Johns Hopkins Data: Proof COVID Shots Cause Majority Of Illness And Death

A savvy UK quantitative data analyst named Joel Smalley recently uploaded a video highlighting data from John Hopkins University showing insane spikes in Covid-19 deaths after countries introduced Covid injections.

johns hopkins data proof covid shots cause majority of illness and death

The data points from dozens of countries shows the same upward trend: as soon as the vaccines got introduced, COVID deaths skyrocketed.

Johns Hopkins data proves COVID shots are causing the majority of illness and death:

COVID-19 deaths around the world, before and after the vaccination programs:

UK Public Health Data: 80% Of Covid-19 Deaths In AUGUST Were Vaccinated People
UK Public Health Data: 81% Of Covid-19 Deaths In SEPTEMBER Were Vaccinated People

Source: / References:

2 thoughts on “Johns Hopkins Data: Proof COVID Shots Cause Majority Of Illness And Death

    YOUTUBE: Tucker: When do we get America back?
    Aug 25, 2020
    Fox News
    For Americans living under coronavirus restrictions, it’s a question too rarely asked. In fact it’s actively discouraged. #FoxNews #Tucker

    YOUTUBE: Global Elite’s “Great Reset” Agenda (Shocking Discoveries Revealed)
    Aug 1, 2020
    George Gammon
    For more content that’ll help you build wealth and thrive in a world of out of control central banks and big governments check out these videos!
    This isn’t the first time “The Great Reset” has been presented, Richard Florida tried peddling this garbage back in 2010 after the manufactured “Financial crisis” of 2007-2008. If you dig into Richard Florida’s background, and realize he has been pushing this concept since 2002 in “The Rise of the Creative Class”. I agree it’s just lipstick on an old pig as James pointed out. (no surprise here)
    Also, something worth reading regarding transhumanism would be about FM-2030 – note the 2030, it’s seems to be a magical number of sorts 😉 FM-2030 created a transhumanist manifesto called “UpWingers: A Futurist Manifesto”, which can be read here: some consider him the “father” of the modern transhumanism. Personally I believe this nonsense even goes further back to ancient greece and the philosophical argument of “Free will vs. Determinism” the later being the one that most “elites” would more then likely say is the case. Especially given the state of “biosecurity” meaning given enough information about an individual you could theoretically predict their behavior and their life in general. A fun filled article over at The Atlantic: gives a window into some current thoughts of how we can be condensed down to biological machines with no real purpose. But hey we are after all just “cannon fodder”

    I walked through some charcoal
    and I couldn’t believe that I had left
    so many carbon footprints”!!!
    I felt dirty and shamed!

    Critics of AGW – Exposing the Scam is Bad for Your
    Career … Here I document several examples of harsh treatment of those who have challenged the AGW propagandists. For example, it was only after he retired that long-time newsreader Peter Sissons criticised the BBC for failing to be more sceptical about AGW25. Chris Landsea (resigned from IPCC) has now admitted some data they used came from a mountaineering magazine article and a student’s dissertation26.

    It seems to be true that those who haven’t been affected by“programming”,
    “education” or indoctrination are “dealt with” by those that have been
    affected… (this is very similar to what happens with the Thought Police in
    Orwell’s 1984).

    Dr David Bellamy, a hugely popular science presenter on the BBC at one time, said he “didn’t get any more phone calls from the BBC” when he started to point out the flaws in the AGW science27. He is quoted28 as saying about global warming, “This is not science – it’s religion.” His scepticism meant the end of his career as he had known it. He said that “They froze me out, because I don’t believe in global warming. My career dried up. I was thrown out of my own conservation groups and I got spat at in London.”

    Another popular BBC science presenter, Johnny Ball, also rejects any
    consensus and was reported as saying29:

    “In the past decade or so I’ve been mocked, vilified, besmirched –
    I’ve even been booed off a theatre stage – simply for expressing the view that the case for global warming and climate change, and in particular the emphasis on the damage caused by carbon dioxide, the so-called greenhouse gas that is going to do for us all, has been massively over-stated.

    A further example of the work of the climate change “thought police” was on the case of Quentin Letts who hosted a BBC 4 series called “What’s the Point Of.” This light-hearted series poked fun at various organisations. One particular episode was about the UK Met Office, and the subject of climate change came up. Letts is reported as saying:

    “I was accused of having shown disrespect to climate change. Mr
    Lilley had cracked a joke: ‘They [the Met Office] come before the
    Select Committee on Energy and Climate Change … and tell us they
    need even more money for even bigger computers so they can be
    even more precisely wrong in future.’ I chuckled. I had ‘not reflected
    prevailing scientific opinion’ about global warming. “Letts asked:
    “Er, hang on, chaps. No one ever told me that. Why on earth would
    independent journalists accept such a stricture? Why should climate change be given such special protection?”

    A further example was seen when Philippe Verdier, weather chief at France Télévisions32, the country’s state broadcaster, was “sent on a forced holiday” for publishing a book questioning the causes of any climate change. He did this following a “meeting with Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, who summoned the country’s main weather presenters and urged them to mention ‘climate chaos’ in their forecasts.”


    YOUTUBE: Tucker: When do we get America back?
    Aug 25, 2020
    Fox News
    For Americans living under coronavirus restrictions, it’s a question too rarely asked. In fact it’s actively discouraged. #FoxNews #Tucker
    YOUTUBE: Global Elite’s “Great Reset” Agenda (Shocking Discoveries Revealed)
    Aug 1, 2020
    George Gammon
    For more content that’ll help you build wealth and thrive in a world of out of control central banks and big governments check out these videos!
    The Rockefeller Foundation published a paper in 2010 titled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. The first scenario was called LOCK STEP and was described as follows: “A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.”
    In this scenario, a virus pandemic appears suddenly, quickly infecting populations around the world, destroying economies by interrupting mobility of people and goods, and debilitating industries and global supply chains.
    This makes it possible for government leaders to take total control over their citizens as a public-health measure – a process the people greatly disliked but are psychologically incapable of resisting, because it is done in the name of protecting them. Thus, the economies and political structures of the whole world emerge as a united totalitarian system with a resentful and unruly population but one that can be effectively controlled by new technology.
    We see from this that the economic and political effects of a pandemic were being carefully studied at the Rockefeller Foundation at least as early as 2010. More recently, a pandemic simulation took place at Event 201, which was hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This occurred six weeks before the first reported outbreak of the coronavirus. Almost to a tee, it followed the initial phase of the LOCK STEP scenario.
    Now this is where it gets interesting, because it deals with the connection between the Rockefeller Lock Step scenario and the Johns Hopkins Event 201. The two organizations have a long history of collaboration ever since 1916, when the John Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health was founded with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation. Since then, they have become inseparable.
    Some of the history of this collaboration is not pleasant. For example, In the 1940s, 750 victims filed a $1-billion lawsuit against the Rockefeller Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Hospital, the Johns Hopkins University, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and the Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation, alleging that they were the driving force behind human experiments in the 1940s in which vulnerable populations of Guatemalans were intentionally exposed to syphilis, gonorrhea, and other venereal diseases, without informed consent. The experiments targeted school children, orphans, psychiatric hospital patients, prison inmates, and military conscripts.
    Key Rockefeller and Johns Hopkins researchers involved in the Guatemala Experiments also were behind the now infamous Tuskegee experiments in which 600 impoverished African-American sharecroppers were never informed they had syphilis, and were given placebos rather than treatment.
    Bill and Melinda Gates now have joined this team and, as previously stated, they co-sponsored Event 201. It is logical that they should come together on this project. All parties involved are obsessed with population reduction. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation granted at least $60-million to the Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health to fund the Bill and Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health that is located inside of the Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. In their dictionary, reproductive health means drastically reducing the birth rate.
    None of this proves ill intent of these parties, but it does (or should) sound the alarm to be cautions when these people and their organizations ask us to trust their judgment and leadership in a health experiment called vaccines, most of which never have been tested for safety and all of which are loaded with toxins known to reduce fertility and shorten lifespan. Could that be a covert way of reducing the population? Think about it.
    Rockefeller Foundation paper —
    Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development_Rockefeller Foundation


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s