As we see from my unscientific blue trend line (I haven’t had the time do dive into the spreadsheets yet), the probability of death for the triple+ vaccinated keeps growing with time.
I think it was Dr Mike Yeadon who said absolutely ages ago that anyone who took those jabs would be dead within five years. I think he's modified his view due to the poor quality control of manufacturer around the world but it seems that his basic theory is pretty sound. At the time I didn't believe it would be possible for all those people to die but it certainly looks as if it's moving in that direction. And yet many people are still lining up to take further doses whilst refusing to believe unusual amounts of people are dying or justifying the deaths by saying dumb things like "tragedies happen all the time" or "young people have always died" or "gosh, that was a rare cancer".
I think most the people you say are “refusing to believe” that people are dying haven’t heard a peep about excess mortality in vaccinees. The news outlets they limits themselves to are staying mum, and the consequent ignorance is deep.
I agree but it is impossible to enlighten them - I have tried! They tend to assume that if the information hasn't come from the BBC or similar then it is simply right-wing conspiracy theory untruths. I gave a Guardian reader a copy of a letter by the Surgeon General of Florida where he said the jabs were unsafe. My friend wasn't having it - apparently the Surgeon General of Florida is a right-wing nutcase who was interviewed by Steve Bannon so anything he says can be ignored. The mainstream media have done a good job of discrediting anyone and anything that goes against the official narrative. It's quite exhausting!
Absolutely! Media have managed to create a reaction that is akin to someone having an infectious disease that causes people to fearfully move away from anything that has been designated the enemy, instead of thoughtfully, examining what it is, that being said, and why. They refuse to even look in the direction of people and sources that have been designated”right wing” or similar ( in their mind) slurs. It’s such a knee-jerk reaction that there is no space to insert a fact or a little bit of logical thinking.
The percentages of All Cause Deaths 18-39 with Three or More Doses of Vaccine and those with an unvaccinated status are pretty much stable from August 2022 in the graph. It would be interesting to know the extent if any of excess mortality in this age group and to correlate that figure with the number of deaths with three or more vaccines since in percentage terms that's the growth area. How does that compare with absolute terms? That said, ONS statistics involving the entire population of UK or of England and Wales have been called into question so caution is probably needed although having said that, 30% of this cohort being unvaccinated seems credible.
If the vaccines were doing their job for any reasonable period of time, these numbers would be impossible. I'm inclined to believe that the apparent disproportionate amount of deaths among the vaccinated may be due to the fact that most people with known risk conditions get vaccinated – but that must also mean that the vaccine isn't doing its job for them.
As I think Thomas is saying, the current theory is that it is the healthy who are more likely to get jabbed, because vaccination is known to be risky for those with some chronic health conditions. Mind you, I'm not sure how this has actually panned out with this particular jabbification because they appeared to be saying it was safe for everyone. Absolutely everyone I knew with chronic health issues was desperate to get it.
The healthy vaccinee effect is most likely a thing and applicable here, but at the same time those who have well defined risks that have been flagged when it comes to COVID have mostly ensured they have gotten vaccinated, unless their health is so poor that they are advised not to get any vaccination. So those two things will pull the overall health profile of the vaccinated in different directions. Regardless, in either case, if the vaccine was working as advertised, we should not be seeing these kinds of numbers, even if they're not adjusted for health profile.
If the vaccine was working as advertised, especially for those who had a health profile that made it especially important to get it, there's just no way the numbers would turn out like this.
Jabbification! Great word. Yes, correct, safe for all, especially for the vulnerable and the pregnant people. They obviously had enough of caring for the elderly and we have far too many kids anyway.
From memory, Alex Berenson (et al) makes a strong evidence based case that “the unhealthy vaccine” is myth not reality. Crudely, the data suggests the least healthy segment of society do not get vaccinated the most. Which makes the trend line even more concerning. For example: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1699417264598978934
"This means the deaths among those triple+ vaccinated are almost 35% higher than should be expected if the vaccine did nothing."
I present the following as a quick exercise in speculaitng on excess deaths. Let's look at a totally different data set (Florida) and only excess deaths. Indeed, they are "refined" using only a few very general assumptions. In a typical year, FL total deaths change maybe 1% or so. Here are the full-year excess deaths for past three years:
2020 = +16%, 2021 = + 26%, 2022 = + 15% (rounded). [NB: compared to 2019 as a base year!!!]
Now my "analysis": We know that the jabs were not even released before December 2020 and uptake had hardly begun. As a simplifying assumption then, can we agree that no deaths would be caused by the jab in 2020?
In fairness, I have no information on causes of death, nor even of "vaccine" uptake (I'm assuming 2/3, as that is a commonly bandied about figure).
If you average 2021 and 2022, that is about 21% (rounded). Let's pretend that the excess deaths are mostly among the 2/3 of the populace who was jabbed. Since the 21% figure is for the entire population, we then "credit" it from the 1/3 unjabbed and add it to the jabbed cohort:
22% * 1.333 = 29% (rounded). That's only 6 points lower than Thorsteinn's England figure.
I claim no special skills here. For those interested, what I've done, I'd argue, is not all that different from the classroom exercise that famous physicist Fermi had his students do. Google "How many piano tuners are there in Chicago?" for details.
Might I suggest that the increased excess death in 2020 was due to the death protocols mandated in the hospitals, ie, remdesivir and intubation. Furthermore, up till then, those in need, especially seniors, would obtain "early treatment" for cold and flu symptoms. Early treatment was withheld under the mandated death protocols. I would conclude there was no deadly novel virus, only a deadly mandated medical protocol.
Part of the reason I am asking this is that I remember months ago looking at some graphs that seemed to indicate that those who had 2 jabs where less likely to die that those who had had one or 3+. I cant remember the comparison to the un-jabbed on those particular graphs.
You could extrapolate from the graph if you assume that all those who are neither unvaccinated nor have taken three or more jabs fall into a category of two jabs, which is not unreasonable. This would give you a stable line below the solid brown and orange lines at approx 28% (being 100% - 42.6% and - 30%). If you do a similar rough and ready visual estimation for the data points from Aug 22 onwards, then deaths in this group account for roughly 25-30% which looks significantly better than the rates for the 3+ group.
I think it was Dr Mike Yeadon who said absolutely ages ago that anyone who took those jabs would be dead within five years. I think he's modified his view due to the poor quality control of manufacturer around the world but it seems that his basic theory is pretty sound. At the time I didn't believe it would be possible for all those people to die but it certainly looks as if it's moving in that direction. And yet many people are still lining up to take further doses whilst refusing to believe unusual amounts of people are dying or justifying the deaths by saying dumb things like "tragedies happen all the time" or "young people have always died" or "gosh, that was a rare cancer".
I think most the people you say are “refusing to believe” that people are dying haven’t heard a peep about excess mortality in vaccinees. The news outlets they limits themselves to are staying mum, and the consequent ignorance is deep.
I agree but it is impossible to enlighten them - I have tried! They tend to assume that if the information hasn't come from the BBC or similar then it is simply right-wing conspiracy theory untruths. I gave a Guardian reader a copy of a letter by the Surgeon General of Florida where he said the jabs were unsafe. My friend wasn't having it - apparently the Surgeon General of Florida is a right-wing nutcase who was interviewed by Steve Bannon so anything he says can be ignored. The mainstream media have done a good job of discrediting anyone and anything that goes against the official narrative. It's quite exhausting!
Absolutely! Media have managed to create a reaction that is akin to someone having an infectious disease that causes people to fearfully move away from anything that has been designated the enemy, instead of thoughtfully, examining what it is, that being said, and why. They refuse to even look in the direction of people and sources that have been designated”right wing” or similar ( in their mind) slurs. It’s such a knee-jerk reaction that there is no space to insert a fact or a little bit of logical thinking.
It would appear that ignorance amoung the triple vaccinated is a soon-to-be, self-correcting problem.
It seems reasonable to assume that the more poison one injects, the more damage & death is sure to follow.
The percentages of All Cause Deaths 18-39 with Three or More Doses of Vaccine and those with an unvaccinated status are pretty much stable from August 2022 in the graph. It would be interesting to know the extent if any of excess mortality in this age group and to correlate that figure with the number of deaths with three or more vaccines since in percentage terms that's the growth area. How does that compare with absolute terms? That said, ONS statistics involving the entire population of UK or of England and Wales have been called into question so caution is probably needed although having said that, 30% of this cohort being unvaccinated seems credible.
If the vaccines were doing their job for any reasonable period of time, these numbers would be impossible. I'm inclined to believe that the apparent disproportionate amount of deaths among the vaccinated may be due to the fact that most people with known risk conditions get vaccinated – but that must also mean that the vaccine isn't doing its job for them.
As I think Thomas is saying, the current theory is that it is the healthy who are more likely to get jabbed, because vaccination is known to be risky for those with some chronic health conditions. Mind you, I'm not sure how this has actually panned out with this particular jabbification because they appeared to be saying it was safe for everyone. Absolutely everyone I knew with chronic health issues was desperate to get it.
The healthy vaccinee effect is most likely a thing and applicable here, but at the same time those who have well defined risks that have been flagged when it comes to COVID have mostly ensured they have gotten vaccinated, unless their health is so poor that they are advised not to get any vaccination. So those two things will pull the overall health profile of the vaccinated in different directions. Regardless, in either case, if the vaccine was working as advertised, we should not be seeing these kinds of numbers, even if they're not adjusted for health profile.
If the vaccine was working as advertised, especially for those who had a health profile that made it especially important to get it, there's just no way the numbers would turn out like this.
Jabbification! Great word. Yes, correct, safe for all, especially for the vulnerable and the pregnant people. They obviously had enough of caring for the elderly and we have far too many kids anyway.
From memory, Alex Berenson (et al) makes a strong evidence based case that “the unhealthy vaccine” is myth not reality. Crudely, the data suggests the least healthy segment of society do not get vaccinated the most. Which makes the trend line even more concerning. For example: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1699417264598978934
All this discussion about the "unhealthy" seems like circular logic to me. The unhealthy already existed in the base line. So....
"This means the deaths among those triple+ vaccinated are almost 35% higher than should be expected if the vaccine did nothing."
I present the following as a quick exercise in speculaitng on excess deaths. Let's look at a totally different data set (Florida) and only excess deaths. Indeed, they are "refined" using only a few very general assumptions. In a typical year, FL total deaths change maybe 1% or so. Here are the full-year excess deaths for past three years:
2020 = +16%, 2021 = + 26%, 2022 = + 15% (rounded). [NB: compared to 2019 as a base year!!!]
Now my "analysis": We know that the jabs were not even released before December 2020 and uptake had hardly begun. As a simplifying assumption then, can we agree that no deaths would be caused by the jab in 2020?
In fairness, I have no information on causes of death, nor even of "vaccine" uptake (I'm assuming 2/3, as that is a commonly bandied about figure).
If you average 2021 and 2022, that is about 21% (rounded). Let's pretend that the excess deaths are mostly among the 2/3 of the populace who was jabbed. Since the 21% figure is for the entire population, we then "credit" it from the 1/3 unjabbed and add it to the jabbed cohort:
22% * 1.333 = 29% (rounded). That's only 6 points lower than Thorsteinn's England figure.
I claim no special skills here. For those interested, what I've done, I'd argue, is not all that different from the classroom exercise that famous physicist Fermi had his students do. Google "How many piano tuners are there in Chicago?" for details.
Might I suggest that the increased excess death in 2020 was due to the death protocols mandated in the hospitals, ie, remdesivir and intubation. Furthermore, up till then, those in need, especially seniors, would obtain "early treatment" for cold and flu symptoms. Early treatment was withheld under the mandated death protocols. I would conclude there was no deadly novel virus, only a deadly mandated medical protocol.
Are there graphs anywhere that show the same information but for people who had 2 doses?
There are. You can see them in the post I'm linking to.
Oh great - that would be really interesting to see thank you!
Interesting point - roughly a quarter of all cause deaths are excluded because they fall outside the two categories.
Part of the reason I am asking this is that I remember months ago looking at some graphs that seemed to indicate that those who had 2 jabs where less likely to die that those who had had one or 3+. I cant remember the comparison to the un-jabbed on those particular graphs.
You could extrapolate from the graph if you assume that all those who are neither unvaccinated nor have taken three or more jabs fall into a category of two jabs, which is not unreasonable. This would give you a stable line below the solid brown and orange lines at approx 28% (being 100% - 42.6% and - 30%). If you do a similar rough and ready visual estimation for the data points from Aug 22 onwards, then deaths in this group account for roughly 25-30% which looks significantly better than the rates for the 3+ group.
Thats a very clever way of looking at it - thank you!