Disappearing MSM Article - Severe COVID-19 ‘Rare’ In Unvaccinated People, Survey Reveals

MSN quickly removes article along with the study itself

Your support is very much appreciated. Please consider taking out a paid subscription to support independent journalism.

I am back after a disruptive week, flight cancelled, tech stolen etc.

The bonus about having limited access to the internet is that by the time I started to write about a news article I was reading, it had been removed. Normally I wouldn’t have noticed but my sporadic typing meant going back and forth to the article over a number of days.

I was going to write about the study in the article but instead I will preserve the original article itself which was published on MSN.com

*UPDATE - As I type the actual study has been removed as well*

Severe COVID-19 ‘Rare’ In Unvaccinated People, Survey Reveals

A survey has found that people who did not get the vaccine had a lower rate of suffering severe COVID-19 amid the pandemic.

The survey uploaded to the preprint server ResearchGate presented data from more than 18,500 respondents from the “Control Group” project with more than 300,000 overall participants. An analysis revealed that compared to those who got jabbed, unvaccinated people reported fewer hospitalizations.

The international survey also found that the unvaccinated people from more than 175 countries were more likely to self-care to prevent and manage COVID-19 infection. They used natural products like vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, quercetin, and drugs, such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.

Many participants experienced discrimination for refusing the administration of “genetic vaccines” and struggled with mental health burdens due to the stigma in the mostly “vaccinated” society.

The participants admitted to avoiding vaccines due to their preference for natural medicine interventions and skepticism of pharmaceutical interventions. They also voiced distrust of government information and fear of the possible adverse effects of the vaccines in the long run. 

The survey was conducted from September 2021 through February 2022. During the period, participants experienced mild to moderate COVID-19 infection and were infrequently hospitalized. 

A number of female participants suffered menstrual and bleeding abnormalities, prompting the researchers who analyzed the data to surmise that the issues might have been caused by spike protein exposure and shedding, as per The Epoch Times.

Data collected from the survey were analyzed and interpreted by an independent, international team of scientists led by Robert Verkerk, Ph.D., the founder and executive and scientific director of Alliance for Natural Health International.

The link to the original article is here but as you can see this just diverts back to the home page.

Wayback Machine seems to be empty but fortunately Google has cached it for now.

The study itself can be read on ResearchGate. (Update - this has now been removed). However, this one is still available on the Wayback Machine.

It used data from a UK citizen-led cooperative called the Control Group Cooperative (CGC). This was formed in July 2021 “to represent the interests of individuals and families around the world who have chosen to not receive COVID-19 ‘vaccine’. Among the aims of the CGC is to evaluate long-term health outcomes among the COVID-19 vaccine-free, as well as linking its members to country support networks and online community groups. Participants who join the ‘control group’ may obtain an ID card (Fig. 1), in the relevant language. The card includes the statement that the individual is part of a SARS-CoV-2 Control Group and “must not be vaccinated”. Many members have reported that these ID cards have been successful in allowing travel, preventing forced vaccination (vaccination without informed consent) or avoiding the loss of liberties, such as access to venues otherwise limited to COVID-19-vaccinated individuals.”

There were around 300,000 members of the CGC which were predominantly from Europe (40.2%) with 25% from North America and 27% from Oceania. Approximately 18,500 were part of the survey on which the study was based.

The study was independent to the CGC and looked at the first five months of survey data. By using data from this group there is an obvious bias but interesting to see the results nevertheless.

Findings included the fact that the unvaccinated did not place a disproportionate burden on health systems. In fact only 0.4% of the cohort were hospitalised with COVID-19 which compared with 0.6% for the US population as a whole.

Reasons for individuals not wanting to be vaccinated was an almost equal five way split between preferring natural medication (16.8%), distrust of pharmaceutical intervention (16.4%), distrust of government information (16.4%), poor/limited trial study data (16.3%) and fear of long-term adverse reactions (15.4%).

Almost 75% of respondents, who had COVID-19, engaged in self-care using vitamins (such as D and C), minerals (zinc), quercetin, as well as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. The amount of people using dietary supplements was highest in the USA with 71% of respondents but still relatively high at 60-65% in the rest of the Western world.

A surprising finding was that there were common reports of menstrual disturbances and bleeding abnormalities in the unvaccinated female cohort. The authors suggest a number of reasons this may have occurred, including: COVID-19, pandemic lifestyle changes, shedding exposure or chronic stress.

Around 40% of respondents reported mental health problems due to the psychological stress of the pandemic. It is suggested that “the mental health burden may be associated more to the human response to the pandemic, rather than psychological, fear-based reactions to any threat posed by the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself. This includes discrimination in the workplace, by peers or by family members, as well as victimisation by states (governments/health authorities) owing to ‘unvaccinated’ status.

Much of this disproportionate and discriminatory treatment is likely the result of widespread misunderstandings about, and over-stated benefits of, COVID-19 ‘vaccines’, false claims over societal risks posed by the unvaccinated, media and state propaganda and coercion to ensure high rates of COVID-19 vaccination, institutional mandates, and the desire for in-group identity as explained by social identity theory (Scheepers and Derks, 2016).”

As I said above, the study is clearly biased. However, there is some interesting data to look at (which public health authorities have largely hidden or not collected) and so this study should not be disappeared. It should remain to be dissected and analysed and if others decide the findings are nonsense, it is for them to argue the reasons why.