Connect with us

Uncategorized

New Zealand Fudged The Data On How Kidneys Fare After COVID Vaccines

New Zealand Fudged The Data On How Kidneys Fare After COVID Vaccines

Authored by Colleen Huber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In a…

Published

on

New Zealand Fudged The Data On How Kidneys Fare After COVID Vaccines

Authored by Colleen Huber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

In a January 2023 preprint in The Lancet, the New Zealand government released a study showing a 70 percent increased rate of kidney injury following two doses of Pfizer mRNA vaccines. Even more telling of injury was the dose-dependent effect. That is, one dose of Pfizer showed a 60 percent increased rate of injury within three weeks post-injection, while two doses showed a 70 percent increased rate of injury three weeks post-injection. “Acute kidney injury” was not defined by the authors but is understood in a clinical setting to include measurable changes in lab results and/or serious signs and symptoms such as bleeding, pain with urination, kidney stones, nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, or other renal dysfunction.

(Flowersandtraveling/Shutterstock)

The data were drawn from a national database of over 4 million people over the age of 5 who had received the Pfizer vaccines. This number represented 95 percent of New Zealand adults and teenagers.

Compared to historical background rates of kidney injury, the following changes in acute kidney injuries were found in the original article, as shown in this screenshot.

These alarming results of vastly increased kidney injury were published in the abstract of the original article, and here are two screenshots from the January 2023 version of the abstract of that article:  [1]

Now let’s zoom in on the last two sentences:

None of the above is now available online anymore, except through web archives.

The full paper does not seem to be available anymore anywhere, just the abstract, and the following is what appears when you click on the link that worked back in January:

The original full article seems to no longer be available on the internet, but I still have the above screenshots. Journalist Alex Berenson wrote a summary of the original article. [2]

Hiding the Data in New Zealand

Then a strange thing happened to the New Zealand data. Not only did the above paper disappear, but the numbers of reported acute kidney injuries were cut nearly in half. Here is what the same table now shows, from the same-titled paper, by the same authors, since August 2023, [3] at this link:

Suddenly, from January to August 2023, the observed acute kidney injury (AKI) events now are only 57 percent and 58 percent, respectively, of the originally reported AKI events. As a result, the data shown in August look like the Pfizer vaccine made no difference or even implied a slight benefit, whereas the data published seven months earlier had shown an alarming increase in acute kidney injuries postvaccine.

Also, in the August 2023 revision, the reported number of those who had received the first dose was reduced by about 100,000, and the number of those receiving the second dose was reduced by over 200,000.

During the time period of the study, Feb. 19, 2021, to Feb. 10, 2022, New Zealand had relatively low rates of COVID-19, as seen in the chart below. [4] The curve below took a vertical turn on Feb. 11, 2022, which was the day after the New Zealand government authors of the paper stopped collecting data. Until that dramatic turn, daily new confirmed COVID cases in New Zealand remained near zero.

So it is not plausible to attribute the kidney injuries seen in New Zealand post-COVID vaccines to COVID-19 infection.

The following list of kidney injuries and disorders were observed in the Pfizer clinical trials. [5] Pfizer listed the following urinary tract injuries seen in the Pfizer clinical trials in its “Appendix 1: List of adverse events of special interest.”

From the Pfizer list of over 1,200 types of injuries, I pulled out the syndromes and injuries observed in the Pfizer trials that were specifically related to, or consequent to injuries to, the kidneys, and/or syndromes and injuries that affected the kidneys more than any other organ. I found 40 such disease conditions. They are as follows:

  1. 2-Hydroxyglutaric aciduria.
  2. Acute kidney injury.
  3. Anti-glomerular basement membrane antibody positive.
  4. Anti-glomerular basement membrane disease.
  5. Autoimmune nephritis.
  6. Bilirubin urine present.
  7. C1q nephropathy.
  8. Chronic autoimmune glomerulonephritis.
  9. Cryoglobulinaemia.
  10. Dialysis amyloidosis.
  11. Fibrillary glomerulonephritis.
  12. Glomerulonephritis.
  13. Glomerulonephritis membranoproliferative.
  14. Glomerulonephritis membranous.
  15. Glomerulonephritis rapidly progressive.
  16. Goodpasture syndrome.
  17. Henoch Schonlein purpura nephritis.
  18. IgA nephropathy.
  19. IgM nephropathy.
  20. Immune-mediated nephritis.
  21. Immune-mediated renal disorder.
  22. Lupus nephritis.
  23. Mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis.
  24. Nephritis.
  25. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis.
  26. Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.
  27. Renal amyloidosis.
  28. Renal arteritis.
  29. Renal artery thrombosis.
  30. Renal embolism.
  31. Renal failure.
  32. Renal vascular thrombosis.
  33. Renal vasculitis.
  34. Renal vein embolism.
  35. Renal vein thrombosis.
  36. Scleroderma renal crisis.
  37. Tubulointerstitial nephritis and uveitis syndrome.
  38. Urine bilirubin increased.
  39. Urobilinogen urine decreased.
  40. Urobilinogen urine increased.

Here is a list of 10 other injuries and syndromes observed postvaccine in the Pfizer trial that involve the kidneys but are not exclusive to them. These often affect and damage the kidneys, but I did not include them on the above list since they are not specific to the kidneys. They are as follows:

  1. ANCA vasculitis.
  2. Diffuse vasculitis.
  3. Disseminated intravascular coagulation.
  4. Granulomatosis with polyangiitis.
  5. Polyarteritis nodosa.
  6. Pulmonary renal syndrome.
  7. Systemic lupus erythematosus.
  8. Systemic scleroderma.
  9. Thrombotic microangiopathy.
  10. Type III immune complex-mediated hypersensitivity syndrome.

More than 1,200 different adverse events of special interest were observed and reported in the Pfizer clinical trials. Here is a screenshot of just those related to disorders of the glomeruli, the fine filtering units throughout the kidneys—over a half million in each kidney—that separate blood from urine:

Other Findings of Kidney Injury Post-COVID Vaccination

Post-COVID vaccine renal events were recorded in a study of 111 patients with previously biopsy-proven glomerulonephritis and two prior mRNA vaccine doses. [6]

The authors found that 22.5 percent of vaccinated patients experienced new-onset or relapse of glomerulonephritis or other renal events following COVID vaccination. Additionally, 10.8 percent had increased proteinuria, 12.6 percent had worsening hematuria, and 0.9 percent had creatinine values 150 times what is normal or worse.

No difference was found between the Pfizer-vaccinated and Moderna-vaccinated with respect to renal events.

The study found the following:

Graph: Y Ota, et al. Association between COVID-19 vaccination and relapse of glomerulonephritis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9686234/

That study did not discuss the time elapsed from vaccination to glomerulonephritis pathology. This smaller study of 13 patients found that the median time of onset was one week after the first dose and four weeks after the second dose. [7] The patients typically presented with acute kidney injury, edema, and visible blood in the urine.

Several reports of minimal change disease appear in the peer-reviewed literature. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] Most of those cases occurred within several days of receiving a mRNA COVID vaccine, usually after the second dose, sometimes after the third dose. [15] It has also been seen following the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine. [16]

Minimal change disease is not one of the conditions noted in the Pfizer adverse events list. It is an insidious kidney disorder that is so named for the very subtle changes in the glomeruli filtration, which leaves gaps in filtration. Nephrotic syndrome results, in which proteins leak through the gaps from the blood into the urine, and then systemic effects of hypoproteinemia result.

Other kidney diseases observed following COVID vaccination include the following:

  • Visible blood in the urine (hematuria) within hours after vaccination. [17]
  • Membranous nephropathy. [18]
  • Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis. [19]
  • ANCA glomerulonephritis. [20]
  • ANCA vasculitis. [21]
  • IgA nephropathy in children. [22]

Magnetic resonance urography is shown below in an MRI image of the kidneys and proximal ureters (photo from OHSU).

https://www.ohsu.edu/school-of-medicine/diagnostic-radiology/body-imaging

We can appreciate in the above photo that the fan shape of a kidney allows lots of surface area peripherally for maximum fine filtration of blood to urine, and the collecting ducts gather centrally toward the minor calyces, major calyces, and then finally, the renal pelvis, to effectively drain off urine with downward flow, gravity-assisted. Hence the fanned “kidney bean” shape.

If You Think the Kidneys Were Hit Hard . . .

After an extensive review of the medical literature over the last three years, since the onset of mass COVID vaccination campaigns, I can say with confidence that the medical literature reveals many fewer victims of kidney injuries following these vaccines than of other types of bodily injuries. Other bodily organs have fared far worse than the kidneys for most of the victims. Most notable and now well-known are the myocarditis and other cardiovascular injuries, for which I described the mechanisms of injury and the ubiquity among the COVID-vaccinated population, [23] as well as brain injuries, [24] among others.

Future vaccines must be screened thoroughly for risk to kidneys and other organs before use in adults, and then only with fully detailed and uncoerced informed consent. Clearly, such toxic products as mRNA injections must never be used in children at all and must never be made a condition of work or study for anyone.

[2] A Berenson.  URGENT:  A big New Zealand study reveals high rates of kidney injury after the Pfizer jab.  Jan 26 2023.  Unreported Truths.

[3] M Walton, V Pletzer, et al.  Adverse events following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) in Aotearoa New Zealand.  Aug 9 2023.  Drug Saf.  46 (9): 867-879.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10442303/

[8] V D’Agati, S Kudose, et al.  Minimal change disease and acute kidney injury following the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Kidney Int. May 15 2021. 100 (2). 461–463. doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2021.04.035.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8123374/

[17] L Negrea, B Rovin.  Gross hematuria following vaccination for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in 2 patients with IgA nephropathy.  Jun 2021.  Kidney Int.  99 (6).  1487.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987498/

[18] N Chavarot, M Padden, et al.  De novo posttransplant membranous nephropathy following BNT 162b2 COVID-19 vaccine in a kidney transplant recipient.  Dec 2022.  22 (12).  3188-3189.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9537991/

[19] N Morimoto, T Mori, et al.  Rapidly progressive IgA nephropathy with membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis-like lesions in an elderly man following the third dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine: a case report.  Apr 24 2023.  BMC Nephrol..  24 (1).  108.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37095451/

[21] M Shakoor, M Birkenbach, et al.  ANCA-Associated vasculitis following Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.  Oct 2021.  Am J Kidney Dis.  78 (4).  611-613.   https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34280507/

[22] C Hanna, L Herrera Hernandez, et al.  IgA nephropathy presenting as macroscopic hematuria in 2 pediatric patients after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine.  Sep 2021.  Kidney Int.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8256683/

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/09/2024 - 02:00

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

February Employment Situation

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000…

Published

on

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert

The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000 average over the previous 12 months. The payroll data for January and December were revised down by a total of 167,000. The private sector added 223,000 new jobs, the largest gain since May of last year.

Temporary help services employment continues a steep decline after a sharp post-pandemic rise.

Average hours of work increased from 34.2 to 34.3. The increase, along with the 223,000 private employment increase led to a hefty increase in total hours of 5.6% at an annualized rate, also the largest increase since May of last year.

The establishment report, once again, beat “expectations;” the WSJ survey of economists was 198,000. Other than the downward revisions, mentioned above, another bit of negative news was a smallish increase in wage growth, from $34.52 to $34.57.

The household survey shows that the labor force increased 150,000, a drop in employment of 184,000 and an increase in the number of unemployed persons of 334,000. The labor force participation rate held steady at 62.5, the employment to population ratio decreased from 60.2 to 60.1 and the unemployment rate increased from 3.66 to 3.86. Remember that the unemployment rate is the number of unemployed relative to the labor force (the number employed plus the number unemployed). Consequently, the unemployment rate can go up if the number of unemployed rises holding fixed the labor force, or if the labor force shrinks holding the number unemployed unchanged. An increase in the unemployment rate is not necessarily a bad thing: it may reflect a strong labor market drawing “marginally attached” individuals from outside the labor force. Indeed, there was a 96,000 decline in those workers.

Earlier in the week, the BLS announced JOLTS (Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) data for January. There isn’t much to report here as the job openings changed little at 8.9 million, the number of hires and total separations were little changed at 5.7 million and 5.3 million, respectively.

As has been the case for the last couple of years, the number of job openings remains higher than the number of unemployed persons.

Also earlier in the week the BLS announced that productivity increased 3.2% in the 4th quarter with output rising 3.5% and hours of work rising 0.3%.

The bottom line is that the labor market continues its surprisingly (to some) strong performance, once again proving stronger than many had expected. This strength makes it difficult to justify any interest rate cuts soon, particularly given the recent inflation spike.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Mortgage rates fall as labor market normalizes

Jobless claims show an expanding economy. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

Published

on

Everyone was waiting to see if this week’s jobs report would send mortgage rates higher, which is what happened last month. Instead, the 10-year yield had a muted response after the headline number beat estimates, but we have negative job revisions from previous months. The Federal Reserve’s fear of wage growth spiraling out of control hasn’t materialized for over two years now and the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9%. For now, we can say the labor market isn’t tight anymore, but it’s also not breaking.

The key labor data line in this expansion is the weekly jobless claims report. Jobless claims show an expanding economy that has not lost jobs yet. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

From the Fed: In the week ended March 2, initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits were flat, at 217,000. The four-week moving average declined slightly by 750, to 212,250


Below is an explanation of how we got here with the labor market, which all started during COVID-19.

1. I wrote the COVID-19 recovery model on April 7, 2020, and retired it on Dec. 9, 2020. By that time, the upfront recovery phase was done, and I needed to model out when we would get the jobs lost back.

2. Early in the labor market recovery, when we saw weaker job reports, I doubled and tripled down on my assertion that job openings would get to 10 million in this recovery. Job openings rose as high as to 12 million and are currently over 9 million. Even with the massive miss on a job report in May 2021, I didn’t waver.

Currently, the jobs openings, quit percentage and hires data are below pre-COVID-19 levels, which means the labor market isn’t as tight as it once was, and this is why the employment cost index has been slowing data to move along the quits percentage.  

2-US_Job_Quits_Rate-1-2

3. I wrote that we should get back all the jobs lost to COVID-19 by September of 2022. At the time this would be a speedy labor market recovery, and it happened on schedule, too

Total employment data

4. This is the key one for right now: If COVID-19 hadn’t happened, we would have between 157 million and 159 million jobs today, which would have been in line with the job growth rate in February 2020. Today, we are at 157,808,000. This is important because job growth should be cooling down now. We are more in line with where the labor market should be when averaging 140K-165K monthly. So for now, the fact that we aren’t trending between 140K-165K means we still have a bit more recovery kick left before we get down to those levels. 




From BLS: Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 275,000 in February, and the unemployment rate increased to 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care, in government, in food services and drinking places, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.

Here are the jobs that were created and lost in the previous month:

IMG_5092

In this jobs report, the unemployment rate for education levels looks like this:

  • Less than a high school diploma: 6.1%
  • High school graduate and no college: 4.2%
  • Some college or associate degree: 3.1%
  • Bachelor’s degree or higher: 2.2%
IMG_5093_320f22

Today’s report has continued the trend of the labor data beating my expectations, only because I am looking for the jobs data to slow down to a level of 140K-165K, which hasn’t happened yet. I wouldn’t categorize the labor market as being tight anymore because of the quits ratio and the hires data in the job openings report. This also shows itself in the employment cost index as well. These are key data lines for the Fed and the reason we are going to see three rate cuts this year.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January…

Published

on

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January jobs report was the "most ridiculous in recent history" but, boy, were we wrong because this morning the Biden department of goalseeked propaganda (aka BLS) published the February jobs report, and holy crap was that something else. Even Goebbels would blush. 

What happened? Let's take a closer look.

On the surface, it was (almost) another blockbuster jobs report, certainly one which nobody expected, or rather just one bank out of 76 expected. Starting at the top, the BLS reported that in February the US unexpectedly added 275K jobs, with just one research analyst (from Dai-Ichi Research) expecting a higher number.

Some context: after last month's record 4-sigma beat, today's print was "only" 3 sigma higher than estimates. Needless to say, two multiple sigma beats in a row used to only happen in the USSR... and now in the US, apparently.

Before we go any further, a quick note on what last month we said was "the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history": it appears the BLS read our comments and decided to stop beclowing itself. It did that by slashing last month's ridiculous print by over a third, and revising what was originally reported as a massive 353K beat to just 229K,  a 124K revision, which was the biggest one-month negative revision in two years!

Of course, that does not mean that this month's jobs print won't be revised lower: it will be, and not just that month but every other month until the November election because that's the only tool left in the Biden admin's box: pretend the economic and jobs are strong, then revise them sharply lower the next month, something we pointed out first last summer and which has not failed to disappoint once.

To be fair, not every aspect of the jobs report was stellar (after all, the BLS had to give it some vague credibility). Take the unemployment rate, after flatlining between 3.4% and 3.8% for two years - and thus denying expectations from Sahm's Rule that a recession may have already started - in February the unemployment rate unexpectedly jumped to 3.9%, the highest since February 2022 (with Black unemployment spiking by 0.3% to 5.6%, an indicator which the Biden admin will quickly slam as widespread economic racism or something).

And then there were average hourly earnings, which after surging 0.6% MoM in January (since revised to 0.5%) and spooking markets that wage growth is so hot, the Fed will have no choice but to delay cuts, in February the number tumbled to just 0.1%, the lowest in two years...

... for one simple reason: last month's average wage surge had nothing to do with actual wages, and everything to do with the BLS estimate of hours worked (which is the denominator in the average wage calculation) which last month tumbled to just 34.1 (we were led to believe) the lowest since the covid pandemic...

... but has since been revised higher while the February print rose even more, to 34.3, hence why the latest average wage data was once again a product not of wages going up, but of how long Americans worked in any weekly period, in this case higher from 34.1 to 34.3, an increase which has a major impact on the average calculation.

While the above data points were examples of some latent weakness in the latest report, perhaps meant to give it a sheen of veracity, it was everything else in the report that was a problem starting with the BLS's latest choice of seasonal adjustments (after last month's wholesale revision), which have gone from merely laughable to full clownshow, as the following comparison between the monthly change in BLS and ADP payrolls shows. The trend is clear: the Biden admin numbers are now clearly rising even as the impartial ADP (which directly logs employment numbers at the company level and is far more accurate), shows an accelerating slowdown.

But it's more than just the Biden admin hanging its "success" on seasonal adjustments: when one digs deeper inside the jobs report, all sorts of ugly things emerge... such as the growing unprecedented divergence between the Establishment (payrolls) survey and much more accurate Household (actual employment) survey. To wit, while in January the BLS claims 275K payrolls were added, the Household survey found that the number of actually employed workers dropped for the third straight month (and 4 in the past 5), this time by 184K (from 161.152K to 160.968K).

This means that while the Payrolls series hits new all time highs every month since December 2020 (when according to the BLS the US had its last month of payrolls losses), the level of Employment has not budged in the past year. Worse, as shown in the chart below, such a gaping divergence has opened between the two series in the past 4 years, that the number of Employed workers would need to soar by 9 million (!) to catch up to what Payrolls claims is the employment situation.

There's more: shifting from a quantitative to a qualitative assessment, reveals just how ugly the composition of "new jobs" has been. Consider this: the BLS reports that in February 2024, the US had 132.9 million full-time jobs and 27.9 million part-time jobs. Well, that's great... until you look back one year and find that in February 2023 the US had 133.2 million full-time jobs, or more than it does one year later! And yes, all the job growth since then has been in part-time jobs, which have increased by 921K since February 2023 (from 27.020 million to 27.941 million).

Here is a summary of the labor composition in the past year: all the new jobs have been part-time jobs!

But wait there's even more, because now that the primary season is over and we enter the heart of election season and political talking points will be thrown around left and right, especially in the context of the immigration crisis created intentionally by the Biden administration which is hoping to import millions of new Democratic voters (maybe the US can hold the presidential election in Honduras or Guatemala, after all it is their citizens that will be illegally casting the key votes in November), what we find is that in February, the number of native-born workers tumbled again, sliding by a massive 560K to just 129.807 million. Add to this the December data, and we get a near-record 2.4 million plunge in native-born workers in just the past 3 months (only the covid crash was worse)!

The offset? A record 1.2 million foreign-born (read immigrants, both legal and illegal but mostly illegal) workers added in February!

Said otherwise, not only has all job creation in the past 6 years has been exclusively for foreign-born workers...

Source: St Louis Fed FRED Native Born and Foreign Born

... but there has been zero job-creation for native born workers since June 2018!

This is a huge issue - especially at a time of an illegal alien flood at the southwest border...

... and is about to become a huge political scandal, because once the inevitable recession finally hits, there will be millions of furious unemployed Americans demanding a more accurate explanation for what happened - i.e., the illegal immigration floodgates that were opened by the Biden admin.

Which is also why Biden's handlers will do everything in their power to insure there is no official recession before November... and why after the election is over, all economic hell will finally break loose. Until then, however, expect the jobs numbers to get even more ridiculous.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 13:30

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending