3. 2020-2021 mortality data


There is as yet very little data for 2021, and hence it has to be considered with great prudence. We continue to use the Eurostat[1] and the British Office of National Statistics[2] databases. We consider 22 European countries for which mortality data is known for 20 weeks. Mortality data for 2021 do not in themselves enable comparison between countries since each may have their own specific but usual contributing local factors. Hence we consider the difference with 2019 for the same period. Given the dates at which weeks 1 of 2019 and 2021 begin, it is more appropriate to compare week 1 of 2021 with week 2 of 2019, all the more so as the weekly breakup of 2020 amounts to 53 weeks, while that of 2018 amounts to 52 in official data. Comparing with 2020 is not as appropriate because of the shock of the first lockdown and of the particularly inhumane orders given at the time, whose effects in the longer term may not be comparable. Table 3 suggests some correlation, namely the UK which has had the worst excess mortality enforced one of the worst lockdowns, while the 7 best countries, at the bottom, especially the 6 without any excess mortality for the period week 1-week 20, had no mandatory lockdowns. Also Slovakia which had no lockdowns in 2020, and Latvia which only had voluntary ones, was then well placed with respected to other countries, while after a two month lockdown in 2021 for the former and a more than a month for the latter, they are both now among the worst group. It is the other way round for Belgium and Luxembourg. Still all countries did implement some measures and they too would have to be taken into account for a more detailed comparison.

The case of Bulgaria keeps being exceptional. Since we are comparing with other years, and in Table 3 with a very recent one, this should to some extent take care of local factors, especially given it has the second worst excess mortality compared to 2019. So there might well be more ubiquitous factors at play, especially as it excess mortality began to rise noticeably since the autumn of 2020.


In fact, one consequence of the measures has not been mentioned so far: the swabs used in most PCR tests and hence possibly also antigenic ones are possible contributing factors.

“Widely used” ones contain EtO-poison, i.e. ethylene oxide, which is “used as a fumigant in agriculture and sterilant in the medical industry.” “Over-exposure” can cause “nausea, vomiting, bronchitis, neurological disorders, pulmonary edema, emphysema, irritation of dermal areas in contact, irritation of eyes, skin, and respiratory passages, renal failure, miscarriage, decreased fertility in both sexes, lymphoid and breast cancer, brain, organ, skin, lung cancer, lymphoma and leukemia”.[3]

Besides, as with masks, debris were found on the swabs. In some of the swabs the fibres are coated with zirconium and thus can scratch the internal mucosa, inducing bleeding. Zirconium’s bio-compatibility is unknown. Silver nanoparticles (AgNP) were also found. These, like EtO, are used as sterilants, and are not supposed to be applied medically for more than 5 seconds. The swabs, according to instruction, are to be rubbed for 30 seconds. What is more, these fibres are brittle, so can break and remain inside. Hence if the tests are “repeated, without allowing recovery time”, infection may follow.[4] And indeed, populations have been led to test and re-test multiple times and hence this too may be taking an increasing toll. In particular AgNP is known to “disrupt olfaction” and the loss of the sense of smell is a symptom associated to both the flu and covid-19.

What is more, nanoparticles “deposited in the nasal region have been found[5] to enter the brain by translocation to the olfactory nerve of experimental animals”.[6] This is especially the case of AgNP.[7] According to the French Académie Nationale de Médecine, “serious complications have started to be described in the medical literature[8] [9] [10] in recent weeks, especially breaches of the anterior skull base associated with a risk of meningitis”.[11]

All this, incidentally, further degrades DNA, increasing positive test results, further entrenching and worsening the entire vicious circle, whose only result is now incessant increase in morbidity and mortality.

However, returning to Bulgaria, the rise of its excess mortality compared to 2018 is not continuous, but sharp from week 43. This leads to believe there might have been an unprecedented shortly before.



Indeed, 5G was activated.[12] The case of Belarus,[13] which has not been considered so far, is particularly interesting in this respect. Like Bulgaria, it did not implement lockdowns in 2020. Mortality remained below that of 2018 until June when it suddenly rose noticeably. In May, 5G had become operational.[14] Is this a more general trend? Does the data suggest this could be a factor?

Table 4 provides some information about the deployment of 5G. We compare weekly mortality in 2021 and 2018 by taking the difference between ASMRs (see section II.1) for these two years.[15] 2018 may be more appropriate than 2015 or even an average of years because trials of 5G and its co-existence in 4G networks began in 2018, so that any impact of this partial use on mortality is already integrated in 2018 mortality figures. What we want to find is whether the acceleration of their expansion in 2020 has any correlation with increased deaths since the autumn of 2020. Given the proximity of 2018 and 2020, changes in population are disregarded and 2020 population numbers are used. Table 4 suggests there may be to some limited extent some correlation in some countries. Once again Table 3 shows that availability of 5G in the seven best countries in terms of mortality compared to 2019 is far less than in those among the top 10 for 5G in Europe.[16] In contrast, the UK which tops Table 3 is among these, and interestingly so is Poland, possibly a reason why it has been propelled among the countries with the worst excess mortality in 2021.

In the same vein, the African country with the highest number of positive test results is the only one with 5G: South Africa. Besides, of the 3711 passengers on the Diamond Princess cruise ship which had in February 2020[17] been fitted with a 5G tower, 18 died. That is about 38 per 10 000 people, which would suggest some 34,000,000 deaths worldwide were a dense network of 5G antennas ever to cover the world.

All this is only very roughly indicative of any possible correlation with 5G. More in-depth study is needed involving the density of antennas and of populations within their range. For instance, in June 2019 the 5G network was activated in Milano and 28 surrounding localities,[18] a cluster of excess deaths in 2020, and also by mid-October 2019 in Wuhan (see section I.2). In some other parts of Europe too, trials and commercial launches began in former years. However, it is hard to tell from superficial national rather than regional data whether it contributed to higher mortality. Unfortunately, recent epidemiological studies showing correlation between 5G expansion and mortality are based on covid-19 infection data, thus either meaningless PCR tests or clinical symptoms indistinguishable from many diseases.

However, correlation with 5G is far from being perfect. So there could be some other major cause contributing to the higher mortality in the autumn of 2020.


Once again Bulgaria provides us with a clue. In the autumn of 2020, its flu vaccination rate doubled.[19] This was followed by a large scale covid-19 injection campaign in 2021. The latter was ubiquitous in all countries. Given flu vaccination rates for 2020 are not known and may as in Bulgaria be significantly different from other years in some countries, no conclusion should be inferred from mere numerical data.

Anyhow, flu vaccine issues, if any, would only be reflected in all-cause mortality figures in the long term, remaining mainly at first of the order of morbidity. So only an epidemiological study over several years is likely to yield any results. This is also why it is too early to find any correlation between eventual mortality due to covid-19 injections and all-cause mortality. In fact the same holds for 5G and most mortality causes.

Data alleged to be due to covid mortality cannot as already stated be used since this alleged disease shares symptoms with a whole class of diseases and PCR tests are not only meaningless, but amplification varies according to the laboratory performing them. The only inference of some possible value may be the following.

According to the European Database of suspected adverse drug reaction reports (Eudravigilance), there were 162,610 injuries and 3964 deaths by March 13, 2021, in the E.U..[20] If “fewer than 1% of adverse vaccine effects are reported” as stated in a 2010 study for the American Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality,[21] this could mean more than 16,261,000 injuries and 396,400 deaths. Assuming that this time, due to the more widespread concern, 5% of adverse effects are being reported, we still get 198,200 deaths. Total mortality until that date amounts to 1,461,732, compared to 1,309,511 for the same period in 2019, giving an excess of 152,221, which is largely covered by these figures. In other words, some 10 to 25% or more of the total mortality until that date could be due to the covid-19 injections.

However this has to be taken with prudence. To what extent is the report’s conclusion reliable especially now that concerns about the jabs is widely known? Besides, can we be sure that the jabs are the cause of the injuries and deaths notified to Eudravilance and other similar official bodies?

In short, epidemiological studies connecting causes to mortality should be taken with prudence. In particular, it should not be forgotten that there are many causes for mortality, and hence pinpointing some should be done after a careful investigation. However given the data available, it would be foolish to dismiss 5G and injections as serious causes of mortality.  Hence we consider in turn the scientific understanding of these two phenomena, 5G and injections. This is what matters.  Does this understanding confirm our concerns?


  1. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database
  2. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales
  3. https://thecoloradoherald.com/2021/covid-19-tests-contain-poison/
  4. https://www.medicdebate.org/node/2016?language=en
  5. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118998694.ch4
  6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223988185_Nanoparticles_Toxicity_and_Their_Routes_of_Exposures
  7. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166445X11001081
  8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33480112/
  9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33303542/
  10. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaotolaryngology/fullarticle/2771362
  11. https://www.academie-medecine.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/21.4.8-Nasopharyngeal-swabs-are-not-without-risk-ENG.pdf
  12. https://5gobservatory.eu/market-developments/5g-services/
  13. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database
  14. https://www.a1.by/en/company/news/a1-razvernula-pervuyu-v-belarusi-avtonomnuyu-5g-set/p/5g-set
  15. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/comparisonsofallcausemortalitybetweeneuropeancountriesandregions
  16. https://www.opensignal.com/2021/06/04/benchmarking-the-5g-experience-emea-june2021
  17. https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/22376-princess-gets-access-to-ses-o3b-mpower-satellite-based-communications-system.html
  18. http://stateofthenation.co/?p=12846
  19. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-11/22/c_138576382.htm
  20. https://healthimpactnews.com/2021/3964-dead-162610-injuries-european-database-of-adverse-drug-reactions-for-covid-19-vaccines/
  21. https://digital.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/electronic-support-public-health-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system/final-report