Cancer rates due to dioxin Vs exposure to experimental gene therapies: Which is worse?
Cancer rates due to dioxin Vs exposure to experimental gene therapies: Which is worse?
Comparing the relative risk of cancer due to dioxin (TCDD) & mRNA transfection.
Any extracts used in the following article are for non commercial research and educational purposes only and may be subject to copyright from their respective owners.
Background:
“The relative risk or risk ratio (RR) is the ratio of the probability of an outcome in an exposed group to the probability of an outcome in an unexposed group.”
“The standardized mortality rate (SMR) is the ratio of the number of deaths observed in a population over a given period to the number that would be expected over the same period if the study population had the same age-specific rates as the standard population.”
Follow up to:
Cancer rates following global nuclear war Vs exposure to experimental gene therapies: Which is worse?
https://doorlesscarp953.substack.com/p/cancer-rates-following-global-nuclear
Note how, logically, mortality rates correlate with cancer incidence rates:
Association between dioxin and cancer incidence and mortality: a meta-analysis (2016)
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to systematically assess the association between dioxin/2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and cancer incidence and mortality. Systematic literature searches were conducted until July 2015 in Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane library to identify relevant studies. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR), risk ratio (RR), standard incidence ratio (SIR) or standard mortality ratio (SMR) for cancer incidence or mortality. In addition, dose-response, meta-regression, subgroup, and publication bias analyses were conducted. Thirty-one studies involving 29,605 cancer cases and 3,478,748 participants were included. Higher external exposure level of TCDD was significantly associated with all cancer mortality (pooled SMR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01–1.19, p = 0.04), but not all cancer incidence (pooled RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97–1.06, p = 0.49). Higher blood level of TCDD was both significantly associated with all cancer incidence (pooled RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.21–2.04, p = 0.001) and all cancer mortality (pooled SMR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.25–1.69, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis suggested that higher external exposure and blood level of TCDD were both significantly associated with the mortality caused by non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In conclusion, external exposure and blood level of TCDD were both significantly associated with all cancer mortality, especially for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
…“Thirty-one studies involving 29,605 cancer cases and 3,478,748 participants were included. Higher external exposure level of TCDD was significantly associated with all cancer mortality (pooled SMR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01–1.19, p = 0.04), but not all cancer incidence (pooled RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97–1.06, p = 0.49). Higher blood level of TCDD was both significantly associated with all cancer incidence (pooled RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.21–2.04, p = 0.001) and all cancer mortality (pooled SMR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.25–1.69, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis suggested that higher external exposure and blood level of TCDD were both significantly associated with the mortality caused by non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In conclusion, external exposure and blood level of TCDD were both significantly associated with all cancer mortality, especially for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.”
Figure 2:
Meta-analysis of the association between external exposure level of TCDD and (a) all cancer incidence and (b) all cancer mortality.
Figure 4:
Dose-response analysis of the association between blood level of TCDD and all cancer mortality.
(a) Dose relationship between blood TCDD level and all cancer SMR. (b) Log dose relationship between blood TCDD level and all cancer SMR. The solid line represents SMRs and the dotted line represents 95% confidence intervals.
…“In conclusion, our findings suggest that external exposure and blood level of TCDD were both significantly associated with all cancer mortality. Higher external exposure of TCDD may significantly increase the mortality rate of esophagus cancer, larynx cancer, kidney cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, myeloma, soft-tissue sarcoma and occupational exposure population. Of note, such relationship may be especially significant for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.”
Full paper:
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep38012
DOD data in final diagram from DMED, Thomas Renz & Senator Johnson's letter:
“Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Renz reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. For example, at the roundtable Renz stated that registered diagnoses for neurological issues increased 10 times from a five-year average of 82,000 to 863,000 in 2021. There were also increases in registered diagnoses in 2021 for the following medical conditions:
Hypertension – 2,181% increase
Diseases of the nervous system – 1,048% increase
Malignant neoplasms of esophagus – 894% increase
Multiple sclerosis – 680% increase
Malignant neoplasms of digestive organs – 624% increase
Guillain-Barre syndrome – 551% increase
Breast cancer – 487% increase
Demyelinating – 487% increase
Malignant neoplasms of thyroid and other endocrine glands – 474% increase
Female infertility – 472% increase
Pulmonary embolism – 468% increase
Migraines – 452% increase
Ovarian dysfunction – 437% increase
Testicular cancer – 369% increase
Tachycardia – 302% increase”
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/FB6DDD42-4755-4FDC-BEE9-50E402911E02
Conclusion:
Overall, the meta-analysis showed that dioxin had a lower relative risk increase for cancer incidence than the DMED 2021 vaccine rollout compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020.