FOR BETTER RESPONSE TO YOUR INQUIRY: When leaving a voicemail, please include your email address and a brief statement about the medical problem you wish to discuss. M Grout MD
Skip to Content
Exciting News! Our new location is at 3729 E Nance Circle, Mesa, AZ. Call us with any questions!
Call Today For a Free Consultation 480-418-0220

ArMA wants to know how I feel about COVID-19?


Every time I run the numbers, the mortality rate remains the same – hovers between 1.4 and 1.8% - since I have been counting the numbers. In the meantime, we have spent untold amounts of money in an attempt to control something over which we have, clearly, no control, and trying to persuade people that we do in fact have control. We have shut the world down, decimate the economy, forced people into isolation, caused many of our medical personnel to leave the field. And for what? The death rate remains the same. We might as well get over it and move on with our lives.

When I tried to check mortality ad hospitalization rates, using the venerable Mr. Google as my source of information, the first thing that came up with a pronouncement from the CDC that vaccinations are wonderful, save lives, decrease hospitalizations and result in a better life for all of us.

Here is the pronouncement on my Google search: has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month

COVID vaccines help prevent severe illness, hospitalization, and death from COVID. The vaccines cannot give you COVID. They can reduce the risk of severe illness from COVID.

What disturbs me more than anything else about the CDC website article, is that the article is full of pronouncements without any back-up from the data – either from their own collection of data or from the medical literature. I would feel the pronouncements were more trustworthy, were there some numbers attached.

The VAERS database suggests that the vaccine has its limitations and is not as innocuous as the manufacturers would have us believe. The anecdotal evidence from those who have developed illness subsequent to vaccination at the very least makes us wonder whether they may be a causal association – although we are well aware of the logical fallacy called “ex hoc ergo propter hoc”, also expressed as “temporality does not equal causality.”

I have never been a big fan of dogma – it is possible that dogma is correct. It is also possible that dogma is hornswoggle, as has been amply demonstrated by the decreased incidence of puerperal infections subsequent to handwashing in the obstetric wards.

So my medical association asks me how I feel about COVID-19?

My own experience has been that my nurse of over 10 years agreed to be vaccinated because the hospital where he worked on weekends to cover his stepdaughter’s medical bills required vaccination. This nurse died on Christmas Eve in the ICU of fulminant COVID-19. So much for the benefits of vaccination in his individual case.

I understand that Public Health deals in population numbers and bell-shaped curves. I do not practice medicine for population numbers and bell shaped curves. I deal with individuals. And when my nurse falls victim to a disease from which he was, in theory, adequately protected, I am forced to question the adequacy of the protection and, by extension, the motives behind our insistence on slavishly acquiescing to and allowing our medical treatments to be dictated by dogmatic pronouncements.

Contrast this headline which appears on a Google search, when the article title is bracketed by quotation marks, with the following one, which does not appear on Google at all, even when bracketing by quotation marks:

COVID Vaccines Don’t Prevent Transmission, Severe Illness or Deaths, Data Show

All we have to do is look at high-quality epidemiological data to get to the truth — COVID-19 vaccines aren’t preventing COVID or its transmission, and they aren’t preventing severe illness or death.

Meryl Nass, M.D.'s avatar

Meryl Nass, M.D.

Meryl Nass, M.D., ABIM, is an internist with special interests in vaccine-induced illnesses, chronic fatigue syndrome, Gulf War illness, fibromyalgia and toxicology.

“Our vaccines are working exceptionally well,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death — they prevent it. But what they can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”

Thus spoke Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Walensky, in an Aug. 5, 2021 interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.

Walensky may have believed the vaccines prevented severe illness and death then — but she cannot possibly believe that now.

That was eight months ago. The vaccines had barely been rolled out eight months earlier.

Now we have nearly 16 months of observation and what have we found? What has Walensky’s CDC revealed that contradicts her glib patter?

While there are thousands of articles discussing COVID-19 vaccines, I have come to agree with professor Tom Jefferson that in order to arrive at the truth, all we need to look at are epidemiological data of very high quality.

In other words:

  • We want raw, official data, before it has been subjected to adjustments or algorithms that “smooth” the data.
  • We want large populations.
  • We want the most solid endpoints, such as hospitalizations or deaths.

Over the past few days I have identified and analyzed such studies on my blog (here and here) and on Substack. The data are from official sources, published by the U.S. CDC and the UK’s Office of National Statistics.

Information on 30 million adults in California and New York, three-fourths of whom were vaccinated, were used to compare COVID hospitalization and case rates in those who were vaccinated and had no prior COVID illness, with adults who were never vaccinated but had recovered from COVID, and presumably had natural immunity.

The data were collected from June to November 2021, before the Omicron wave appeared.

The Defender reported on this data two months ago:

  • Vaccinated Californians and New Yorkers were three times more likely to develop COVID than those who had prior immunity and were unvaccinated.
  • Vaccinated Californians had a higher rate of hospitalizations (severe illness) than those who were unvaccinated but had prior immunity. (New York did not provide hospitalization data.)
  • The vaccine failures in this huge study cannot be blamed on Omicron, because the data were collected during Delta.

The UK data from its Office of National Statistics, published March 16, extend from Jan. 1, 2021, through Jan. 31, and include both the Delta and Omicron waves.

The data have been age-standardized. The database includes 86% of all deaths in England (which has a population of 56 million) during the 13 months described.

The graphs reveal that being doubly vaccinated protected the English against death for most of 2021.

However, over last December and January (corresponding to the Omicron wave), COVID death rates in the doubly vaccinated but un-boosted were higher than in those who had never been vaccinated. This was true for the population as a whole.

If you break down the deaths by age group, the vast majority of COVID deaths occurred in the over-70 population.

While deaths from COVID in younger people were trending up as the time since vaccination increased, by Jan. 31, 2022, they had not exceeded COVID deaths in the unvaccinated.

Boosters did appear to “top up” COVID immunity for a time in all age groups, reducing death rates. But one wonders how long it will take before this effect wears off?

What is the bottom line?

High-quality, official data obtained on more than 30 million American adults and 48 million residents of England incontrovertibly reveal that:

  • Natural immunity was three times better at preventing cases than vaccination alone, even before Omicron.
  • Natural immunity was somewhat better at preventing serious illness, measured as hospitalizations, than vaccination alone, even before Omicron.
  • Boosters (a third shot) reduced the death rate in England of those vaccinated against Omicron, but the benefit was starting to drop off by January 2022.
  • Overall, England’s unvaccinated population had a lower COVID death rate during the Omicron wave than the COVID death rate in its doubly vaccinated population.
  • Walensky and the other so-called experts are wrong. Natural immunity provided three times more protection against infection (and therefore against transmission) than did double vaccination, even before Omicron. After Omicron, vaccine efficacy was even worse.
  • While vaccination provided some protection against severe illness (measured as hospitalizations) during the Delta wave, it provided less protection than natural immunity.
  • The vast majority of COVID deaths occur in those over 70. In this age group, the doubly vaccinated died from COVID at higher rates during Omicron than the unvaccinated.

Originally posted on Meryl Nass Substack page.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.

A picture containing clipart

Description automatically generated

Martha M Grout, MD, MD(H)

Medical Director

Arizona Center for Advanced Medicine

10210 North 92nd Street, Suite 104

Scottsdale, AZ 85258

Tel 480-240-2600

Fax 480-240-2601

Health is an indication of agreement between your body, mind, and spirit.

This transmission, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, legally privileged, or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering this to an addressee, you should notify the sender immediately by telephone or by reply e-mail, and destroy all copies of the original message.