https://ivim.substack.com/p/interview-with-lex-acker-part-2-youtube
In this second half of the interview Lex Acker unpacks non-public BC CDC AEFI tables (Mar 15 & Sept 15, 2021), shows wide lot-to-lot variability, flu and AstraZeneca safety benchmarks, and why experiences diverged by batch.
Mentioned references:
Lex’s Articles: https://freedomandinvesting.substack.com/p/review-of-foi-f23-1799-part-1 (Feb 2025), https://freedomandinvesting.substack.com/p/review-of-foi-f23-1799-part-2 (Aug 2025)
Web App “How Bad is My Batch?” : https://knollfrank.github.io/HowBadIsMyBatch/HowBadIsMyBatch.html
Dmitry opens by confirming they’re picking up “where we left,” praising Lex’s table and Datawrapper workflow: “you can copy paste it… upload a spreadsheet… a CSV file,” then format and embed into Substack.
Lex outlines the two non-public BC CDC AEFI tables he transcribed: March 15, 2021 and September 15, 2021. The main difference is scale (“14 lots” in March vs “64 lots” six months later), but the signal is consistent: “there’s a wide variability of AEFI rates across vaccine lots.” To Lex, that variability means “the manufacturing of the product is defective… you’re not supposed to have that kind of variability in a drug across… manufactured lots.”
He explains why the public is divided: “You have vaccine lots that are like extremely harmful and… lots that are not so harmful.” Some people took a “less harmful” lot and “were able to go about their daily business,” while others got a “very toxic” lot—so neighbors can have opposite experiences of the same program.
Next, Lex introduces benchmarks used by public health. First is the flu baseline, with rates expressed per 100,000 doses: “6.6” for total AEFIs and about “1–1.5” for serious. Comparing the tables, “pretty much… all the COVID vaccine… had… total AEFI rates and serious AEFI rates that were… multiple times higher than the flu shot.” Dmitry adds the consumer-safety analogy: food recalls like spinach with “salmonella” — specific batches are pulled.
Lex adds a second benchmark: AstraZeneca clot signals (Mar–Apr 2021) triggered age-based curtailment, thereby establishing a safety threshold. He notes that March’s AZ rate isn’t visible until the Sept dataset (“coming from the future”), but the benchmark still applies: “approximately like 80% of the [Pfizer/Moderna] vaccine lots had… higher AEFI rates than AstraZeneca,” and by September “several lots” remained “significantly more harmful than” AZ, including the lot “reported by Dr. H” which the BC data shows as “the second most toxic lot.”
Dmitry demos “How Bad Is My Batch” lookups, showing a specific lot with “13 deaths, 25 disabilities” and contrasts this with other lots he checked (“okay… no deaths”). Lex then emphasizes a key inference from the FOI tables: each lot’s rate and incident count allow a data scientist to derive doses administered. From Sept 15 data, the 15 most harmful lots totaled “393,000” doses (~“5%”), while the 15 least harmful totaled about “2.5–2.7 million” (~“36%”). He argues this is evidence of silent curtailment: “they silently curtail the distribution of harmful lots… to protect the mass vaccination agenda,” instead of alerting recipients (“by the way you’ve received… a harmful dose”). “It was never about public health… They concealed it.”
Lex’s bullet-point summary (from his Substack) includes: by Sept 15, “59 out of 64 lots (92%)” above the flu rate; relative risk spanning roughly 1.2× to 85× vs flu depending on lot and timepoint; and “27 out of 64 lots” (≈42%) more harmful than AstraZeneca. He adds: “22.4% of all COVID vaccine doses… came from lots more harmful than AstraZeneca.”
Dmitry closes by promising to publish the numbers and tables across his IVIM and union member portals “not much commentary… just the numbers,” alongside other evidence of data manipulation he tracks (e.g., weekly stats showing higher deaths among 3–4-dose cohorts than unvaccinated in a particular analysis he cites).
They end by noting US developments (as described by Dmitry): “our neighbor… now recommends against COVID vaccines for general population” and a statement from HHS; Dmitry frames this as a historic shift enabling officials to say what “wasn’t possible” before, and a duty for others to publish and follow up. Lex thanks Dmitry and remains open to “more interviews,” acknowledging “the amount of information is overwhelming,” while Dmitry says he’ll keep gently introducing these ideas across communities and applauds moves toward transparency.
