MSU Professor Mark Skidmore was exonerated by MSU; his landmark paper showing over 250,000 killed by the COVID vaccine is now back in the peer-reviewed literature

substack.com ^ | Oct 21, 2023 | Steve Kirsch

[ransomnote]

After a 7 month review by his university, Mark Skidmore, was exonerated of all charges and his new, improved paper was published in a more credible peer-reviewed journal.

Steve Kirsch

Oct 21, 2023

 

Michigan State University Professor Mark Skidmore was exonerated of all ethics charges after a 7-month investigation. His paper was revised and was reinstated in the peer-reviewed literature. It revealed that over 250,000 people were killed by the COVID vaccine. Others have found similar numbers.

Executive summary

Mark Skidmore wrote a paper that showed that 217,000 Americans were killed in 2021 by the COVID vaccine.

The journal retracted the article and Mark’s university commenced a 7-month investigation into unethical behavior by Professor Skidmore.

Today, I’m pleased to announce that Professor Skidmore has been exonerated on all charges and his paper, with some helpful additions suggested by Dr. Susan Oliver (and her dog, Cindy), has now been published in another peer-reviewed journal.

The news on the investigation and the paper

See this press release that Mark sent me.

The press release was drafted by the Liberty Counsel who was instrumental in defending Mark in the investigation by Michigan State University. If you want to support their work, please donate here.

Bottom line: After a 7-month ethics investigation, Michigan State University found that Mark did nothing wrong!

Note: What this really means is that they tried for 7 months to find something they could nail him on, and they failed.

The new paper is now published in a peer-reviewed journal

COVID-19 Illness and Vaccination Experiences in Social Circles Affect COVID-19 Vaccination Decisions.

Here is an excerpt:

With these survey data, the total number of fatalities due to COVID-19 inoculation may be as high as 289,789 (95% CI: 229,319 – 344,319). The large difference in the possible number of fatalities due to COVID-19 vaccination that emerges from this survey and the available governmental data should be further investigated.

Let me translate that for you. Here’s the “plain English” version (my embellished interpretation):

“Our survey showed that there’s a good chance that 290,000 Americans (and maybe as many as 344,000) may have lost their lives due to taking the COVID vaccine and that’s in 2021 alone! That’s a lot of people and it’s a lot more than the US government claims. And for the record, this isn’t the only survey that found this. For example, the Rasmussen survey found a similar number of people were killed by the vaccine and the virus. So did other firms. So how come there isn’t an investigation to determine conclusively who is telling people the truth here? What’s wrong with you people? Instead of trying to censor the data, maybe it is high time we started talking about it so we can finally determine who is telling the truth and who is lying to you.”

Background

Here are the previous articles that I’ve written about Mark Skidmore’s paper.

If you have time to read only two articles, here are the top two I’d recommend:

1. New peer-reviewed study: >217,000 Americans killed by the COVID vaccines in just the first year alone!

2. It's time we hold these people accountable; let the lawsuits begin

The article, “What the "Defenders of Science" Miss About the Purpose of Scientific Peer-Review and the Open Dialogue: When You Censor or Support the Censorship of Dissident Voices, You Are In the Wrong” is an excellent summary also of how papers such as Mark’s, are retracted unethically.

Here’s an article recapping the whole thing by James Lyons-Weiler: Dr. Mark Skidmore Exonerated

 

Acknowledgment

Mark would like to thank Dr. Susan Oliver (and her dog Cindy) for all their helpful suggestions. Susan was nice enough to make a helpful video for Mark to ensure that even the most nit-picky peer-reviewer wouldn’t be able to find any errors.

Mark incorporated her suggestions into his revised paper to make it even stronger.

LA Times opinion

Why anti-vaxxers are pretending a flawed study on vacccine deaths has been vindicated

MICHAEL HILTZIK, business columnist for the LA Times, basically repurposed David Gorski’s new hit piece. It’s the same old arguments as they used before that the survey didn’t verify the deaths were caused by the vaccine. That’s right. The survey didn’t do that and never claimed to have done that.

What the survey did is say, “Whoa! We could have a MAJOR problem here; how do you explain all the carnage?”

Any objective scientist looking at that data would have to agree: this is smoke. Mark pointed out it was smoke.

Hiltzik should be writing about how nobody seems to want to investigate this signal.

So I decided to run my own survey. Nearly all my followers are anti-vaxxers; for most of their households, NOBODY in the household took the vaccine. So my respondents are biased; we’d expect there to be way fewer deaths in their households from the COVID vaccine because of so few vaccinations. Yet, we found around 1.5X more COVID vaccine deaths than COVID virus deaths in their households. That’s insane. We have a VERY deadly vaccine here. So how does Hiltzik explain that?

Summary 

So it’s now back in the scientific peer-reviewed literature that over 250,000 people were killed by the COVID vaccine in 2021 alone.

Other independent surveys (like Rasmussen and the outside surveys I’ve done) all are consistent with those numbers that the vaccine killed a comparable number to the virus. So that’s very validating of Mark’s numbers.

Remember that Rasmussen surveyed the general public. Over half the general public thinks the vaccines have killed nobody. So they are not reliably assessing vaccine caused deaths because they’ve been gaslit by the mainstream press and their doctors. So you should be VERY concerned that the Rasmussen survey found comparable numbers because it means that the reality is more likely than not that the the vaccine has killed more people than COVID.

So how are they going to explain the results which are verifiable and which can be replicated?

Answer: They will not. They will ignore it. Because they cannot explain it. Gaslighting people on this is too hard. That’s why they had to get the paper unethically retracted when it came out. Now that it’s out, they will ignore it. No fact checks, nothing. Silence.

Please help share the good news about Mark Skidmore with others. It’s important we let the world know that their governments have been lying to them.

[exDemMom]

The real problem was the innate response;and how to get the genetic package into the cells, *and* to have it last long enough to do it's dirty work of hijacking the protein construction to crank out artificial (therefore fixed, therefore losing efficacy in provoking immune response as the natural spike mutates in the wild over time).

So you *have* read something about how an mRNA vaccine works. Yet you still fail to show any comprehension of what you read.

The purpose of any vaccine is to introduce an antigen into the body in order to provoke the adaptive immune system into producing antigen-specific T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies. This is true whether the antigen is injected directly, or whether an mRNA is used to cause immune cells in the lymph nodes to make antigen.

Let me tell you something about virus infections. During an infection, a virus attaches to a cell. It forces the cell to release its "guts" into the cell cytoplasm. The guts consist of RNA or DNA, mRNA, and proteins. Those nucleic acids and proteins force the cell to make virus DNA or RNA, mRNA, and proteins and to package them into new virus particles. That is all the cell can do once it is infected. Many viruses, such as the coronavirus, cause the cell to fill with virus particles until it bursts open, killing it. All of those new virus particles go infect nearby cells and enter the blood where they can access and infect cells all over the body.

Clearly, you are all hyped up about a single mRNA species that causes a cell to make a single virus protein for a limited period of time, but you are unconcerned about viruses that force your cells to make large quantities of mRNA, protein, and DNA or RNA. Talk about inability to conduct basic risk assessment...

[exDemMom]

Oh, like what Barry Marshall won the Nobel Prize for?

What about Barry Marshall's work was inconsistent with previous theory and past research?

Bacterial infections were well-known long before Marshall did his work. Furthermore, people discover new bacterial species all the time.

Barry J. Marshall - Facts.

[exDemMom]

So you claim to have worked in Robert Malone's lab, and that is supposed to bolster your credibility, while his anti-clotshot stance simultaneously destroys his credibility?

Bob destroyed his own credibility by suddenly making the rounds of nominally conservative talk shows to scare the pants off of people about mRNA vaccines.

When I was a graduate student, I "tested" four different laboratories in order to select one for my graduate studies. One of those labs was Bob's. In his role as my mentor during that time, he gave me a huge stack of papers to read regarding membrane fusion. He stood me in front of a chalkboard and described the function and biology of the AIDS virus. He had me grow cells and then apply nanolipid particles to them in order to take pictures of the membrane fusion process. When it came time to report my experience in his lab to the new graduate student mentor, Bob told me that I had to incorporate those pictures into a story that tells others how and why cells fuse. In short, he acted like a knowledgeable teacher and mentor, and there was absolutely no indication that he was a kook. When I encountered him at a meeting years later, we chit-chatted and he brought me up-to-date on his research. He also gave me his card and invited me to come visit him and his wife and kids at their farm. Again, there was no indication that he was a kook.

Then, all of a sudden, there he is, spouting out nonsense that he knows perfectly well is not true. And I am left dumbfounded as to why he would suddenly be a charlatan when he never was before.

[grey_whiskers]

You're a cretin.

You haven't addressed the issue of how the jabs will always be behind the curve of the AA sequence of the natural spike protein.

Nor of the fact that the jab manufacturers did not end up targeting nucleocapsid proteins which are more highly conserved.

(I'll bet you know why, but have been instructed to blow smoke even more than normal.)

And of course, ignoring the little detail that it is the spike protein which causes so many of the ills from the real virus.

So of course it takes real genius to tell the body to makes lots of copies of *that* and distribute it all over the body.

Too bad the contents jabs didn't just stay placidly in the arm/shoulder muscle like the "scientists" (raise eyebrows here) said?

Did you clowns decide that all in your own, or were you pressured to "put on your management hats" like the Morton Thiokol engineers trying to warn people about the brittleness o of the O-rings at low temperature, on the fuel tanks on the space shuttle that blew up?

Because the MBA types have been itching to demonstrate the power of this fully operational battle station RNA jabs for *everything*, and this was a chance to rush in and play hero and they saw and endless stream of future dollar signs.

Which is one more reason--despite the real official white lab costs and everything--biologists (even molecular biologists) and doctors aren't real scientists.

See also, "you have to use statistics to wash out all the oodles of unknown confounding variables".

Dingbat.

The real scientists were the crew at Los Alamos. When they first had a sample of fissile material, they investigated it's physical properties: and discovered a spontaneous phase change in the crystal which could allow a sub-critical mass to go critical. Not enough to *boom* as the density wasn't great enough. But enough that the neutron and gamma ray flux would really screw everyone nearby.

But you do you, foisting the mass production of spike protein while sweeping under the rug it's distribution in the body post-jab, and not investigating in advance the likely sequelae.

Oh, I almost forgot.

Because SCIENCE™!

[grey_whiskers]

So you’re an overachiever, who is loath to give up the vicarious glory of “science as the savior of the WORLD!”™ in the face of Inescapable Deadly Peril!™

Got it.

Too bad the pandemic (to the extent hyped) was a dud all along—see also the University of London epidemiologist skipping quarantine to go bang his mistress, or Gruesome Newsome skipping quarantine to go gave a party at a top-shelf restaurant, or Pelosi going to the hairdresser to get her hair done.
Or just both Congress and Pfizer not being required to get the jabs.

Speaking of those last two, too bad they tried to have all their internal safety and efficacy studies SEALED for 75 years.

Honest companies whose products are not harmful don’t do that.

Dingbat.

[grey_whiskers]

Dingbat.

All the best people and consensus was that ulcers were caused by stress.

But you keep lying through your teeth and sliding topics.

Troll.

[grey_whiskers]

Stupid autocorrect.

“its” properties not “it’s”properties.
And Effing auto correct tried to screw up my correction in this post.

Whoever designed autocorrect should be imprisoned in solitary for life and have every penny they own taken from them.

[Pelham]

Speaking of clowns, do you remember when the conspiracy nuts were saying that the the Covid virus doesn’t even exist?

That the pandemic was caused by “jabs” given out before Covid had ever been heard of?

I bet you do!

Whatever happened to that idea anyway?

Was it so crazy the Daily Expose frauds abandoned it before the slow learners realized that they are lunatics?

Can you imagine if Trump had ever endorsed those idiots. But he doesn’t. He supports Warp Speed and the vaccines.

You pretend to support him despite that, right?

[exDemMom]

All the best people and consensus was that ulcers were caused by stress.

So?

Once upon a time, respiratory diseases were believed to be caused by "miasmas."

The fact that scientists keep researching and sometimes uncover new facts that no one knew before (like the role of H. pylori in the development of ulcers) does not at all invalidate my previous statement that science proceeds according to theory and builds on previous research.

Barry Marshall would never have been able to pinpoint H. pylori as the cause of ulcers without the work of countless scientists who preceded him in characterizing bacterial biology, identifying and verifying the role of a specific organism in causing a disease (Koch's postulates), in developing laboratory analysis methods, reagents, and equipment, etc. He wasn't just some bloke who walked in off the street without any knowledge of scientific theory and method who then pronounced that H. pylori causes ulcers.

[ShadowAce]

Science is about doing research and obtaining results that are consistent with the theory and previous research in the field.

Ya know, I ALMOST believed you are a scientist--until you came up with that little gem.

If you do not even know what science "is about" then you really should not be talking with the adults.

[exDemMom]

Too bad the pandemic (to the extent hyped) was a dud all along—see also the University of London epidemiologist skipping quarantine to go bang his mistress, or Gruesome Newsome skipping quarantine to go gave a party at a top-shelf restaurant, or Pelosi going to the hairdresser to get her hair done.

You are getting into the political games that politicians, especially corrupt hacks like Pelosi play. The narrative that she tried to promote at first was that all of Trump's early efforts to prevent the pandemic from entering the US and to control its spread were because Trump is such a racist against Chinese people. She even made a big show about going to a Chinatown to prove that SHE isn't racist like Trump.

Political games have nothing to do with the science of epidemiology.

I'm sure that the nearly 7 million people who have died of Covid didn't think it was a dud before they died. I'm sure their families don't think it was a dud.

Here is the story of a police officer whose stand against vaccines was so principled that he quit his job rather than get vaccinated. Wash. state trooper whose resignation over vaccine mandate went viral dies from COVID. I wonder if he still thought Covid was a dud when he was suffocating to death in the ICU from Covid?

Speaking of those last two, too bad they tried to have all their internal safety and efficacy studies SEALED for 75 years.

Really? I keep seeing that fabricated misinformation repeated over and over. Those who make such a claim are absolutely certain, of course, that you will never ever fact-check them on it. They also know that you have no clue where to find such information in the first place.

The FDA requires volumes of safety and efficacy studies before it will approve a drug. And the FDA posts decision memoranda and fact sheets targeted at consumers and at health care providers on their website. You can also find the product inserts on-line that contain a lot of the technical data. There is no such thing as a drug that has been approved while all of the safety and efficacy data is being kept secret from the public. Just because you personally do not know how to navigate scientific and medical resources does not mean that those resources are being kept a secret. You can find a lot of that "secret" information in the links contained in the following web pages:

Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.

Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine.

Updated COVID-19 Vaccines for Use in the United States Beginning in Fall 2023.

[EVO X]

When I encountered him at a meeting years later, we chit-chatted and he brought me up-to-date on his research. He also gave me his card and invited me to come visit him and his wife and kids at their farm. Again, there was no indication that he was a kook.

Having a bad reaction to the vaccine had something to do with it. He had recovered from covid and needed the vax to travel. He almost died and is on blood pressure meds.

[grey_whiskers]

The challenge for people analyzing drug safety is to determine whether the rate of cardiovascular events is higher in the population taking the study drug than it is in a matched control population. Doing this kind of analysis requires very heavy-duty statistical analysis.

Speaking of that.

$hot $hill Troll. Forensic study just published found Pfizer hid cardiac deaths in the vaccinated arm of their report. Had they not done that, the world would have been aware of a 3.7 fold increase in cardiac deaths among the vaccinated.

Crimes are finally being revealed. https://t.co/Zjyw0hcmvB— Pierre Kory, MD MPA (@PierreKory) October 21, 2023

[exDemMom]

I didn’t expect anything but an off hand dismissal of other sources from you.

I analyzed the information at one link that you provided, which turned out to be such a time-consuming and wordy process that I decided not to analyze the rest of the links at the time. I also told you that I am perfectly capable of analyzing the other links, with the implication that I would do so if you insist.

How is that an "off-hand" dismissal of anything?

Do you want me to follow the other links, read them, dig through the anti-science blogs to find enough information to locate the original data at the source, and then tell you why the original studies do not support the narrative that the professional antivaxxers told you they proved? (A yes or no answer is sufficient here.)

Anything that goes against your or the medical community’s narrative is by default discredited by you all.

On the one side is the medical research community which does all of the experiments and studies that reveal information about our biology and our health. On the other side are the professional antivaxxers/anti-sciencers who dig through our studies and then post them as proof of whatever non-scientific (and scary) claim they are pushing. Often, the study conclusion is diametrically opposite from what the professional charlatans claim the study showed. There is, therefore, no reason to take seriously anyone who makes claims that contradict the current knowledge about medical science.

Oh, and thank you very much for recognizing that I am a bona fide expert in medical research. If you would go on to compare me to Dr. Anthony Fauci (as others have done), I would be very humbled and honored.

[grey_whiskers]

Pure sophistry on your part.

Your remark about science building in past work was an attempt to redefine science as consensus.

The counterexample stands.

Dingbat.

[grey_whiskers]

Political games have nothing to do with the science of epidemiology.

Sure they do. Politicians at Pelosi's level are appraised of the real risks.

And your glib toss-off dismissal as "games politicians play" never addressed the University of London epidemiologist and his tryst, now did it?

Dingbat.

[absalom01]

And I am left dumbfounded as to why he would suddenly be a charlatan when he never was before.

No one likes to think ill of someone they once respected, but sudden changes in character are suspicious, and demand explanation.

The famous "Shirlock Holmes" quote comes to mind: 

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

Much like the vile paid anti-vax grifting Q-Anon $hills on this forum, he's getting paid. 

Maybe not in cash.  Maybe fame, maybe revenge for not getting the "proper" credit for the mRNA technology he claims to have invented, but with everything else eliminated, chances are there's some sort of quid pro quo that underlies the grift.

[Fury]

Re: 94 - I see lots of grayed out posts, so you must be taking flak. You know what they say - if your taking flak, you’re over the target, etc...

Or it’s just monkeys flinging poo at the screen at your posts! ;)

[ransomnote]

That same silly dog keeps barking and whining at me.
*walks to window, slams it shut*

[grey_whiskers]

I'm sure that the nearly 7 million people who have died of Covid didn't think it was a dud before they died. I'm sure their families don't think it was a dud.

Covid is only a danger to the elderly and/or those with significant comorbidities.

The widespread jabbing was just $$$ for Pfauci & co. I think it was Martin Kuldorff of Harvard who said he wouldn't recommend the jabs for anyone over 70. Dingbat.