Not bad for a mRNA injection with an absolute risk reduction factor of 1%. What is happening is entirely predictable. The mRNA experimental injections do nothing other than scramble your immune system which is their main purpose anyway.
You are always gonna need another mRNA injection for eternity because they do not have any efficacy against any virus. Meanwhile, with each new injection your poor immune system is going to become even more degraded and thus any nasties lurking around might get a foothold.
Then comes the best part, if you are still breathing. You get to enter the modern stone-age medical system as a life long patient...good for the doctors and hospitals, good for the drug companies and not so good for you. Because you don't count anymore. You are just another body to be sucked dry of your dignity, health and wealth.
They work for the virus it was designed for. Problem is corona viruses are RNA virus, so they mutate quickly. Hard to keep up with. The scandal is the medics always knew this. Big money in selling vax for mutating viruses. When government bureaucrats share the bounty, they'll try to convince you to buy it, and will hide or ban anything that reduces those sales. Our medical industry is fatally corrupt. Maybe we can save it. Probably not.
Maybe they would work for the virus it was designed for, IF that virus was injected into your deltoid muscle. The fake vaccine does not train your respiratory immune system, hence it does not prevent infection, transmission, or disease. https://antimarxist.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccines-cause-your-body
They work exactly as intended- they were designed ONLY to lessen symptoms, to hopefully prevent hospitalization so they wouldn't be overwhelmed. It was NEVER part of the design to stop transmission.
Don't blame the innocent mutating coronavirus🤣😂 Virus gonna virus.
Vaxes sent stop anything, don't affect any symptoms. Their design is entirely to introduce antigens that will accelerate immune response when we do get infected. The RNA vaccines do that, but are too specific for a designated protein charateristic which mutates out of existence quickly. Thus the short efficacy. Dealing with symptoms, and killing invading viruses before retransmitted is entirely up to us, not the vax.
I think at some point in the future there might be a sort of splintered health care system, one for the experimental jab victims (they'll never be called victims but that is what they really are) and one for "pure bloods". If you were jabbed you go into this medical treatment path, with a series of expected ailments and immune system degradations, and if you weren't you get the traditional medical path.
I get what you're saying....but my point would be that if you've been jabbed they run a full battery of tests expecting to find certain problems, but if you have not been jabbed you would just get treated/tested for whatever complaint you came in for and nothing more.
There would indeed be created, two tiers of treatment, one would be vastly more expensive than the other and would also, therefore, be more costly from a health insurance point of view.
This would create two classes of health care consumers but would be reversed from what they currently wish upon us dirty and unvaxxed deplorables.
Yes, long term there has to be some immune fatigue and differences (although presumably the young may cover up issues, short-term at least, as their immune systems are stronger). If we even wanted to get a jab now, how would we do it? Start at jab 1 or just skip to jab 4?!
" It looks like the more you test regardless of symptoms, the more you find it."
Trump got boo'd off the stage for making this astute observation ~nearly 2 years ago.
Policies that drive notSick people to get tested while tests produce falsePositives is recipe for fiat casedemic (always has been, see Nancy's "test test test" propaganda early on, they knew the game)
"This must be a combination of pre-holiday testing..."
A "pandemic" so serious we don't work weekends and holidays. Imagine if those of us who maintain the electricity and sewage didn't work weekends and holidays during the "pandemic." Still can't figure out if it's decadence or entropy with the cubicle plankton/symbol manipulator class.
The 50-59 adjusted Death rate seems quite interesting. It looks like the bias included for the elderly Death rate cant play a big role. If they wanted to be more trustworthy they should offer us also comorbidities per age group.
Its a biiit strange that vaxxes with seemingly negative effect concerning infection have still such a high rate of protection concerning Death, while they insist on revax every 3 months. Something doesnt add up well.
we have been hearing from some quarters that they wont treat the unjabbed, (they are filthy and disgusting, nazi propaganda style) i wonder if they are treated different in hospital settings, whether consciously or not
There has been at least one recorded case in Scotland of a woman refused IVF treatment until she got the vax. Absolutely nothing about any such policy was ever debated in the Scottish parliament, some apparatchik apparently just thought it would be a good source of brownie points..
thats remarkable since we heard a long time a go that the jab concentrates in the ovaries, but then when are doctors ever up to date on the science, most are 15 years behind
This is the same country that broke the news of a record number of stillbirths correlated with the vax roll out. This poor woman (who was well aware of the latter, but who did take end up taking the shot) had a choice between no fertility treatment and running what she quite rightly thought was a risk to her fertility.
How is vax status determined? Does the hospital just ask the patient, or is there some kind of "official" checking that goes on? Because I would lie if I was unvaxxed and in the hospital.
Breaking: Chancellor of Austria Karl Nehammer tested positive - I wonder at which point even the Very Brainwashed Folks of Austria will realize that Nehammer probably wasn't an unvaccinated villain with a fake green pass.
It would be indeed, but even then people would say (and be told) that it would have been far worse if he hadn't been vaccinated. Or they would say (and be told) that unfortunately, Nehammer was too busy to get a booster shot. So I doubt a lot would be gained in terms of public awareness.
> It would be indeed, but even then people would say (and be told) that it would have been far worse if he hadn't been vaccinated.
There was a reported case (I think in the US) of a fully vaxxed (at the time) guy who died of covid, and the doctor treating him reported that it would have been worse if he'd not been vaccinated.
I don't think all of them are unprincipled, lying scoundrels, I must say, so I think he's likely to be vaccinated and boostered, as his press people told the public.
This is exactly what we were promised 2 years ago: lockdown until we have a vaccine that results in significantly higher case rates among vaccinated people, which we will handwave away by pointing to higher rates of hospitilizations and deaths in the vanishingly small unvaccinated cohorts, not accounting for confounding variables.
The last graph seems to imply the jabs do reduce death. Whether there are more/less cases isn't death what we're trying to minimize? That being said I am aware of possible negative health implications of the jabs. From a marketing perspective - the last graph seems to provide a good story for avoiding death, right?
the vaccines reduce official Corona mortality. at the level of all-cause mortality, their effect is vastly weaker, which would suggest that a big part of SARS-2 mortality consists of very old sick people whose deaths are imminent anyway, whether or not they get Covid
What kind of 85 year old person in high vax community is unvaxxed?
In Vermont, that age group is 99% vaxxed, boosted, the works, yet it is the unvaxxed in that age group that drive the death statistics. Where do they find these people? How did they remain vax-free? This is NEVER discussed in official channels, but anyone over 70 who is unvaxxed is probably already in hospice care and at death's door.
this is one of the most important questions. i would guess: people with terminal illnesses in palliative care, people with severe brain damage, in comas, etc.
I'm sure you know this, but Alex Berenson has reported on how there has always been a confound with the flu vaccine where very sick people who are not well enough to receive the vaccine skew the mortality data for the unvaccinated, and that same signal is showing up here with these vaccines.
People >70 who are unvaccinated are not anti-vaxxers, they are just too sick to receive the vaccine, and then they pass away and confound the vaccine efficacy data.
"..but anyone over 70 who is unvaxxed is probably already in hospice care and at death's door." Nonsense. Pushing that age myself, and in better health than most younger individuals who eat processed garbage every day, and neglect their overall health. Haven't ever had a cold or flu, or any other issues. Of course, I'm unvaccinated, and would never pump my body with those toxins. I also know others in this age group who are perfectly fine and don't fit the stereotype of the sick and debilitated senior who is at "death's door." If people neglect their health throughout their lives, and turn to doctors and the government to "fix" things for them instead of realizing they have some skin in the game -- karma will indeed be a bitch when they enter their "golden years." Payback time.
No offense meant. I agree with you. But in Vermont, they are reporting that 100% of the 70 and up group is vaxxed. Yet there are still “unvaxxed” deaths in this age group. Hard to explain.
I agree, I was mainly referring to stereotypes about the elderly. I don't trust statistics as they claim 100% of the over 55 are vaxxed in my county in upstate NY. Yet I'm not and many, many others aren't. So it's clearly not 100%!
if we can make any general observation about the past almost 2 years now it's that we can't believe the statistics or the claims about numbers. numbers don't lie, but those who provide them abuse them to serve their own interests.
Cool! I don’t believe the stats either. Out of state people got vaxxed here and skewed the numbers. Where in NY? Near Vermont? Are they enforcing the mask mandate there? I
Are you referring to over 70s in Vermont? I am one not in Vermont and know quite a few others and many who are not boosted. Perhaps we are at death’s door and just don’t know it. At least, we are saving the state the cost of hospice care.
Hello! You have not gotten the boosters? or are you one of the very few that Gov. Scott blames for all the trouble? (Like me!) Booster uptake in Vermont is pretty high, but still something like 50% overall?
Yes absolutely this is a classic issue. In my field we are always producing tables of sensitivity statistics. Some of the table cells are driven by millions of data points. But some cells in that table might be highly improbable conditions and the sensitivity might be driven by a couple hundred cases. Often the sensitivity in those cells are pretty weird. Management always wants an explanation of that sensitivity number even though it is probably some weird special case. So we always are trying to figure out how to direct people's gaze at the numbers that have good support. Those unvaxx bars probably have vanishingly small support and are some weird special case, but we don't see the number of samples that support each bar.
I have at least a half dozen over 70's in my immeditate family that aren't vaxxed and likely never will be. Whatever stats the gov't is peddling in that age bracket are pure bullshit.
I know of a number of elderly people who dropped dead within two weeks after the third shot; in most cases, the cause of death was listed as pneumonia. If games are being played, they might be considered unvaxxed to boost the official statistics. Vax status: unknown could also work.
Thank you for discussing this particular issue more in-depth.
We are constantly told that these vaccines prevent more severe illness and THAT is the basis for the mandates.
So when I ask my health care colleagues - if that is the legal ground on which these mandates rest, imagine what other things we can mandate “to prevent severe illness.”
So I start listing a whole host of measures we can mandate that will prevent severe illness. And it is as if it is the first time this has dawned on most of them. They grow so very quiet when they realize that we are standing on the precipice of a world that few truly want.
Why did it take two years for people to grasp this???
I am a nurse in the US. We have a severe nursing shortage right now. I have never seen anything like this.
We could solve the nursing shortage in less than a year, possibly REDUCE the need for RNs, if we simply mandated everyone must obtain a BMI < 26.
I admit. It will be rough. We will have to chuck the recent demand that we all acknowledge that “big” is healthy AND beautiful but again, we have decided we can mandate anything if it “prevents severe illness” right?
There are others:
- no red meat consumption
- no sugar
- mandated physicals (this one is my favorite - your employer can mandate these AND decide what tests you will be subjected to each year AND of course they are sent the results).
On and on and on.
This is hell. I do not want any part of it. But amazingly millions think it’s justifiable.
And you can think of even worse hypotheticals, particularly if you expand your concern to reducing severe injuries and avoidable emergencies. And why wouldn't you? They kill and maim people, who then take up hospital beds. If we want to stop avoidable medical problems by any means necessary, no reason to only stick to illness. Options include:
- Mandatory sedatives for military age black males. As a demographic, they commit a disproportionate percentage of violent crime in the US. Think of the lives saved if they're too doped up to shoot anyone.
- Mandatory sterilization or IUDs for women who would have high risk pregnancies. Look, we can't have you and your infant taking up valuable (N)ICU space. Use a surrogate if you want a kid of your own that badly.
- Medication checks for all, with forcible administration of meds if you fail too often. Compliance can be hard; let the government help by giving you no choice.
And on and on. Once you dispense with things like informed consent and bodily autonomy, there's really no limit to the atrocities you can commit for the greater good.
Agree there might be an argument for the vax reducing Covid mortality in the above 70 age groups. But I personally can’t find a benefit for the vax at all for the younger age groups.
sorry to be a spoilsport, but the corona stats are propaganda and the virus has never been isolated. however, for beautiful stats, worldwide and updated in real-time, one should really takae a look at the amazing worldometers website https://www.worldometers.info/
But if the jabs do reduce Corona mortality this is a win. Are they meant to reduce all-cause mortality? Oh, I may be missing a subtlety - are these deaths due to covid? If not, I presume the unvaxxed are sick and the vaxxed are the healthy ones who could make it to the pharmacy/clinic to get the shot. Is this what you mean?
if the jabs reduce Corona mortality by a lot, but only reduce all-cause mortality by a little, they're saving far fewer lives than it seems. this isn't that unusual for medical interventions.
the uk have good enough numbers that you can roughly track all-cause mortality in vaccinated and unvaccinated separately and compare. for DE we have no such numbers, so there’s a lot more uncertainty, but hard to believe picture can be that difft from UK
Sorry, haven't seen those UK numbers. If all-cause mortality of vaccinated population is truly reduced (even only very little) I'm very surprised. I had expected all-cause mortality of the vaccinated to be increased and be largely unchanged among the unvaccinated.
What could be the cause of the increase of all-cause mortality then? According to RKI data it is not corona
A drug can prevent you from dying of diabetes, by killing you from a stroke. Cancer drugs kill the tumor, but the patient dies of pneumonia. Weight-loss pills get you to lose weight, but you kill yourself from despair. Drug companies are always trying to find that perfect drug that only does the thing you want, and nothing you don't. And since they can't, they lie: they either overstate the effectiveness of basically a harmless placebo, or they lie about the harmful side-effects.
Right, except that all cause mortality has been noticed and registered in the UK, Netherlands, US, etc., which does not necessarily imply a causal relation with vaccination, but further attention should be given. For the US check out https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/what-if-the-largest-experiment-on, and it is worth to quote following, based on this pre-print paper - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355581860_COVID_vaccination_and_age-stratified_all-cause_mortality_risk: "Comparing our estimate with the CDC-reported VFR (0.002%) suggests VAERS deaths are underreported by a factor of 20, consistent with known VAERS under-ascertainment bias. Comparing our age-stratified VFRs with published age-stratified coronavirus infection fatality rates (IFR) suggests the risks of COVID vaccines and boosters outweigh the benefits in children, young adults and older adults with low occupational risk or previous coronavirus exposure."
Keep in mind that in 2020 the all cause deaths dropped for many other causes. So the sudden rise of deaths if people went back to normal reporting should show a massive increase in all cause mortality. What we should do is look at 2018 to see how it compares.
Here is a great link to an archive of the Johns Hopkins study from end of 2020 that noticed deaths were for the most part moved around.
“Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.
“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.
Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths.”
very true. it takes a few hours, but when I compared 2018-2019-20202 (beware the many rabbit holes) the same conclusion came about: no spikes in total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Interesting. I should say excess deaths. 2021 is worse in some countries with a track record of 'viable' data than 2020. Excess deaths is one of the best options we can apply to measure the pandemic impact. In the Netherlands and I think also in the UK, some weeks/months in 2021 saw an increase in deaths surpassing the average of previous years, including 2020. I wonder if the definition of cause determination in death certificates changed from 2020 to 2021, which might artificially benefit vaccination.
Jabs certainly give the appearance of reducing death with covid. But at what risk? What is the effect on all cause mortality? Vaxxed vs unvaxxed. It would also be interesting to find out all cause mortality within 2 weeks of vax or booster vs rate outside of this period.
Covid-19 roundup: FDA shortens interval for Moderna booster dose to 5 months; Moderna CEO says another booster could be necessary this fall — report – Endpoints News (endpts.com)
Those data are all so full of biases, for example:
1. Asymmetric testing
2. Definition of vaccinated/boosted: how are people within the 2 weeks of dose 2 counted? Single dose, unvaxxed
I think data is here so really a simple Y2021 vaccination rate <-> excess mortality analysis will be telling. Just the correlation between vax rate and excess mortality for 2021 - I am afraid it will not look very pretty
of course. the UKHSA series is mostly about highlighting the hypocrisy and bias of the public health statistics. but, also, there seems to be a pretty strong signal hear about the ability of vaccines to prevent infection.
Some old people, not all. Always a mistake to assume averaged stats are relevant to any individual. Unless you're an average person. Unlikely. Half the people are above average, half below. Survivors try to be above average.
So am I correct to conclude from your last graph that the vax continues to be correlated with a death rate approximately one fifth that of vaccinated people in the over 80 age group? And the death rate is about the same (1/5th) for vaxed vs unvaxed in the 70-79 age group?
I dismiss all per 100K population figures for good reasons that Prof Norman Fenton has outlined. I prefer the raw data without narrative when its supplied so we can draw our own conclusions.
the point of these updates, isn’t that the rates are correct. it’s that these numbers are an ongoing embarrassment to the UK vaccinators, who started out citing these very same figures, when they were in their favour.
Yes I know that. The best data they used to publish was the PHE VoC Technical Briefings as that was based on sequenced PCRS and excluded false positives and it was presented as raw data without any narrative or analysis. As soon as people analysed that data and revealed that vaccination had no efficacy in the under 50s they just stopped publishing it and they have since gone to figures per 100K when the actual population that is unvaccinated is unknown and likely being under estimated by 10 million people. Even that data series has moved against them so they greyed the data out as you have pointed out. Even the ICNARC data is now using graphs based on estimates per 100K when they should have all the precise figures but refuse to publish them.
"Your immunity will wane too" The Doctor did a fantastic job keeping his cool in front of this charlatan but he should have challenged him over this. There is nothing in the literature that suggests naturally acquired immunity "fades". Not only is this contrary to everything that has been previously understood about human reactions to viruses but the studies out of Denmark and Israel prove unequivocally that natural immunity is both longlasting and robust.
It was good to see one of these worms squirm though if only for a short time, I'd imagine this Doctor will be looking for new employment very soon for daring to question the Party Line.
Have you found that being infected with sinusitis or rhinitis means a person will never be infected with that again in their lives? Not all viral infections behave the same, and the structure of coronaviruses help them to evade immune systems or use them to their own advantages. Developing immune responses to one group is not going to be proof against other groups for all time.
Not bad for a mRNA injection with an absolute risk reduction factor of 1%. What is happening is entirely predictable. The mRNA experimental injections do nothing other than scramble your immune system which is their main purpose anyway.
You are always gonna need another mRNA injection for eternity because they do not have any efficacy against any virus. Meanwhile, with each new injection your poor immune system is going to become even more degraded and thus any nasties lurking around might get a foothold.
Then comes the best part, if you are still breathing. You get to enter the modern stone-age medical system as a life long patient...good for the doctors and hospitals, good for the drug companies and not so good for you. Because you don't count anymore. You are just another body to be sucked dry of your dignity, health and wealth.
Exactly and yet the mandates continue (Citi just announced no jab, no job 🤦♀️)
They work for the virus it was designed for. Problem is corona viruses are RNA virus, so they mutate quickly. Hard to keep up with. The scandal is the medics always knew this. Big money in selling vax for mutating viruses. When government bureaucrats share the bounty, they'll try to convince you to buy it, and will hide or ban anything that reduces those sales. Our medical industry is fatally corrupt. Maybe we can save it. Probably not.
Maybe they would work for the virus it was designed for, IF that virus was injected into your deltoid muscle. The fake vaccine does not train your respiratory immune system, hence it does not prevent infection, transmission, or disease. https://antimarxist.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccines-cause-your-body
They work exactly as intended- they were designed ONLY to lessen symptoms, to hopefully prevent hospitalization so they wouldn't be overwhelmed. It was NEVER part of the design to stop transmission.
Don't blame the innocent mutating coronavirus🤣😂 Virus gonna virus.
Vaxes sent stop anything, don't affect any symptoms. Their design is entirely to introduce antigens that will accelerate immune response when we do get infected. The RNA vaccines do that, but are too specific for a designated protein charateristic which mutates out of existence quickly. Thus the short efficacy. Dealing with symptoms, and killing invading viruses before retransmitted is entirely up to us, not the vax.
https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/1123075/1123075_y53beeq8sxxrtbi.jpeg
Hilarious.
https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/686246/686246_jheadcsvurcgxwx.jpeg
Even Spiderman?!? Hopefully Batman is hanging tough.
LOL. Good one.
And I thought I was crazy thinking Vax-as-a-Service.
I think that your appraisal may be far too charitable! The trajectory here suggests a much deeper evil than mere pecuniary gain.
I think at some point in the future there might be a sort of splintered health care system, one for the experimental jab victims (they'll never be called victims but that is what they really are) and one for "pure bloods". If you were jabbed you go into this medical treatment path, with a series of expected ailments and immune system degradations, and if you weren't you get the traditional medical path.
can we still speak about a 'traditional medical path' when we know how frightenningly compromised it is?
I get what you're saying....but my point would be that if you've been jabbed they run a full battery of tests expecting to find certain problems, but if you have not been jabbed you would just get treated/tested for whatever complaint you came in for and nothing more.
There would indeed be created, two tiers of treatment, one would be vastly more expensive than the other and would also, therefore, be more costly from a health insurance point of view.
This would create two classes of health care consumers but would be reversed from what they currently wish upon us dirty and unvaxxed deplorables.
Yes, long term there has to be some immune fatigue and differences (although presumably the young may cover up issues, short-term at least, as their immune systems are stronger). If we even wanted to get a jab now, how would we do it? Start at jab 1 or just skip to jab 4?!
Brilliantly said.
" It looks like the more you test regardless of symptoms, the more you find it."
Trump got boo'd off the stage for making this astute observation ~nearly 2 years ago.
Policies that drive notSick people to get tested while tests produce falsePositives is recipe for fiat casedemic (always has been, see Nancy's "test test test" propaganda early on, they knew the game)
"Sick people" lined up for hours in the cold weather to be tested to find out if they were sick.
Maybe they are motivated by getting a positive test so they can get 10 days off work with pay????
and numbers don't lie. well, actually that's a lie.
"This must be a combination of pre-holiday testing..."
A "pandemic" so serious we don't work weekends and holidays. Imagine if those of us who maintain the electricity and sewage didn't work weekends and holidays during the "pandemic." Still can't figure out if it's decadence or entropy with the cubicle plankton/symbol manipulator class.
The 50-59 adjusted Death rate seems quite interesting. It looks like the bias included for the elderly Death rate cant play a big role. If they wanted to be more trustworthy they should offer us also comorbidities per age group.
Its a biiit strange that vaxxes with seemingly negative effect concerning infection have still such a high rate of protection concerning Death, while they insist on revax every 3 months. Something doesnt add up well.
Also wonder how much prior infection props up vax effectiveness. Would be nice to know rate of inf3ction/death in vaxd with covid naive immune system.
we have been hearing from some quarters that they wont treat the unjabbed, (they are filthy and disgusting, nazi propaganda style) i wonder if they are treated different in hospital settings, whether consciously or not
There has been at least one recorded case in Scotland of a woman refused IVF treatment until she got the vax. Absolutely nothing about any such policy was ever debated in the Scottish parliament, some apparatchik apparently just thought it would be a good source of brownie points..
thats remarkable since we heard a long time a go that the jab concentrates in the ovaries, but then when are doctors ever up to date on the science, most are 15 years behind
This is the same country that broke the news of a record number of stillbirths correlated with the vax roll out. This poor woman (who was well aware of the latter, but who did take end up taking the shot) had a choice between no fertility treatment and running what she quite rightly thought was a risk to her fertility.
tbh she was going for ivf so what was the risk to her fertilty??! (you know what i mean)
Read about John O´Looney´s experience, and make sure you watch the video, too. https://rairfoundation.com/shocking-escape-covid-whistleblower-abused-in-uk-hospital-rescued-by-friends-interview/
absolutely chilling! me and BFF watched the whole RAIRvideo on bitchute a few days ago.
How is vax status determined? Does the hospital just ask the patient, or is there some kind of "official" checking that goes on? Because I would lie if I was unvaxxed and in the hospital.
its in your med records in the UK
The really crazy thing in the last report is the huge spike in infections among vaxxed vs previous reports. https://inumero.substack.com/p/more-evidence-for-vaccine-accelerating?r=tv61s&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct
updated with link!
Thanks! For folks that want to explore the compiled data from these reports, dashboard available. Three tabs in this dashboard, best viewed on a large monitor: https://public.tableau.com/views/UKReportsRiskRatios/AgeVaxCohorts?:language=en-US&:display_count=n&:origin=viz_share_link
Breaking: Chancellor of Austria Karl Nehammer tested positive - I wonder at which point even the Very Brainwashed Folks of Austria will realize that Nehammer probably wasn't an unvaccinated villain with a fake green pass.
him going to the ICU would be epic
It would be indeed, but even then people would say (and be told) that it would have been far worse if he hadn't been vaccinated. Or they would say (and be told) that unfortunately, Nehammer was too busy to get a booster shot. So I doubt a lot would be gained in terms of public awareness.
I was wrong, his press people just said he had a booster shot.
> It would be indeed, but even then people would say (and be told) that it would have been far worse if he hadn't been vaccinated.
There was a reported case (I think in the US) of a fully vaxxed (at the time) guy who died of covid, and the doctor treating him reported that it would have been worse if he'd not been vaccinated.
He's a politician. Chances are that he is indeed an unvaccinated villain with a fake green pass.
I don't think all of them are unprincipled, lying scoundrels, I must say, so I think he's likely to be vaccinated and boostered, as his press people told the public.
This is exactly what we were promised 2 years ago: lockdown until we have a vaccine that results in significantly higher case rates among vaccinated people, which we will handwave away by pointing to higher rates of hospitilizations and deaths in the vanishingly small unvaccinated cohorts, not accounting for confounding variables.
The last graph seems to imply the jabs do reduce death. Whether there are more/less cases isn't death what we're trying to minimize? That being said I am aware of possible negative health implications of the jabs. From a marketing perspective - the last graph seems to provide a good story for avoiding death, right?
the vaccines reduce official Corona mortality. at the level of all-cause mortality, their effect is vastly weaker, which would suggest that a big part of SARS-2 mortality consists of very old sick people whose deaths are imminent anyway, whether or not they get Covid
What kind of 85 year old person in high vax community is unvaxxed?
In Vermont, that age group is 99% vaxxed, boosted, the works, yet it is the unvaxxed in that age group that drive the death statistics. Where do they find these people? How did they remain vax-free? This is NEVER discussed in official channels, but anyone over 70 who is unvaxxed is probably already in hospice care and at death's door.
this is one of the most important questions. i would guess: people with terminal illnesses in palliative care, people with severe brain damage, in comas, etc.
I'm sure you know this, but Alex Berenson has reported on how there has always been a confound with the flu vaccine where very sick people who are not well enough to receive the vaccine skew the mortality data for the unvaccinated, and that same signal is showing up here with these vaccines.
People >70 who are unvaccinated are not anti-vaxxers, they are just too sick to receive the vaccine, and then they pass away and confound the vaccine efficacy data.
"..but anyone over 70 who is unvaxxed is probably already in hospice care and at death's door." Nonsense. Pushing that age myself, and in better health than most younger individuals who eat processed garbage every day, and neglect their overall health. Haven't ever had a cold or flu, or any other issues. Of course, I'm unvaccinated, and would never pump my body with those toxins. I also know others in this age group who are perfectly fine and don't fit the stereotype of the sick and debilitated senior who is at "death's door." If people neglect their health throughout their lives, and turn to doctors and the government to "fix" things for them instead of realizing they have some skin in the game -- karma will indeed be a bitch when they enter their "golden years." Payback time.
No offense meant. I agree with you. But in Vermont, they are reporting that 100% of the 70 and up group is vaxxed. Yet there are still “unvaxxed” deaths in this age group. Hard to explain.
I agree, I was mainly referring to stereotypes about the elderly. I don't trust statistics as they claim 100% of the over 55 are vaxxed in my county in upstate NY. Yet I'm not and many, many others aren't. So it's clearly not 100%!
if we can make any general observation about the past almost 2 years now it's that we can't believe the statistics or the claims about numbers. numbers don't lie, but those who provide them abuse them to serve their own interests.
Cool! I don’t believe the stats either. Out of state people got vaxxed here and skewed the numbers. Where in NY? Near Vermont? Are they enforcing the mask mandate there? I
riiiight, "they are reporting"....
Why would anyone believe the official numbers of vaccinated people? We are dealing with inveterate liars and human rights abusers.
Are you referring to over 70s in Vermont? I am one not in Vermont and know quite a few others and many who are not boosted. Perhaps we are at death’s door and just don’t know it. At least, we are saving the state the cost of hospice care.
Hello! You have not gotten the boosters? or are you one of the very few that Gov. Scott blames for all the trouble? (Like me!) Booster uptake in Vermont is pretty high, but still something like 50% overall?
Yes absolutely this is a classic issue. In my field we are always producing tables of sensitivity statistics. Some of the table cells are driven by millions of data points. But some cells in that table might be highly improbable conditions and the sensitivity might be driven by a couple hundred cases. Often the sensitivity in those cells are pretty weird. Management always wants an explanation of that sensitivity number even though it is probably some weird special case. So we always are trying to figure out how to direct people's gaze at the numbers that have good support. Those unvaxx bars probably have vanishingly small support and are some weird special case, but we don't see the number of samples that support each bar.
I have at least a half dozen over 70's in my immeditate family that aren't vaxxed and likely never will be. Whatever stats the gov't is peddling in that age bracket are pure bullshit.
No doubt -- are you in Vermont? I think out of staters moved in and got vaxxed and are not reflected in our census numbers.
The kind of person who is too sick to get the shot.
LOL you don't know any old people, do you.
If you think 70 = "in hospice" wow. SMH.
I know of a number of elderly people who dropped dead within two weeks after the third shot; in most cases, the cause of death was listed as pneumonia. If games are being played, they might be considered unvaxxed to boost the official statistics. Vax status: unknown could also work.
They would be considered unvaxxed.
Thank you for discussing this particular issue more in-depth.
We are constantly told that these vaccines prevent more severe illness and THAT is the basis for the mandates.
So when I ask my health care colleagues - if that is the legal ground on which these mandates rest, imagine what other things we can mandate “to prevent severe illness.”
So I start listing a whole host of measures we can mandate that will prevent severe illness. And it is as if it is the first time this has dawned on most of them. They grow so very quiet when they realize that we are standing on the precipice of a world that few truly want.
Why did it take two years for people to grasp this???
Yes. Why aren’t cigarette and alcohol completely illegal?
VeryVer-
Think bigger.
I am a nurse in the US. We have a severe nursing shortage right now. I have never seen anything like this.
We could solve the nursing shortage in less than a year, possibly REDUCE the need for RNs, if we simply mandated everyone must obtain a BMI < 26.
I admit. It will be rough. We will have to chuck the recent demand that we all acknowledge that “big” is healthy AND beautiful but again, we have decided we can mandate anything if it “prevents severe illness” right?
There are others:
- no red meat consumption
- no sugar
- mandated physicals (this one is my favorite - your employer can mandate these AND decide what tests you will be subjected to each year AND of course they are sent the results).
On and on and on.
This is hell. I do not want any part of it. But amazingly millions think it’s justifiable.
Needless to say I am praying a lot today.
And you can think of even worse hypotheticals, particularly if you expand your concern to reducing severe injuries and avoidable emergencies. And why wouldn't you? They kill and maim people, who then take up hospital beds. If we want to stop avoidable medical problems by any means necessary, no reason to only stick to illness. Options include:
- Mandatory sedatives for military age black males. As a demographic, they commit a disproportionate percentage of violent crime in the US. Think of the lives saved if they're too doped up to shoot anyone.
- Mandatory sterilization or IUDs for women who would have high risk pregnancies. Look, we can't have you and your infant taking up valuable (N)ICU space. Use a surrogate if you want a kid of your own that badly.
- Medication checks for all, with forcible administration of meds if you fail too often. Compliance can be hard; let the government help by giving you no choice.
And on and on. Once you dispense with things like informed consent and bodily autonomy, there's really no limit to the atrocities you can commit for the greater good.
Ar-Z- my goodness - impressive work. Remind me to not get on your bad side. I would hate to be the target of your imagination!
Seriously tho - you can see the point. This is just so dangerous. It absolutely will be abused and quickly. I am so alarmed.
Agree there might be an argument for the vax reducing Covid mortality in the above 70 age groups. But I personally can’t find a benefit for the vax at all for the younger age groups.
I'd like to see someone run all the Corona stats and exclude the 80 plus age group altogether. Might be hard to find the "pandemic" then.
sorry to be a spoilsport, but the corona stats are propaganda and the virus has never been isolated. however, for beautiful stats, worldwide and updated in real-time, one should really takae a look at the amazing worldometers website https://www.worldometers.info/
But if the jabs do reduce Corona mortality this is a win. Are they meant to reduce all-cause mortality? Oh, I may be missing a subtlety - are these deaths due to covid? If not, I presume the unvaxxed are sick and the vaxxed are the healthy ones who could make it to the pharmacy/clinic to get the shot. Is this what you mean?
if the jabs reduce Corona mortality by a lot, but only reduce all-cause mortality by a little, they're saving far fewer lives than it seems. this isn't that unusual for medical interventions.
This seems an important point to get out to folks. I am continually asking why another believes that only Covid can kill them.
I regularly forget the importance of all-cause mortality when evaluating the jab
All-cause mortality is not reduced in Germany. Is it reduced in UK? If not, there is no reason to assume that the jabs save any lives
the uk have good enough numbers that you can roughly track all-cause mortality in vaccinated and unvaccinated separately and compare. for DE we have no such numbers, so there’s a lot more uncertainty, but hard to believe picture can be that difft from UK
Sorry, haven't seen those UK numbers. If all-cause mortality of vaccinated population is truly reduced (even only very little) I'm very surprised. I had expected all-cause mortality of the vaccinated to be increased and be largely unchanged among the unvaccinated.
What could be the cause of the increase of all-cause mortality then? According to RKI data it is not corona
look up the stats at https://www.worldometers.info/
A drug can prevent you from dying of diabetes, by killing you from a stroke. Cancer drugs kill the tumor, but the patient dies of pneumonia. Weight-loss pills get you to lose weight, but you kill yourself from despair. Drug companies are always trying to find that perfect drug that only does the thing you want, and nothing you don't. And since they can't, they lie: they either overstate the effectiveness of basically a harmless placebo, or they lie about the harmful side-effects.
Would the all cause mortality effect both cohorts the same?
Right, except that all cause mortality has been noticed and registered in the UK, Netherlands, US, etc., which does not necessarily imply a causal relation with vaccination, but further attention should be given. For the US check out https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/what-if-the-largest-experiment-on, and it is worth to quote following, based on this pre-print paper - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355581860_COVID_vaccination_and_age-stratified_all-cause_mortality_risk: "Comparing our estimate with the CDC-reported VFR (0.002%) suggests VAERS deaths are underreported by a factor of 20, consistent with known VAERS under-ascertainment bias. Comparing our age-stratified VFRs with published age-stratified coronavirus infection fatality rates (IFR) suggests the risks of COVID vaccines and boosters outweigh the benefits in children, young adults and older adults with low occupational risk or previous coronavirus exposure."
Keep in mind that in 2020 the all cause deaths dropped for many other causes. So the sudden rise of deaths if people went back to normal reporting should show a massive increase in all cause mortality. What we should do is look at 2018 to see how it compares.
Here is a great link to an archive of the Johns Hopkins study from end of 2020 that noticed deaths were for the most part moved around.
“Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.
“The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals,” Briand said.
Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths.”
https://archive.fo/ByNUQ
very true. it takes a few hours, but when I compared 2018-2019-20202 (beware the many rabbit holes) the same conclusion came about: no spikes in total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Interesting. I should say excess deaths. 2021 is worse in some countries with a track record of 'viable' data than 2020. Excess deaths is one of the best options we can apply to measure the pandemic impact. In the Netherlands and I think also in the UK, some weeks/months in 2021 saw an increase in deaths surpassing the average of previous years, including 2020. I wonder if the definition of cause determination in death certificates changed from 2020 to 2021, which might artificially benefit vaccination.
Jabs certainly give the appearance of reducing death with covid. But at what risk? What is the effect on all cause mortality? Vaxxed vs unvaxxed. It would also be interesting to find out all cause mortality within 2 weeks of vax or booster vs rate outside of this period.
or they were all culled in the first few waves, deaths mean nothing now.
moderna CEO already saying 4th jabs this fall
Covid-19 roundup: FDA shortens interval for Moderna booster dose to 5 months; Moderna CEO says another booster could be necessary this fall — report – Endpoints News (endpts.com)
https://endpts.com/covid-19-roundup-another-moderna-booster-could-be-necessary-this-fall-report-jj-touts-real-world-data-supporting-a-single-dose-of-its-vaccine/
Those data are all so full of biases, for example:
1. Asymmetric testing
2. Definition of vaccinated/boosted: how are people within the 2 weeks of dose 2 counted? Single dose, unvaxxed
I think data is here so really a simple Y2021 vaccination rate <-> excess mortality analysis will be telling. Just the correlation between vax rate and excess mortality for 2021 - I am afraid it will not look very pretty
of course. the UKHSA series is mostly about highlighting the hypocrisy and bias of the public health statistics. but, also, there seems to be a pretty strong signal hear about the ability of vaccines to prevent infection.
So, in other words
Old people vaxx good
Everyone else, you do you
Some old people, not all. Always a mistake to assume averaged stats are relevant to any individual. Unless you're an average person. Unlikely. Half the people are above average, half below. Survivors try to be above average.
Sure. My best friends father is in his 80s and has 1 lung (injury). And unvaccinated. Has fake papers and is living life
So am I correct to conclude from your last graph that the vax continues to be correlated with a death rate approximately one fifth that of vaccinated people in the over 80 age group? And the death rate is about the same (1/5th) for vaxed vs unvaxed in the 70-79 age group?
yes, vaccinated 80+ have a death rate roughly around 1/5 that of unvaccinated people. in the 70-79, it's more like a 1/6.
This was a bit of a long read, but I found it stimulating. Would love to hear considerations from more capable minds.
https://www.juliusruechel.com/2022/01/the-false-god-of-central-planning.html?m=1
I dismiss all per 100K population figures for good reasons that Prof Norman Fenton has outlined. I prefer the raw data without narrative when its supplied so we can draw our own conclusions.
the point of these updates, isn’t that the rates are correct. it’s that these numbers are an ongoing embarrassment to the UK vaccinators, who started out citing these very same figures, when they were in their favour.
Yes I know that. The best data they used to publish was the PHE VoC Technical Briefings as that was based on sequenced PCRS and excluded false positives and it was presented as raw data without any narrative or analysis. As soon as people analysed that data and revealed that vaccination had no efficacy in the under 50s they just stopped publishing it and they have since gone to figures per 100K when the actual population that is unvaccinated is unknown and likely being under estimated by 10 million people. Even that data series has moved against them so they greyed the data out as you have pointed out. Even the ICNARC data is now using graphs based on estimates per 100K when they should have all the precise figures but refuse to publish them.
Then ignore the narrative.
For those who didn’t see it.
UK ITU Doctor Confront Health Secretary about Mandatory Vaccinations.
An awkward exchange from an unvaccinated doctor about waning vaccines
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/uk-itu-doctor-confronts-health-secretary
"Your immunity will wane too" The Doctor did a fantastic job keeping his cool in front of this charlatan but he should have challenged him over this. There is nothing in the literature that suggests naturally acquired immunity "fades". Not only is this contrary to everything that has been previously understood about human reactions to viruses but the studies out of Denmark and Israel prove unequivocally that natural immunity is both longlasting and robust.
It was good to see one of these worms squirm though if only for a short time, I'd imagine this Doctor will be looking for new employment very soon for daring to question the Party Line.
Have you found that being infected with sinusitis or rhinitis means a person will never be infected with that again in their lives? Not all viral infections behave the same, and the structure of coronaviruses help them to evade immune systems or use them to their own advantages. Developing immune responses to one group is not going to be proof against other groups for all time.
BBC have "fact checked" this Doctor, who is going to fact check the fact checkers? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59929638