A Lancet review of 325 autopsies after Covid vaccination found that 74% of the deaths were caused by the vaccine – but the study was removed within 24 hours.
The paper, a pre-print that was awaiting peer-review, is written by leading cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough, Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch and their colleagues at the Wellness Company, as well as top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson and others, and was published online on Wednesday on the pre-print site of the prestigious medical journal.
However, less than 24 hours later, the study was removed and a note appeared stating: “This preprint has been removed by Preprints with the Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.” While the study had not undergone any part of the peer-review process, the note implies it fell foul of “screening criteria”.
The original study abstract can be found in the Internet Archive. It reads (with my emphasis added):
Background: The rapid development and widespread deployment of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with a high number of adverse event reports, have led to concerns over possible mechanisms of injury including systemic lipid nanoparticle (LNP) and mRNA distribution, spike protein-associated tissue damage, thrombogenicity, immune system dysfunction and carcinogenicity. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate possible causal links between COVID-19 vaccine administration and death using autopsies and post-mortem analysis.
Methods: We searched for all published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination up until May 18th, 2023. We initially identified 678 studies and, after screening for our inclusion criteria, included 44 papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case. Three physicians independently reviewed all deaths and determined whether COVID-19 vaccination was the direct cause or contributed significantly to death.
Findings: The most implicated organ system in COVID-19 vaccine-associated death was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%), the respiratory system (8%) and multiple organ systems (7%). Three or more organ systems were affected in 21 cases. The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days. Most deaths occurred within a week from last vaccine administration. A total of 240 deaths (73.9%) were independently adjudicated as directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.
Interpretation: The consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, their mechanisms and related excess death, coupled with autopsy confirmation and physician-led death adjudication, suggests there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases. Further urgent investigation is required for the purpose of clarifying our findings.
The full study does not appear to have been saved in the Internet Archive, but can be read here.
Without further detail from the Preprints with the Lancet staff who removed the paper it is hard to know what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has. A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line. Keep in mind that the CDC has not yet acknowledged a single death being caused by the Covid mRNA vaccines. Autopsy evidence demonstrating otherwise is clearly not what the U.S. public health establishment wants to hear.
Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and co-Chair of the HART pandemic advisory group, says that in her view the approach taken in the study is sound. She told the Daily Sceptic:
The VAERS system [of vaccine adverse event reporting] is designed to alert to potential harms without necessarily being 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.
However, this is imperfect as a deficit of deaths would be expected after a period of excess deaths, making the accuracy of any baseline dubious.
An alternative approach of auditing such deaths through autopsy is sound.
There may be a bias [in the study] towards reporting the autopsies of deaths where there was evidence of causation and the likelihood of causation might be exaggerated by that bias. For example, 19 of the 325 deaths were due to vaccine-induced immune thrombocytopenia and thrombosis (VITT) but these reports may be overrepresented because of the regulators’ willingness to acknowledge such deaths.
Nevertheless, it is important that attempts are made to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, rather than open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.
Dr. Harvey Risch, one of the study’s authors, told the Daily Sceptic he deems it “pure Government-directed censorship, even after the Missouri v. Biden injunction”.
“Meanwhile, my colleagues are studying what they call ‘Long Vax‘, which is vaccine-caused damage. But of course that is a rare, rare, rare outcome, except that they seem not to be having any problem finding such individuals to enroll in their study,” he added.
Stop Press: Co-author Dr. Peter McCullough has defended the study in an interview with the Epoch Times, saying the project was approved through the University of Michigan’s School of Public Health, and the team used a standard scientific evaluation methodology known as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses to evaluate studies for inclusion. He added that before removal, the study was experiencing “hundreds of reviews per minute” and is now on the Zenodo preprint server and currently under review at another high-level journal.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It’s hard not to get really depressed
“To be a scientist is to be naive. We are so focussed on our search for truth we fail to consider how few actually want us to find it. But it is always there, whether we see it or not, whether we choose to or not. The truth doesn’t care about our needs or wants. It doesn’t care about our governments, our ideologies, our religions. It will lie in wait for all time. And this, at last, is the gift of Chernobyl; where I once would fear the cost of truth, now I only ask, “what is the cost of lies?” “
— Valery Legasov
Were it not for the DS, I would never have known that this study exists and that it has been suppressed.
That is the power of the Internet and social media and why the establishment is so anxious to clamp down on it.
The scale of the corruption and deception of the established power is such that it is constantly being revealed, in myriad ways. And they just can’t have that. People will eventually get fed up when they hear over and again about their cheating and lying.
I wonder if the authors will be found dead soon, due to suicide or jumping off the top of building somewhere, maybe a train crash. But remember – the UK and the US are ‘democracies’ and the Russkies are the evil Soviet-types….
What was the name of that chap who spoke about the “dodgy dossier”?
Dr Kelly. That was definitely very suspicious.
Dr David Kelly, found dead with his glasses immaculately cleaned and bearing not even a fingerprint; Dr Kelly was very well known for never cleaning his glasses, so much so that people often asked how on earth he could see anything. He was murdered, there is no doubt about it whatsoever.
I heard of it via Steve Kirsch, who linked to Peter McCullough’s substack. No surprise it was pulled as ‘the flack increases when you’re over the target’.
I posted this 8 hours ago in the News Round-Up and I remember thinking to myself, if Prof Fenton is having problems getting his work onto even pre-print servers then it’s a miracle this made it on. So lo and behold it has now been removed but at what point do the paper’s authors get an explanation for what has happened to their work? And why allow it on the server only to remove it shortly after? This just looks like really unprofessional behaviour and smacks of major censorship. People aren’t thick. They can see what’s going on and the more things are censored the more that makes people suspicious and want to seek out the works that are being censored. I look forward to a response and explanation from the Lancet about their highly questionable behaviour.
How did you learn about it, Mogs?
On Twitter. It’s a goldmine of intel that I harvest at least twice per day. I sift through the sh*t to bring you guys the good stuff if and when I can.
Thank you so much
People aren’t thick but a controlled media keeps them uninformed and distracted. Scientific literature has been co-opted for the same reason I would assume. All information outlets need to be controlled.
We’ve reached the stage where if a paper gets into a medical journal it is likely to be suspect. Tom Woods reminded me yesterday of the blog by former bmj editor Richard Smith about the problem
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/07/05/time-to-assume-that-health-research-is-fraudulent-until-proved-otherwise/
On the topic of vaccines, I know this is something most on here will already be aware of but if you don’t get on Twitter it seems Dr Paul Offit possibly let on more than he intended to. Surely one of the main objectives to drug and vaccine trials is to see if they are safer and more effective than having no intervention whatsoever, hence why they should always be trialed against a true placebo, right?
”Why is Offit tweeting about placebos and saltwater right now?
It has to do with a truth bomb Robert F. Kennedy Jr. dropped at a town hall event last week.
According to Kennedy, chairman on leave from Children’s Health Defense, he and attorney Aaron Siri sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) after HHS refused to meet their demand to produce at least one study comparing the safety of a vaccine on the childhood immunization schedule with a true placebo.
In a written response received more than a year later, the HHS did not cite a single such study, instead claiming:
“Inert placebo controls are not required to understand the safety profile of a new vaccine, and are thus not required.”
This stupefying claim made by Melinda Wharton, M.D., MPH, acting director of the National Vaccine Program Office, should be attacked on podcasts and publications everywhere.
How do you know that a new vaccine is safe if it isn’t tested against an inert placebo, Dr. Wharton?
If you are someone who is willing to abandon basic logic and trust every single word spewed by our public health agencies, ask yourself, why then does the FDA demand that medicines be tested against a placebo to ensure safety prior to licensure?”
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/paul-offit-vaccines-placebos/
Again I commend Aaron Siris testimony to the Arizona State Senate featured on last week’s Highwire
https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/aaron-siri-gives-testimony-on-the-floor-of-arizona-state-senate/
It is long but easy to follow. The facts are so mind-boggling and most of us have been so brainwashed that we’re unable to grasp the truth.
The vaccine industry (both pharma companies and their so-called regulators) is totally out of control and nobody has the courage to do anything about it.
I should also add that RFKJr 2021 interview on darkhorse podcast – only released a few days ago because Bret Weinstein was worried about losing his income! –
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ocxl_Do1nx8
Is well worth a watch with regard to the questions we should be asking about childhood vaccines. At the very least we need to have public debate about the problems with and evidence of efficacy of traditional “live” vaccines, the health benefits of the modern replacements, the issues over adjuvants and the need for more research into the short and long term adverse effects.
Thanks for the links and I agree with you totally. Yes I have my eyes on Aaron Siri. He’s done great things in getting the truth out and challenging the entire corrupt complex. I’m often put off by long interviews/videos, which I know is daft because I can watch them in segments. I do read his substack though and he writes very good articles. I think everyone takes vaccines, or consents to their kids having theirs, based on blind faith coupled with fear of what would happen if they didn’t. I used to be one of those. If only more people knew the truth that it’s basically a massive, lucrative racket that’s been going on for decades. That’s the real reason they don’t use an inert placebo as the control in trials. Because then the truth that their product is both unsafe and ineffective would be self-evident. If they are so confident in their vaccine then trial it against a saline jab in a true randomised double-blind placebo controlled study. A sore arm is a sore arm regardless of what gets injected IM. Nobody would know.
All explained in Turtles All The Way Down – a fantastic read.
(But not the novel with the same title…)
The authors remain anonymous to save the mob the trouble of looking for ways to smear and discredit.
Wow, just wow. Talk about a Freudian slip!
Brilliantly quick on your feet there Will Hay! Well done my man! Autopsy is cast iron fact. They cannot be denied. (Burkhardt – at least words to that effect)
Which is precisely why post mortems around the globe were stopped…. Why cremations were promoted….. No crime without a crime scene…..
Wot? An autopsy only shows what is there. It does not show what the cause was.
The Lancet is no longer a reputable journal.
Just posted link to study and have deleted comment because the paper is linked in the article
We need to look over the channel at France burning. Liberals start wars and Conservatives fight and win them
20 years later the entitled liberals crawl out of their holes.
It’s a wonder the Lancet hasn’t announced that Joseph Merrick died of Covid-19
LOL! Lots of traffic on Twitter about this…one of the funniest things is that the pro-vaxxers always use the same arguments, one of which is..but these guys work for, in this case, The Wellness Company..so cannot be trusted to be independent…but apparently see no problem with a well known and previously criminally charged company like Pfizer doing their own studies!! LOL!
I’m not sure that I am convinced by this study. What is missing is the number of people vaccinated who did not die and surely this is needed to put the deaths into perspective. Further if an individual country had done this study, in most of them there is only one death recorded so that is not enough to reach the conclusions of this paper. Most of the deaths said to be related to vaccines occurred in a few specific countries. Should that raise questions about why?
It seems that excess deaths are increasing but there can be other reasons and they are still no high compared to some recent past years. If vaccines have caused deaths it is because there was nothing in the trials to justify the claim of safe and effective. This must be admitted and then the vaccines withdrawn.
They obviously came to the ‘wrong’ conclusion and have been sent for ‘re-education’.
Ofcourse they did.
Big pharma sponsored fact check
https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2023/07/fact-check-preprint-paper-submitted-to-the-lancet-did-not-find-74-percent-of-deaths-in-reviewed-autopsies-were-caused-by-covid19-vaccine.html
Behold, the smoking gun.