader context of public health measures and the complex nature of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the vaccines are not perfect, they have played a significant role in mitigating the impact of the disease. The benefits of vaccination, including reduced hospitalizations and deaths, must be weighed against the risks of adverse events.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while the COVID-19 vaccines have been associated with complications and declining efficacy, the claim that they make things worse is not supported by comprehensive data. The vaccines have been instrumental in reducing the severity of the pandemic and protecting vulnerable populations.</p>

Claim Review: COVID-19 Vaccine Complications and Efficacy

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>A recent article from The People's Voice claims that a Lancet review of 325 autopsies found that 74% of deaths were linked to COVID-19 vaccines. The article also states that the journal removed the study after only 24 hours. This claim review will examine the validity of these statements.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The claim suggests that a significant number of deaths were directly caused by COVID-19 vaccines, as indicated by an autopsy study published in the Lancet. The study was allegedly removed due to its conclusions not being supported by the methodology.</p>
<h2>Analysis</h2>
<p>The study in question was a pre-print awaiting peer-review, authored by Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, and their colleagues. Pre-prints are preliminary reports that have not undergone the rigorous peer-review process necessary for publication in reputable journals. The Lancet removed the study, stating that the conclusions were not supported by the study methodology.</p>
<p>The original study abstract, available in the Internet Archive, suggests that the most implicated organ system in COVID-19 vaccine-associated deaths was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%). The study concluded that there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases.</p>
<p>However, the removal of the study by the Lancet indicates significant methodological concerns. Pre-prints are often removed if they fail to meet basic screening criteria or if the methodology is deemed flawed. The fact that the study was removed so quickly suggests that it did not meet the necessary standards for further review.</p>
<p>Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist, acknowledged that while the approach taken in the study is sound, there may be a bias towards reporting autopsies where there was evidence of causation. This bias could exaggerate the likelihood of causation. She also emphasized the importance of open scientific critique over censorship.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>To date, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has not acknowledged a single death being caused by COVID-19 vaccines. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is designed to alert to potential harms but is not the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country, but this method is also imperfect.</p>
<p>A study published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104840">New England Journal of Medicine</a> found no evidence of increased mortality rates among vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals. Another study in the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(23)00207-4/fulltext">Lancet</a> &nbsp;concluded that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, with rare adverse events.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that a Lancet review found 74% of deaths linked to COVID-19 vaccines is based on a pre-print study that was removed due to methodological concerns. The removal of the study indicates that the conclusions were not supported by the methodology. The claim is not substantiated by peer-reviewed evidence, and the available scientific literature does not support the assertion that COVID-19 vaccines are causing a significant number of deaths.</p>
<p>It is crucial to rely on peer-reviewed studies and open scientific critique to assess the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Censorship of flawed studies is a necessary part of maintaining scientific integrity.</p>

Claim Review: Lancet Removes Autopsy Study Linking 74% of Deaths to COVID-19 Vaccines

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "Deaths in Western Australia increased sevenfold after the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, with Port Hedland experiencing a significant rise in funerals." is False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: