Are the vaccines killing people? Data from the UK says Yes, especially for 18-39 year olds. The data shows that a vaccinated person is twice as likely to die from things other than covid than an unvaccinated person. For some context this is eerily similar to the increased mortality rate from all causes for a smoker 55+ compared with a non smoker. If you are younger taking up smoking will increase your risk of dying less than the COVID vaccine. And we are mandating people take the vaccine. Let that sink in for a while.
The below links provide an overview of the data backing up this claim. It is provided month by month with unvaccinated mortality rates shaded blue and the vaccinated yellow for easy comparison.
Don’t believe me or want more info. You can look it all up for yourself. This is all taken from freely available public health data Here and Here. Why is this so obvious in the 18-39 age group and less so in others? My guess would be because the non vaccine related deaths are so low in this age group that the vaccine related ones are much easier to spot relatively. There is probably a similar absolute level of additional deaths in older groups but it is buried in the data as a much smaller percentage increase along with more from other causes.
One really interesting thing in that data is the very large increase in the greater than 21 days after either a single shot or the second shot. These deaths will never be attributed to the vaccine in a clinical setting as the vaccine event is so far removed and there are far more pressing things to worry about than looking for statistical anomalies. This sort of statistical analysis is what would normally be undertaken in a proper trial before widespread release of a drug as it requires much more effort and specialised knowledge that is not required by frontline medical staff. It also leads to the question if the rates are increased after 21 days, are they still increased 6 months, 2 years or longer after? This is again something that would be established by a proper trial.
Is it possible there is some underlying bias in the data causing this rather than the vaccine itself? Sure, and that’s an argument that the smoking lobby ran for many decades quite successfully. To confirm one way or the other you really need more detailed data where the 20x increase seen in lung cancer deaths amongst smokers will show up in the vaccinated vs unvaccinated datasets if they exist. Heart problems, blood clots and similar seem like a good first target to investigate given they are admitted side effects of the vaccination. It is impossible that vaccinated people dying at higher rates so consistently for such a long time is randomness or statistical noise, and some other cause that just happens to coincide with vaccination status seems unlikely with such a large sample size. The important question to ask though is why aren’t any studies being conducted into this to determine one way or the other?
And a little extra for the tin foil hat crowd, The seemingly illogical quest for 100% vaccination rates may stem from a desire to prevent comparisons like this from being made by removing all unvaccinated people from existence.
And in more good news:
Israeli trial, world’s first, finds 4th dose ‘not good enough’ against Omicron
Roll up, roll up….get ya boosters!
Theres a strong selling point compared with a doubling of your chances of dying from non covid things…
Although why would you think the 4th shot would offer more protection than the 3 before it in the first place?
There is some debate about the origin of this quotation, but it holds true regardless:
“Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results”
Some attribute it to Albert Einstein, who reportedly turned down the prime ministership of the state of Israel…
is that ironic? Or prophetic? Or poetic? …or simply inaccurate on both counts?
Yes….Einstein was offered the Presidency of Israel in 1952 and turned it down.
No…..general consensus seems to definitely rule out Einstein as the origin of the “insanity” quote.
50/50….not bad, Peachy 🙂
That just means you need a 5th dose of medicine with the 5th dose window brought forward to 30 days.
I suppose they can only bring forward these windows so many times, so maybe just make the vaccine a double shot.
Like I said before, once this plays out it is going to make James Hardie – asbestos and tobacco companies look like girls guides selling cookies, there is a reason they wanted 75 years to release the data ….
No-one will get a cracker out of a single government.
In light of people getting re-infected with Omicron as in this thread
Does anyone have a take on whether the unvaccinated are getting re-infected or is it only the vaccinated. As in does anyone know a pure blood that has had whuflu twice?
Don’t know anyone who has had it twice.
moreover I am of the understanding that it is hard to actually establish that someone has it twice. Because people who had been infected and recovered continue to test PCR positive for many months after recovery.
im going to regret engaging with you again, but what on earth are you talking about?
The results show unvaccinated dying in huge numbers relative to vaxxed in january (winter), then slowly declining
which makes sense as winter fades and the vulnerable unvaxxed all get killed off
Then for the vaxxed, none were dying in winter because they were all vaxxed and also locked inside obeying restrictions.
As restrictions are lifted, they all come out, their vaccine efficacy wanes as we know it does, the vulnerable ones catch covid and die
The values of vaxxed and unvaxxed groups then converge to become about equal in September and October which makes sense as the virus has minimal effect on healthy young people, and the vulnerable have already died
have I missed something here?
Clearly. The first one is that those figures are for
ie deaths not due to the virus so what has anything you have said got to do with that? If we were talking overall or covid deaths you may have a point.
But that is everything but covid deaths.
So what were the unvaxxed dying of in huge numbers in January ?
while no vaxxed at all were dying at the same time ?
That’s the question isn’t it?
But firstly people 21 days past their first vax were dying in larger numbers admittedly from a small sample size.
I’d also say the effect seems much greater more than 21 days after injection so how many people even were more than 21 days post injection in january?
What the data really shows is very few people at all had had the injection in january.
The really interesting tidbit I just noticed,
for every data point after april when the 21 days after second dose sample size becomes big enough to be more statistically certain, that number is always higher than the unvaxxed death rate, not just overall or most of the time but every month without fail.
Even april, the first month with enough data to be statistically valid at all has the unvax at 26-35 with high confidence and post 21 day double at 10-51 with high confidence.
Yes, I also noticed that about the confidence interval, as the sample size grew.
in the early months the interval was wide enough to even admit a situation where the jabbed were dying less than the unjabbed, but in the later months even the lower end of the jabbed interval was clearly above the unjabbed rate.
…cue someone to claim that in each age group the most vulnerable peeps were the ones to get jabbed; and also that the unjabbed are the predominant ones getting their sniffles tested… or not tested, as the narrative requires! 🤤
Anyone can find what they want by selectively looking at the data.
The answer lies in
But I have neither the data, time or inclination to undertake a study of that scale.
The difference between the two groups is vaxxed vs unvaxxed, but we could very reasonable assume that the vaxxed group is MORE likely to have other risk factors for death eg chronic disease
And if vaxxed deaths are MUCH higher in January
then unvaxxed deaths go SLIGHTLY higher in May
before the two groups become equal in October
The conclusion that any reasonable person would reach is the ones I have suggested
Look at the data for all deaths (incl covid-19) Table 1 of the first link you provided
It clearly shows exactly the same trend
For fucks sake, 24,000 unvaxxed died in January alone, which is more than all the vaxxed deaths combined January – October
Then 7700 unvaxxed died in February, which is STILL more than all the vaxxed deaths combined January – October
These two months dominate so much, that all the other deaths in both groups are basically just noise
You are desperately clutching at straws to suit your pre-determined narrative
everyone was unvaxed in January. Almost everyone In February.
No, everyone was FULLY unvaxxed in January
remember there was originally 8 weeks between the AZ doses
Second doses (to make them fully vaccinated) started in march
Clearly everyone wasn’t. there were 243 person-years of people more than 21 days post second vax.
compared with 26,000 less than 21 days post first injection and 900,000 unvaxxed.
The chart above is about first dose vaccinations. It’s clearly there at the top.
Says the guy that spouted an entire post of irrelevant bullshit as a first response.
Well given that it includes non covid deaths you’d kind of expect it to…
Given it also shows up ion the non covid table the cause is far more likely to not be covid.
You also seem to be missing the point, I’m not saying the vax doesn’t provide protection, I’m saying it causes death.
Would you recommend taking up smoking as a weight loss measure to prevent health problems? There’s plenty of evidence it causes weight loss.
im thinking of taking up smoking at age 65 for the stroke-protection value!
That protection may be the result of earlier death
Assuming it is showing a lower rate…I can’t be bothered looking.
May was supposedly the month that you believe all the vaxxed started dropping dead
All cause deaths Unvaccinated in May 44/100,000y
All cause deaths Vaccinated in May 6.1/100,000y
There is no way any sane person could look at this data and make themselves believe that the vaccine is killing people at a greater rate than it is saving them
That depends on if it keeps killing them at the same or increasing rate, and if covid keeps killing them at the same or reducing rate, doesn’t it.
You really are hung up on that single factor thingy aren’t you…
It must hurt to find out your profession is bsing you…
So you are imagining that the trend of a converging difference between the two groups will continue in a linear fashion until the unvaxxed group starts dying in higher numbers than the vax?
Rather than this just being a function of waning vax effect, reduced pathogenicity of the virus, and death of the vulnerable
Of course its possible, but it hasn’t happened and it seems far, far, far less likely
You are basing your decision on imaginary data that doesn’t exist, by extrapolating a linear trend that is almost undoubtedly not going to continue
Can you explain that a bit more simply, you seem to be hiding your lack of knowledge with obfuscation…
And I actually think YOU are the one imagining a trend of converging difference.
what are you having difficulty understanding?
The unvaxxed were dying at 8x the rate of the vaxxed in May
The unvaxxed were dying at 4x the rate of the vaxxed in October
The rates of death are converging, but unvaxxed remain far, far higher
The only thing I could potentially imagine you believe is that this convergence will continue until the rates flip, and the vaxxed start dying at a greater rate than the unvaxxed
Which I think is not going to happen for the reasons I have explained
you seem to both not understand statistics and be conflating 2 sperate things.
But lets attack your point(using ALL DEATHS DATA) since you like it so much
No they were not dying at 8x the rate
from table 3 of the linked data:
2733 unvaxxed deaths at a rate of 1695/100,000
7605 deaths 21 days post vax 1 at a rate of 4725/100,000
18695 deaths 21 days post second vax at a rate of 847/100,000
Note this is ALL AGES not 18-39.
Also fun fact, the non covid deaths for unvaxxed in may was 2676, so less than a hundred killed by covid for the unvaxxed. That makes covid deaths statistical noise in this data and explains why you have exactly the same trend in the all deaths as the non covid deaths. There simply aren’t many actual covid deaths relatively speaking.
Therefore the higher death rate for unvaxxed is clearly not caused by covid given unvaxxed are still dying at twice the rate of vaxxed when you take out covid deaths from the unvaxxed data.
Why does this happen in the all ages data and not the 18-39? My guess is because the all ages data contains a lot more people too sick to be vaccinated when compared to the 18-39 group of unvaxxed.
Aren’t statistics fun…
So can you stop just making stuff up and link or insert ACTUAL data.
obviously the vax causes death
literally every medication known to man causes death
Its a cost benefit analysis
All cause deaths Unvaccinated in October 285/100,000y
All cause deaths Vaccinated in October 64/1000,000y
Greater than 4x more
I mean come on guys
So is smoking safe?
And the really big question, is that protection that wanes as you freely admitted earlier worth a lifetime of elevated risk of death?
why are you imagining a lifetime of elevated risk of death?
What is the evidential basis for this imaginary belief
It’s kinda the same as the one use use to say it isn’t, but has the benefit of an existing risk now.
But not from covid, see above…
Thats the thing about statistics for complicated multi variable things. They can mislead you.
The exact opposite seems true based on the data below…
So how many of those deaths were from covid? THat seems the relevant number to the discussion?
I have been following the weekly Vaccine Surveillance Report issued by the UK Health Security Agency for some time now.
The report for Week 1, 2022 had a strange (to me) note towards the end:
Now, I’m no mathematician, so maybe there are good statistical reasons for this move.
But to my untrained (and cynical) eye, it looked a bit like a white-flag-waving exercise to me.
Would be happy to be educated otherwise.
Here’s the link to the report……the tables comparing cases, emergency admissions, and deaths for the vaxxed/unvaxxed make for interesting reading…but of course you must read the explanatory notes accompanying them which are designed to convince you that your are not seeing what you think you are seeing 🙂
either white flag waving (because untenable to maintain claims of efficacy) or preparing for a situation that bjw is alluding to – where hospitalisations and death might more and more convincingly begin to rise due to the shots.
either way, clearly the decision was made that there was more to be lost – than to be gained- by continuing to publish. In any case, the persuaded/pressured >80% Britons into the experiment, so the job is done anyway. The <20% who have not taken the bait are clearly not going to be persuaded by some obscure and clearly dubious modelling of wha would have been
Fuck cunt, what do you do for work? Must be a complete fuckin doddle if you have this much time to convince yourself to be this fuckin retarded and post about it endlessly day after day lol. You’re even getting destroyed by Coming and that cunt is full blown nuffy.
Funniest shit I’ve read on here though was you the other day “fuck off and leave us alone” lol fuck you’re a sad cunt.
“fuck off and leave us alone” lol fuck you’re a sad cunt.
I couldn’t agree more…
Why do you keep showing up?
To laugh at you spastics. The insane shit that gets posted here is some of the most fringe tard shit I’ve ever seen on the internet.
And seriously, how do you have time to post here so much?
I was hard posting in here when I was off work but geez, my post count has sure dropped off since I’ve gone back to work, meanwhile, you’re still here day in day out saying the same shit over and over and over and over. Don’t you have anything better to do? It’s sad man, nearly as sad as that geriatric fuck that responded below.
Thought I’d give you a little dopamine hit. Here boy…good boy…well done…
How’s the whinging pom missus of yours? I’m guessing she’ll probably go back to pommie land (good riddance) and leave you here sad and alone and then you’ll hang shit on her on here and MB like you do with your 5 other ex wives (noticing a trend yet? Or is it always them and not you lol).
Fuck you’re a wanker. Don’t believe in vaccines so throw your hat in the ring with these cunts here, who the majority of don’t even believe the virus exists and yet you’re off posting on MB about how you’ve radically modified your lifestyle and became a shut in to avoid the virus.
You’re a fuckin hypocrite poseur shit cunt.
Come on LSWCHP. Admit that is funny shit.
Create the environment for a reduced crowd then use the reduced crowd as an excuse to eliminate the event.
ahahhahahah! how much shit is blasted into the air by the thousands and thousands of tonnes of explosives used by miners every year in WA?
They don’t even try for anything believable anymore.
they realised they don’t have to bother.
He has his disclaimer that he is supportive of the continuation of the event and if the referendum does support the winding up if the Skyworks I suppose he can always blame the unvaccinated for it.
Exactly right. Walking both sides of the street.
I live near the CBD with views of Casino / Gloucester park / Ascot etc. I have lived here just shy of one year and I reckon I’ve seen about 14 lots of fireworks, including midweek.
That is a great oppprtunitu – if ever you fall ill in the future, you can sue the council for causing your illness with constant toxic fireworks!
Fremantle last night.
heya Timbo or Minister Sinister, can you do an article about your recent interview Barry Healy?
Dark horse described this kind of thing on a recent podcast. They called it infantilising society.
Lots of potentially interesting data to mine in COVID-related UK FOI’s:
Also, I find the following Substack commentator to be nicely inquisitive with the data:
Thanks RogerDodger, that sons tack is an interesting read.
I need to be in a more courageous state to tackle the FOI data….
Couldn’t make this up
After 2yrs of practice, you would think they would be getting better.
If you add the total deaths (covid + non-covid) figures for double-vax (<21days + >=21days) and divide by total deaths (double-vax + unvax) you end up with the percentage below by age group.
Note that percentages are lower than the vaccination rates in every age group. This means for every age group the vaccinated people end up with a lower mortality rate (covid + non-covid deaths) than unvaccinated.
If you want a rough idea of how much better off vaccinated. Using recently published vaccination rates below. I will use 50-59yo age group as example. Vaccination rate around 74%. From table above vaxxed make up roughly 46% of all total deaths in that age range.
Vaxxed = 46%/74% = 0.62
Unvaxxed = 54%/26% = 2.07
Unvaxxed:Vaxxed = 2.07:0.62 = 3.34 times more likely to die if unvaxxed
I didn’t know what to do with the single dose stats, but for the sake of argument (some people die from 1st dose before getting a chance to receive 2nd dose) if I include them in the vaxxed category it bumps up percentage from 46% to 57%.
Vaxxed = 57%/74% = 0.77
Unvaxxed = 43%/26% = 1.65
Unvaxxed:Vaxxed = 1.65:0.77 = 2.15 times more likely to die if unvaxxed
There are other statistical quirks such as different vaccines, everyone vaccinated has encountered the immediate risks of vaccination whereas not everyone has come in contact with the virus, etc.
You didn’t do anything with it, the governments pdf you ripped off just doesn’t have it.
is clearly not true in the Official UK dataset linked above.
this is lifted straight from an australian government propaganda piece.
You have clearly demonstrated you in depth statistical knowledge…
search for the below in google:
You are becoming more unhinged by the minute and too dumb to even know how to properly use Google.
The figures are derived from the link you provided above. Table 9.
Deaths by vaccination status, England – Office for National Statistics
That data clearly shows that people 21 days or more past either their first or second vax are dying at a higher rate than the unxaxxed for all the ages from 10-14 to 35-39 as the article claims.
I didn’t bother with the others as it’s effort and irrelevant to the discussion.
For anyone who wants to verify this for themselves, the easiest way to extract this data from table 9 is divide the personyears by the number of deaths giving a personyears per death. Higher being better obviously.
Or if you need it as a rate as shown in the other tables, divide deaths by personyears and multiply by 100,000 for rate per 100,000 personyears.
And what is it you think
is actually telling you? WIthout any indication of the numbers of people in each group it definitely isn’t a rate.
Kudos to you for finding that data which implies the death rates for vaccines are perhaps higher than advertised. You still haven’t answered the question on whether the vaccine is worth taking.
Semantics. It is a proportion of deaths between vaxxed and unvaxxed. A “to date” calculation which is essentially what your post is about.
It is clear that older people are much more likely to die if they are unvaxxed. But I admit that after including 1st dose deaths in one of the younger group calculations that younger unvaxxed people are less likely to die so far.
The evidence seems pretty strong at this point that getting the covid vaccine is killing more people under 40 than it is saving, and by a significant margin. People over that age group require more detailed info than I have looked at. People with underlying health conditions it may also hold true for.
This is also relatively short term and can only become worse given the protection from covid definitely falls to nothing over time and we don’t know if the risk of death from the vaccine does or not. It clearly seems to increase for the first 21 days at least from the available data., but there is no 60 day, 90 day or longer data to compare with.
So to put it bluntly, you’d have to be crazy to get it under 40, and I wouldn’t get it under 50 at least from the available data. If someone does a more detailed study on the cause of these additional deaths and find that vaxxed people are 20x more likely to die from myocarditis, strokes, blood clots or anything else then I wouldn’t recommend any ages take it, and I’m pretty sure most doctors would agree with me.
Coming tried to argue above that this is because there are more people who are sicker in the vax group than the unvaxxed group. If this was the case then the overall deaths in that age range would be unchanged from before covid vaccinations started.
This article and this one make a pretty strong case that the death rates of young people have not remained constant but have significantly increased from the pre vaccination rates and the data above show that is predominantly in those that are vaccinated.
Anecdotally, how many ball boys have collapsed at the tennis previously? And things like that aren’t captured in the above data at all, only deaths.
No, a particularly common error for people who don’t understand statistics. If 90% of the population is vaxxed you expect 90% of deaths to be vaxxed people and seeing a total of 90% of deaths being vaxxed would mean it has no effect. If 80% of deaths were vaxxed people it would halve the death rate and if it was 95% it would double the death rate but in all 3 cases the number of vaxxed people dying is more than 4 times the number of unvaxxed people dying.
Absolute numbers of deaths mean nothing about how effective something is.
And that killing more people than it is saving is in the UK, which had a fairly high covid infection rate. In australia with it’s much lower rate at least until the last month it would be INSANE to take the vax under 40.
as usual – 80%-90% of the population is insane or are happy enough to go along with the insanity, with some mild incevisation. Go along to get along, and all that.
housing, migration, share market, etc. this is very profitable
I don’t understand statistics hey. I know enough to know a vaccinated person is at much higher risk of dying within a few weeks of the vaccine, and that using a time-based rate would grossly exaggerate the death rate. I get vaccinated and two months later when all the risks have subsided I am only counted as being vaccinated for two months, and get counted as ten months towards the unvaccinated.
Also go and take a look at Table 4 in the July dataset. Explain to me why the non-covid were high in January and dropped to zero in July. Could this be another mysterious case of non-covid deaths perfectly aligning with Covid deaths?
I do agree about young people not taking the vaccine. I just don’t agree with your attempted exaggeration of it. The numbers are a lot closer than you make it out to be and that is without everybody having caught the virus.
freddy, there are two issues in the above that I’m trying to think through:
I think it is more like two/eight as data is Jan-Oct.
seems entirely appropriate. Before you were jabbed you had unjabbed risk of dying. After you were jabbed on Oct, you begin to have jabbed risk of dying.
(we’ll ignore the fact that, being a few months older you have a slightly higher risk of dying anyway)
what is wrong with this?
maybe it will fall over time. We don’t know this, do we? In fact, this is what we’re trying to find out from inspecting the data.
also, to the extent that if falls over time because those who have previously died are no longer at risk of death … that’s not really a good thing, is it?
As per my comment above – Even if you are right about the 2 week thing, that doesn’t seem to be a good thing. It might be comforting to each individual, in retrospect, when they have made it past 2 weeks. But for those looking to decide whether to take the jab, this doesn’t seem to be a benefit.
also, there isn’t really any long term data, so we don’t know if the 2-week mortality spike doesn’t also have analogues 18mo or 30mo down the track (say 18mo is how long it takes to get to [acute liver failure]; 30mo to [insert some other type of hypothetical delayed-action disaster])
If there were any significant ongoing risks of vaccines we would already know about it. Waiting for BJW to jump in and pretend this article proves it does exist but re-read my comment about July data set. The number of non-covid deaths were high in January and close to zero in July for both vaxxed and non-vaxxed. I could not see that same data in the latest dataset.
No death is a good thing but that emotion has no bearing on the death rate discussion 🙂
What the odds on death rate being close to zero after a few months and rising again after 18months?
We also don’t fully know the long term effects after contracting the virus. There are some recent stats that show an elevated risk of type-1 diabetes 12 months after contracting the virus. Time will tell whether those stats are dominated by unvaxxed who are more likely to end up with the severe Covid illness.
thats not my point. My point is that if the vax takes out some large number of users (say 2%) over the first 1, 2 or 3 years, with the remaining 98% experiencing normal/baseline mortality rate, that is a bad result for vax safety.
seems like quite a plausible possible outcome to me.
Depends on the mechanism of action, but if it’s something like underminig of immune system, then it could be like aids. Could be like asbestos exposure, etc. could take years.
One thought. Despite all the soothing propaganda, heart inflammation is not a good thing. Suppose all the current young victims of that expire prematurely over the next 30 years due to excessive early strain on their hearts. People currently in their teens and 20s dying in their 50s.
Seems plausible to me. Not a good Vax outcome.
could you really dumb this down for me? I’m trying but not following.
The non-Covid death “rates” were 10+ higher in January and drop off over time. This coincided with the Covid wave in UK.
May be a good time to talk about South Africa. Click on link below and scroll halfway down and look at the graphs on Excess Deaths. Note that the Excess Deaths (non-covid deaths) perfectly line up with the covid waves. The last wave possible confirmation of the Peachy hypothesis that Omicron maybe not as mild as what it is being made out to be.
Report on Weekly Deaths in South Africa | South African Medical Research Council (samrc.ac.za)
The point being are these non-covid deaths really non-Covid deaths? I know a forum comprising of people who believe the (of-)Covid deaths are being overstated and don’t want to know about the possibility of the covid numbers being understated.
oh, ok! Now I see what you’re gunning for!
the SAf article is good in this regard because it shows excess deaths rather than all deaths (as the uk data)
obviously SAf is not UK & their quality of reporting may be different, so it’s possible that south African Covid deaths are understated. I’d personally be very very surprised if UK or US or EZFKA “covid deaths” are understated.
Also it would be good to see the UK death data longer term. The January spike could perhaps be seasonal and observable in years prior to covid.
Some US states did. I recall NY was estimated to have understated by around 60% in first wave based on excess deaths.
The Excess Death discussion gets very muddied because flu deaths were near zero for last two years, then other factors come into it like people not receiving adequate health care for other issues, suicides etc.
No, the absolute number of deaths was 10 times higher, For unvaxxed, mostly because there were almost 10 times as many people who were unvaxxed.
You seem to not understand correctly what a rate is.
The unemployment rate is 4% not 200,000 people.
It appears that Google is not the only thing you are incapable of using correctly. Table 4 column E and Column S. Are they rates? Do they drop significantly between January and July?
Ok. I realise I am the muppet his time and Table 4 is the covid death rates.
The are still questions to be answered on correct table 5. Why are unvaxx death rates high and falling? whereas vaxx rates are low and rising?
Table 4 is ALL DEATHS.
I have explained this multiple times.
The RATES are not. The absolute numbers are.
And it is because more people are getting the vaccine.
If 0% of people are vaccinated then no vaccinated people can die.
If 100 % of people are vaccinated all the deaths must be vaccinated people, as you move from one to the other the number goes from none of the people to all of the people.
I am talking about the July dataset. It says “Rate per 100,000 population”. Are you saying it is not a rate?
They have unvaxxed death rate dropping from 66.1 in Feb down to 23.7 in July. And two-dose vaxxed death rate rising from 4.8 to 14.6 over the same period.
Colum E is person years, not a rate. It is effectively equivalent of how many people are in that vaxxed state.
So vaxxed(more than 21 days post second) goes up, unvaxxed goes down, and the intermediate ones are a dogs breakfast that depends on what happenned in the previous few weeks.
Column I is the last one with data, so S is nothing?
Really? Based on what exactly? And that would be a medical question not a statistical one.
To use a really blunt comparison, am I at risk of dying from aids more 2 weeks after being infected with HIV or years later? Am i more at risk from dying of smoking related illness when I smoke the cigarette or decades later?
It depends entirely on why the vaccines might be killing people.
I assume you are talking about unvaccinated deaths going from 52,353 to 2,149?
The vast majority of that is because the number of people who were unvaccinated is far lower in july.
3,052,744 person years in january, 763,000 in july.
This is why rates matter and not absolute numbers.
The rate per person has gone from 2400 to 1400 and is most likely because more people die in winter, of all causes.
the number of vaxxed deaths in july were 29,357 from almost 2 million person years up from 80 in january. For the inverse reason of unvaxxed above.
This only true if you use absolute numbers as you did, not if you use rates per person in the vaccinated state if I am understanding what you are saying correctly.
Anyone who doesn’t die in the first week or 2 is VERY UNLIKELY to have their death linked DIRECTLY to the vaccine they had earlier. The officially identified deaths are therefore all in the early weeks.
This is even without Health authorities actively trying to hide these problems.
The statistic show a much higher problem beyond 21 days. This is why this sort of statistical analysis is done for literally years before drugs are approved in a post thalidomide world. Thalidomide was never directly identified as a cause of birth defects, it merely increased the rate massively when the statistical analysis was done.
Asbestos is the same, and smoking…
Nah. You should read about the bovine drug Pfizer produced. It caused the calves of the parents to haemmorhage to death. The long term effects of these drugs won’t be truly know for another 30 years or more.
i think that is definitely right. Moreover, I think that it would take an extraordinary amount of luck for there not to be significant long term side effects on a very large scale.
I mean, while “Pfizer” is nice shorthand, remember that we are dealing not just with Pfizer. Globally there are 6 or 8 different concoctions that have been squirted into billions of bodies.
if the makers of each of those 8 different hastily-developed chemical cocktails weren’t even able to make them work particularly well at the one thing they were aiming for …it would be absolutely remarkable if, in designing the cocktails, they were able to consider and avoid all possible serious side-effects over the next 30+ years of the users’ lives.
in other words – there is one way to get it right and millions of ways to fuck up. Each of them didn’t even manage to get the one thing right. The probability is just vanishingly small that each of them managed to avoid all the ways to fuck up.
There is zero long-term data at this point, that is an undisputable fact. Regardless of whether you are pro or anti.
Exactly right. People who say there have been no long term Vax side effects are talking about the short term. We need to consider elevated mortality over decades. Children with pericarditis now all dying in 30 years time.
The obfuscation by big pharma and governmentabout this stuff is disgusting and infuriating.
So then, the vaccine and the disease both cause heart problems that could kill younguns in 30 years, what are we supposed to do?
Riddle me that cunt.
Er….No. Healthy young people DO NOT get severe covid and hospitalised. Heart problems from viruses are very very rare in young healty people because the virus almost never gets to the bloodstream due to young healthy immune systems (immunoglobin A and lymphocytes prouced by the thymus) stopping the virus in its tracks in the upper respiratory system.
The shots are delivering the code for spike protein directly into the bloodstream where it can travel to every organ in the body. The mRNA is maniputated in the lab to make the resulting spike protein look like a human protein (methyl pseudouridine) so the spike protein stays in the body longer and in bigger quantities, more than enough to cause a lot of damage.
Might be quicker than that, the reason why mRNA vaccines had not been approved in the past was because the test subjects had all died within 5 years of receiving it …..
Interested in the source on that, as haven’t heard that one before.