Pandemic threat? Anyone else concerned?

What's the useful info from that chart ^^^^ ? Without knowing rates, as opposed to raw numbers, I don't see the point. At the extreme, if 100% of the population got the vaxx, all of the deaths would be in the vaxxed population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
Well, this gave me something to think about. I can avoid flying but what about medical care? I had knee surgery a couple of months ago, my wife had shoulder surgery last week and has a dentist appt this week.

Must be the Common Cold that got him....as the new narrative pushes...beware of the sniffles, unless you are not Vaxxed...
 
What's the useful info from that chart ^^^^ ? Without knowing rates, as opposed to raw numbers, I don't see the point. At the extreme, if 100% of the population got the vaxx, all of the deaths would be in the vaxxed population.


Well for one, its 'Covid 19 Deaths...." so I guess if you assume the jab does nothing to protect you, you are 100% correct. And it clearly shows the more you got jabbed the higher percentage of deaths.
You can make it hard if you want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ssayer and rolibr24
And it clearly shows the more you got jabbed the higher percentage of deaths.
Sorry I'm being dense, how does the chart show percentage of deaths based on jabbed or unjabbed status? I believe the data set says the jabbed have a lower death rate from covid than unjabbed. One caveat, the data set does give rates, but they're based on person-years, giving an opportunity to cook the raw data. Here's my reasoning and maybe somebody can tell me where it's wrong....

- On the chart giving raw death counts, the red bar is the sum of the orange and yellow bars, so when comparing the death count for jabbed vs. unjabbed, only the red and green bars are relevant.

- Looking at the May 2023 data, the death counts are correctly shown on the chart. But the stated rate for covid-19 deaths in the data set is:
Unvaxxed: 46.1 per 100,000 person-years
Vaxxed: 22.7 per 100,000 person years

Isn't this saying the vaxxed death rate is lower???

The rate for non-covid deaths in May 2023 is stated as:
Unvaxxed: 901.6 per 100,000 person-years
Vaxxed: 840.6 per 100,000 person years

Close enough to think that vaxx status might have nothing to do with non-covid deaths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigredfish
Are you looking at Table #1? If so yes I see the same

What makes no sense to me is the rate as derived from that "person-years" calc

The other odd thing is the UK shows their worst spikes of Covid Deaths in April of 2020 (obviously NO vaxxed) and Jan 2021 (very few vaxxed as jabs had just begun), then tails off dramatically.
So over that period, say Apr 2020 through Jan 2021, most EVERYONE was unvaxxed

From lets say Fall or 21 through May 23, from what I've found, roughly 85-90% of England citizens over age 12 had been jabbed at least once.
So lets say 90% jabbed, 10% not jabbed.

My eyeball data say thats about what the chart showed as to Covid deaths. So again it tells me the jab was not effective

Did they change how they determined "died of" vs "died with"?

UK-covid-deaths.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ssayer
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ssayer
What makes no sense to me is the rate as derived from that "person-years" calc
I'm very skeptical of that. The obvious defense is that it's an accepted standard. So is the vaxx effective rate that vastly overstates effectiveness to anybody who doesn't understand what it means, which I'd guess is 99+% of the population. With the data set not defining how they came up with the person years, I myself with no statics credentials can think of multiple ways to define it to get a desired result.
Did they change how they determined "died of" vs died with?
Wouldn't surprise me. First job is to get the desired result. Next job is to present the appearance of correctly and honestly backing it up.
 
. Reserved for data crunching
 
Ughhh then you have the whole lifestyle factor.
Jabbed enough times to get the free toaster and likely stayed home, vs unjabbed and was out finding bars that hadn’t been shut down?

And then there’s the whole natural immunity factor:
How many/percentage of each cohort got the Flu and had what we now know to be some, even good immunity? And which variant? This last few have been mild, the original was more potent….

complicated stuff.

Total deaths shown in the time period
Unjabbed 6836
Jabbed 48,370
 


Um...
"Overall, the study suggests, SARS-CoV-2 has become more infectious and less virulent through viral domestication"

Yes it did. Just as any reccurring human virus has once it infects a large portion of the population. They evolve and typically become more contagious but less lethal. This has been known for ? 200 years? and predicted by many 3 years ago.

Correlating this to vaccine uptake is, well, taking advantage of those who don;t know any better.
 
Florida State Surgeon General Calls for Halt in the Use of COVID-19 Mrna Vaccines
January 03, 2024

Tallahassee, Fla. — On December 6, 2023, State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo sent a letter to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Robert M. Califf and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Dr. Mandy Cohen regarding questions pertaining to the safety assessments and the
exit disclaimer icon
discovery of billions of DNA fragments per dose of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

The Surgeon General outlined concerns regarding nucleic acid contaminants in the approved Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, particularly in the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes, and Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA. Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells. The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into human cells.

More to read below.

 
Review Shows COVID-19 Vaccines "Significantly" More Deadly Than Flu Shots: Sen. Ron Johnson
Review Shows COVID-19 Vaccines "Significantly" More Deadly Than Flu Shots: Sen. Ron Johnson | ZeroHedge

An analysis of Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data indicates that the COVID-19 vaccines are “significantly” more deadly than the flu vaccine, according to Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).



The review was conducted by the senator’s staff and involved a certain level of assumption given that no publicly available data exist regarding how many flu vaccine doses were administered in the United States over the past 10 years.

Using the number of distributed doses to generate that figure, they found that the number of deaths per million doses of the COVID-19 vaccines (25.5) far exceeded those estimated for the flu vaccine (0.46).

“Using the midpoint assumption that 70 percent of distributed flu vaccines were administered, the 25.5 deaths per million doses of the COVID-19 vaccine represents a 55-fold increase over the flu vaccine deaths per million doses,” Mr. Johnson wrote in a Dec. 21 letter to the heads of the Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“This is a shocking difference and only adds to the growing evidence of safety signals that are screaming to be taken seriously,” he added.

Mr. Johnson cited the study as part of a request for internal studies, documents, and data surrounding the COVID-19 vaccines’ development and safety.
“When it comes to responding to my data requests on the adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccines, your arrogant lack of transparency has been unprecedented, irresponsible, and completely unacceptable,” chided the senator, who serves as the top Republican on the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
“Over the course of the last 32 months, I have raised questions, sent formal requests, and conducted oversight on the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines.

“Instead of addressing my legitimate questions and requests for information, you and other public health officials continue to promote the COVID-19 vaccines as safe and effective and often use the number of vaccine doses administered as support for that misleading claim.”

He also requested that the agencies advise whether they were aware of and had acted on another recent study published in Nature that has raised additional concerns about the safety of the Pfizer vaccine—namely, whether it produces “off-target,” or unintended, proteins that could potentially elicit harmful immune responses.
The administration officials have been given until Jan. 18 to produce the requested information.
 
What do Trump supporters have to look forward to in 2024...

Trump supporters will celebrate Trump owning the libs by taking the perfect vaccine and then dying of heart attacks.

Yeah that is a problem for him, and us. An unfortunate part of his personality is that's it's almost impossible for him to admit he made a mistake, so I don't like him still being all in on those jabs either. If he made it to office I would like to see a surgeon general like Joseph Ladapo.
 
1 in 2 people will get Cancer, Wow

 
Last edited:
More of what we already knew, but with more documents to validate it. Conspiracy theory turned fact, again....

They're getting closer to the whole truth, even mention Ralph Baric of UNC Chapel Hill finally. The father of Covid

US scientists held secret talks with Covid 'Batwoman' amid drive to make coronaviruses more deadly... just before pandemic
US scientists held talks with Covid 'Batwoman' before pandemic broke