The new Public Health England (PHE) Vaccine Surveillance report was released on Thursday, allowing us to update our estimates of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness from real-world data.
Oddly, the report appeared on a new webpage this week, but the old page didn’t include a note to let you know, so it took me a while to discover it had appeared and where it was.
Following last week’s ‘fact check‘ from Full Fatuous – ostensibly of my piece but with some words of admonition for PHE as well, particularly over the accuracy of the population data – a new note appeared in the report: “Interpretation of the case rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated population is particularly susceptible to changes in denominators and should be interpreted with extra caution.” So there you go. All estimates in this post are based on the data PHE uses and are valid insofar as that data is accurate.
As before, the data is just for a four-week period, which, given that the early part of the Delta surge was dominated by the unvaccinated and the latter part has seen infections rise in the vaccinated, seems to me a mistake. A fairer view would cover the whole Delta surge (as with the estimates I make from the data in the Technical Briefings), but in any case the report gives a snapshot of current relative infection rates.
As Full Fatuous pointed out, PHE don’t recommend using this data to estimate vaccine effectiveness, saying it’s “not the most appropriate method” because it’s unadjusted for risk factors (and, inevitably, they don’t provide the data you’d need to adjust it). However, even if not recommended by PHE, it is certainly a valid method of calculating vaccine effectiveness, which is just a figure which states the relative risk reduction in the vaccinated group, as long as you bear in mind its limitations. All vaccine effectiveness estimates have limitations, and while adjusting for confounding factors is in principle important, it is helpful only if done well, and many studies do not do it well. Unadjusted estimates from raw data are a necessary starting point.
Perhaps the key confounder for the estimates of vaccine effectiveness against infection given here is whether people have been previously infected, with a common assumption being that a higher proportion of the unvaccinated will be previously infected, due to it being a potential factor in people’s decision not to be vaccinated. This may well artificially lower the vaccine effectiveness estimates, but since no one has yet produced data showing how antibodies-from-infection split between vaccinated and unvaccinated it is hard to know how far this is the case.
Unvaccinated here means actually unvaccinated, not partially vaccinated or post-jab. Hospitalisation means “cases presenting to emergency care (within 28 days of a positive specimen) resulting in an overnight inpatient admission”.
As England’s drawn-out Delta outbreak drags on, the infection rates in the vaccinated continue to outpace those in the unvaccinated, reducing (unadjusted) vaccine effectiveness further. For the 60s age group, infection rates are 63% higher in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated, up from 53% last week, giving an (unadjusted) vaccine effectiveness of minus-63%. But that has been topped this week by the 40s age group, the vaccinated among whom now have an infection rate no less than 66% higher than the unvaccinated, up from 46% in last week’s report and 27% in the report for the month ending September 5th. Vaccine effectiveness has been heading downward in the 30s age group as well, now just 8%, though interestingly it has actually been increasing in the under-18s. On this data, vaccine protection against serious illness and death appears to be holding up. I have included the two previous tables below for comparison.
With infection rates now, on this data, much higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated, what remaining justification can there be for vaccine passports, vaccine mandates, and any other policy based on the assumption that vaccines protect other people? When will the Government face up to the reality that vaccines provide poor protection against infection, poor protection against transmission, and thus poor protection of others, and so there is no justification for continuing to build up the infrastructure of a two-tier, discriminatory state?
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It isn’t a matter of needing an apartheid state, it’s a matter of wanting one. Fascist thug governments need a hate figure.
First signal of ADE kicking in? Time will tell.
Anecdotally and a very small sample, an unusually high number of people I know of that are double vaxed seem to be suffering unduly from a cold that is circulating. Those of us unvaxed had a couple of sniffles, felt under the weather and bounced back.
Yep my wife has been hammered by two colds. She was like death for days. Kids had a little sniffle and I had barely so much as a sneeze.
It’s twice she has had nasty colds since her vax
Cross-immunity disease enhancement for other coronaviruses? If this is the case then the vaccinated are going to get ‘rater ill’ with what would otherwise be ‘minor colds’ until their ‘protective immunity’ wanes sufficiently (or perhaps longer, because recent research has shown that enhancing antibodies appear to last longer than protective antibodies).
Shame that they didn’t do some proper clinical trials before jabbing the world.
I had a bad cold several weeks ago and felt lousy for some time after. Was I suffering from Long Cold?
Long Cold is perfectly possible if it progresses to sinusitis, which can take weeks or months to resolve and has many of the symptoms of “Long COVID”.
Sounds like a similar thing to I’ve been having this past week. Mine’s been a minor annoyance – been worse for my (admitedly OAP) dad who is double jabbed, and more so for my friend (also double jabbed), who told me in a recent phone chat that he’d been off work (he works in a school but tested -ve for COVID) for a few days.
I managed to go out for my usual lengthy/brisk walks every day and, apart from going through a tissue box in 4 days (my record when I had the flu back in 2013 [after being vaccinated [never again] is one day) during the ‘runny nose’ phase, I’ve gone about my daily routine as normal.
In fact, my appetite has been better than usual and I’ve eaten more to help my body fight off whatever lurgey I caught (presumably) from my parents a week ago. Hopefully fully recovered by tomorrow.
Notably this is the first cold I’ve had in a few years now, where also I’ve haven’t had the flu since 2013, when I (oddly enough) got the flu three times in four years with each year being vaccinated against it, never having before or (as a result) since.
To all, please consider taking Vitamin D, Zinc, and Quercetin daily to prevent a cold. See dr. Zev Zelenko’s protocol. Read up on these simple preventives.
So much lack of clarity isn’t there. And yet study after study shows vitamin D helps our T cell response to corona viruses. Two sisters with serious colds since they were jabbed. Symptoms almost like Covid🤫🤫
the clot-shot does seem to harm the immune system.
It’d be interesting to see case numbers on symptomatic (I mean properly ill not just +ve) cases. An awful lot of children are being pushed to test now + those in certain professions.
Although, I don’t trust anything published by the government or healthcare agencies anymore because of the censorship and coercion that is going on.
I’d also like to know if the treatment regime is identical for vaxed and unvaxed. What are the demographics / health condition of those seriously ill and dying? I.e. is there certainty that we are comparing apples to apples.
As this full horror ADE data leaks out week by week now… I detect a growing finding among real investigators that – depending upon age and other existing health pathogens – it’s going to take at least five vaxx jabs or more to kill-off most of the over 40s…
For sure this will take a period of several years to complete so for the unthinking MSM brainwashed masses the veil of virus variant deceit will reign.
It’s beyond doubt now that these mRNA spike protein produce by the vaxx shots bind onto the endothelial lining of blood vessels and promote blood clots, leading to a range of lethal events such as myocardial infarction, cerebral hemorrhage, heart attacks, stroke and a broad array of other vital organ damage…
The number of call outs for cardiac conditions and strokes is up. It is a shame that the great Pandora journalists who suddenly (were given) the names of world leaders et al who are hiding their money. Something we all knew.
It would be great if these incredibly “smart” journalists provided Covid reality. The stats are there in front of them, yet they continue to ignore.
But the journalists (actually six families that own the world msm) haven’t been given permission to blow the whistle on Covid (yet) like they have been given permission to blow the whistle on all the politicians and country leaders (who were promised a lot if they kept their mouths shut). Now the higher powers are yanking their chains to show who is in charge and the world leaders and the rest have been fooled. They must be slightly ticked off.
all the death data is available on gov’t sites. Just read it. Not a lot we can do about all the manipulation going on food, fuel shortages, no blood vials, no GP visits, 5 million waiting for nonelective surgeries, gas and electricity bills going up, and a government totally prepared to continue ruining the economy. The only question is why?
Those on the ground journalists don’t want to look at the papers. Some of them are likely to be named, too.
private individuals will have to trawl these.
I might choose suicide than mandatory vaccination. I know sufficient about these agents that I’d be genuinely frightened of being injected by any of them.
I don’t want to be alive in VaxPassWorld. That’s the main reason. It’s not going to be ok if we get there. We certainly cannot extract ourselves.
I’m wondering if children and students are being asked to get tested more frequently if they are unvaccinated than if they’ve had the experimental shit? Say, when someone in their peer group or family tests positive? We certainly know they are testing the hell out of young people, and when they want to attend a big event many are having to provide a negative test result if unvaccinated. More testing = more “cases”. Because it makes no other sense that so many young people are testing positive now when that hasn’t been the case previously.
This would be interesting, but only if the ct count of the testing is low enough that it can be sure that the symptomatic person actually has an active covid infection. I’m convinced that many of the positive tests are still false positives from people with a cold.
They don’t see any need to justify it. They’re following WEF Orders so it will be done regardless of “the science” because it has nothing to do with controlling a Low Consequence Infectious Disease.
Well it’s great to know that very soon I’ll be shut out of civil society and my children won’t be allowed in school and I’ll lose my job and we won’t be able to get healthcare or go on holiday for absolutely no fucking reason whatsoever.
I mean at that point one should probably just get it
Yeah that’s the spirit!
Putting on the handcuffs yourself because the psychopath orders you to.
I’m still unjabbed. But if the above was actually a real life scenario then I would take the jab. If this offends you then fine.
That’s an interesting line to take. Just curious, what’s your view on what is really going on?
Honestly I have no idea. However my main issue with the vaccines is the safety. The longer it goes on the more data I have to work with.
As I said, if the scenario the OP talks about was real, I honestly don’t know why someone would put themselves through all that. To prove what? That you can fight the man? Well guess what, you can’t.
I’m personally waiting it out as my kids schooling is not at risk, my job is not at risk, and I can still go out and have a life and travel.
Well, thanks for replying and being honest. I too won’t claim to know the end goal. Though it does seem a lot of very wealthy interest groups are doing well out of this.
Here is my problem with it all though. While I don’t buy the depopulation theory (though the small percentage I give it has risen a little lately), it does look like these vaccines, which will become annual, or 6-monthly etc, are designed to make people sick. And treating the symptoms of long term sick people is very profitable indeed.
Yes, there isn’t enough data in yet to back up the claims, but it is increasingly looking the case.
So I think for many of us here, there are 2 standout reasons why we won’t be getting the jab under any circumstances. Firstly, mass compliance just feeds the beast. And secondly, the price of our health, and our children’s health is not worth it to be allowed into society again. I think we would rather live out in the wilderness with other free people.
So yes, hold out until you’re forced into a choice by all means. Though I do believe they will close the window before the serious damage on peoples health becomes apparent.
Just throwing my thoughts at you 😉
So you would honestly lose your job, your home, take your kids out of school to not take the jab? You’d allow you and your family to be homeless and destitute? I’m sorry I just don’t believe that.
I’m just being honest, I could easily give it the big talk here.
But remember this is a completely hypothetical situation for me. The OP may actually be in that situation right now and I struggle to appreciate that someone would allow that actually happen to themselves rather than take the vaccine.
Do you genuinely believe there is a global conspiracy to harm the population and all these pharmas are in on it? Not a single whistleblower? You think that kind of operation is possible?
Sorry but I don’t.
I completely understand your position but maybe I should clarify mine. Sadly I do feel that the scenario I laid out in the original post is coming. There’s no particular reason to believe things will be any different here than they are in the US, Australia or much of Western Europe. And yes I meant what I said; here’s why. I believe, like you do I think, that the drugs they are touting as ‘vaccines’ are dangerous and I have seen first hand just about every side effect you could mention play out in acquaintances and relations. Truly. I also believe they will leave anyone who submits to them vulnerable to ever worsening versions of the virus and thereby dependent on the state to provide a lifetime of top-ups. I don’t want my children to be anything to do with that. I expect the passports to become a fact of life and what I’m describing is not a society I want my family to be part of. So I’ll find work in some other way and home school if I have to (I’m a teacher); we’ve long written off international travel. I just don’t think you can ever submit to tyranny and I couldn’t bear to let my children watch me do so. Tyrannical systems eventually fall and I want to have my health while I’m waiting for that to happen!
But some countries (Denmark, Norway) have rescinded all their domestic measures including vaccine passes. How does that fit the global narrative?
That’s a great question – I don’t know.
Deliberate ebb & flow in order to prompt questions just like yours.
Same happened in Israel. I knew it wouldn’t last & it didn’t.
Most people don’t know how bad these agents are, even inside Pharma.
On the outside you surely can see how deluded people are?
Theyve been rehearsing something like this for decades. It’s not particularly complicated.
Same formula in every domain.
Worth watching this:
https://youtu.be/d3WUv5SV5Hg
Totally with you, looking forward to living in the wilderness on the same commune some day!
There’s already so much data that you’d need to be insane to voluntarily accept any of them. As a former toxicologist I’m very sure of that. I’ll die before covid19 vaccination, happily.
Your body your choice. But it’s not exactly keeping the Faith is it? 😢
That’s the point to hold the line.
What is coming is even worse.
What’s coming Sandra?
Complete Communist/Fascist state control, across the world.
Mass depopulation, obviously.
No. That way lies hell. At the moment we’re at its gates (no irony intended).
Check out the news roundup
BREAKING: AI-powered DoD data analysis program named “Project Salus” SHATTERS official vaccine narrative, shows A.D.E. accelerating in the fully vaccinated with each passing week – Crack Newz
“The alarming findings show that the vast majority of covid hospitalizations are occurring among fully-vaccinated individuals and that outcomes among the fully vaccinated are growing worse with each passing week.”
Indeed….
Thanks for sharing. Duly forwarded.
Holy cow. Just when we thought things couldn’t get any more definitive…
My DiL and son both double vaccinated earlier this year have had covid, now saying how grateful they are that they had had the vaccination!
I’ve lost count of the number of mugs I know who trotted out this line having caught covid after double jabbings. The cognitive dissonance is strong in these ones!
It’s the standard response – if you point out to one of them who has been ill in bed for a week that someone of their demograpahic wouldn’t be expected to be that ill with it, you just get incomprenension. They believe that it’s beyond question that being spiked makes it less bad than it would have been otherwise.
The stupidity is extraordinary.
Ha ha – a friend of mine after being bedridden for a week actually said ‘think how bad it would have been had I not had the vaccination’ like it was somehow quantifiable……
Hes a friend so I just laughed derisively (inside) and went and went and got another round in…..
With infection rates now, on this data, much higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated, what remaining justification can there be for vaccine passports, vaccine mandates, and any other policy based on the assumption that vaccines protect other people?
As Will himself admits – vaccine effectiveness calculated without taking into account confounding factors is pretty meaningless. However, let us assume these data do mean something. The vaccine effectiveness in the groups most affected by vaccine passports – the under 30s – is extremely high and increasing.
Let’s take a stab at it…
MTF = Male To Female tranny, or perhaps Mindless Twat Fuckery or even maybe Mostly Twaddle Fudgerry?
You should apply to the 77th you’ll then get paid a pittance per post for forum shilling…
To actually turn out and spout the nonsense must be draining for him don’t you think?
The narrative has gone from, vaccines will solve it all, to actually they don’t seem to be stopping transmission, to they don’t stop transmission at all, to, ‘they’re highly effective at stopping serious illness and death…to they don’t seem to have any effect on serious illness and death, to they’re not stopping illness and death, to in fact if you are vaccinated and catch Delta you are more likely to be seriously ill and die!
That the only thing left to grasp onto is the fact that fit young healthy people, who never needed a vaccine, are ‘gasp’ doing well, is pretty sad, but
that said with this stupidity they have likely killed thousands and maimed millions…it will not be forgotten or forgiven.
The narrative has changed very little. Vaccines were highly effective against infection and serious illness. We have now learnt they become less effective against infection after about six months (although they still make a difference).
My comment was – let’s suppose that Will’s analysis actually meant something, even then there is case for vaccine passports. However, Will’s analysis doesn’t mean anything – by his own admission: adjusting for confounding factors is in principle important, the fact that he doesn’t have the data to do that analysis doesn’t make it less important. There are studies that do adjust for confounding factors and they find that vaccines remain effective in all age groups.
“Vaccines were highly effective against infection and serious illness.”
No. Even at the start of this, based on fairly uncontaminated Israeli data, it was noted that the ARR was very low, and that there was this weird uptick in deaths following the introduction of jabbing for the ‘vulnerable’.
Vaccine effectiveness is independent of ARR which varies according to the prevalence at the time and the timescale you are considering (I don’t understand why you continue to ignore this. It is not realistically debateable). However, it would be interesting to see the study you are referring to.
Do I need to post links to studies showing vaccine effectiveness? You are probably familiar with many of them.
Off topic MTF. Why has Boris Johnson been vaccinated, when he’s had Covid-19?
I don’t know about his personal circumstances but there is some evidence that being vaccinated on top of natural immunity is even better protection. To be honest it is more likely he wants to set an example.
Being vaccinated on top of prior immunity is definitely contraindicated with any prior vaccine. It’s reckless in this case, given the mechanism of action. You’ll definitely end up with autoimmune attack. Nasty & can be fatal. A worse risk than naive immunity.
The whole country has been told to “vaccinate” despite immune status. It’s not just him.
If those who have natural immunity don’t take it, then Pfizer loses its market. Everyone will get it eventually, so their vast profits would rapidly dwindle away. They have to deny and undermine NI.
He probably wasn’t actually vaccinated. Many leaders have been caught out having dummy injections.
Indeed, Team Kirsch’s analysis makes it plain that the vaccines kill more people than they save. Worse, they kill across all ages but save only a few who are months at most from death even in the absence of this virus.
There are 200 viruses capable of infecting humans & those near the end of their lives often die with or of such infections because of immuno senescence. It literally cannot to much helped. All of us will be fortunate to go out like that, being reasonable active for our advanced age one week yet dead a fortnight later. I should be so lucky.
The narrative is in your head only so will never change!
The report also shows that during September 78% of deaths were among the vaccinated. As around the same number are double vaccinated that shows an efficacy of…..nothing!
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10654-021-00808-7
Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States
The only studies showing any effectiveness are done on computers, and done by people with a financial vested interest…and most of them are NOT based on the Delta variant.
every ‘breakthrough’ infection is yet another vaccine failure, and they are now the majority of infections.
Finally..point out the countries that have high vaccination rates and where deaths have been less (and if they are so effective, much less) than 2020, when we didn’t have vaccines?
The narrative is in your head only so will never change!
All narratives are in someone’s head. That’s what makes them a narrative and not just a bunch of meaningless data. Actually mine has changed a bit – I learned that vaccines lose some efficacy after 6 months.
The report also shows that during September 78% of deaths were among the vaccinated. As around the same number are double vaccinated that shows an efficacy of…..nothing!
I can’t find how you calculated the 78% but as Will’s own tables clearly show the mortality rate was significantly higher among the non-vaccinated than the vaccinated for all age groups I think there must be a misunderstanding.
Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States
Note that this is correspondence not a peer reviewed paper. It is just a snap shot of the case rate in September. That really doesn’t tell you much about the effectiveness of vaccines – case rates go up and down for all sorts of reasons – although I absolutely accept their point that you can’t rely on vaccines alone to limit cases.
The only studies showing any effectiveness are done on computers,
Yes computers are used to make the calculations – have you got an example where they are done by hand?
and done by people with a financial vested interest…
Argumentum ad hominem
and most of them are NOT based on the Delta variant.
The most recent ones are.
point out the countries that have high vaccination rates and where deaths have been less (and if they are so effective, much less) than 2020, when we didn’t have vaccines?
UK will do – Covid deaths are currently about 200 a day as opposed to over 1000 a day in January with a similar level of cases. It is actually quite hard to find a country with a high level of vaccination that has not got a much lower Covid mortality rate than it did last year (where last year includes the peak over the New Year and so extends into January where vaccination was very low worldwide).
Considering you’re so concerned about possible confounding factors you seem to be quite happy to ignore them when it suits.
You’re comparing winter with summer. There are almost always more respiratory-related deaths in winter – regardless of case numbers. This is possibly explained by more ventilation reducing the concentration of viral load.
Between July & September 2020 the UK had ~2.2k covid deaths. For the same period in 2021 there were 8.6k covid deaths – around 4 times as many. Why?
More cases perhaps but why were there more cases. The vaccine has failed bring about an end to virus transmission. It is a complete failure.
Uttar Pradesh has a population which 3-4 times larger than the UK’s. Barely 6% are ‘fully vaccinated’. Daily deaths are in single figures, daily cases are generally below 100. This has been true for several months.
There are many many example which show that countries with low vaccination rates have more control over Covid than the highly vaccinated countries. Countries which had previously low infection rates (e.g. Singapore, Thailand) have experienced huge spikes in cases.
More cases perhaps but why were there more cases.
The challenge was about deaths not cases. If you look at the deaths/cases ratio in 2020 compared to 2021 there is no comparison. Will’s own figures show the high effectiveness for reducing deaths.
The vaccine has failed bring about an end to virus transmission. It is a complete failure
The vaccines (there are many) have not met some initial expectations/hopes as it has become apparent they decline in effectiveness after about 6 months and may be less effective against the Delta variant, but that is not the same as being a complete failure. The properly conducted studies show clear evidence that they are reducing the chances of being infected and therefore of transmission.
Uttar Pradesh has a population which 3-4 times larger than the UK’s. Barely 6% are ‘fully vaccinated’. Daily deaths are in single figures, daily cases are generally below 100. This has been true for several months.
Cases go up and down for all sorts of reasons. We spent much of last summer with hardly any cases and no vaccinations. Some countries, including the UK at the moment, with high vaccination rates continue to get a lot of cases. But that doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t helping. There are too many other factors to use a simple correlation as evidence. It needs the kind of study which looks in details at confounding elements to draw out the vaccine contribution.
Don’t know which report you are reading. Wills report shows cases are higher in the vaccinated groups. I’ve actually read the report which in table 4 shows 687 deaths in unvaccinated, 110 deaths vaccinated with one dose, and 2,338 deaths after two vaccine doses. I’m sure you’ll try to wangle some idiotic nonsense out of that!
I’m sure the authors of the study I cited will be pleased with your assessment of their paper, luckily they don’t need your approbation.
As for finding a country with high vaccination rates and lower mortality rates than last year…you didn’t find one did you…!
Don’t know which report you are reading. Wills report shows cases are higher in the vaccinated groups. I’ve actually read the report which in table 4 shows 687 deaths in unvaccinated, 110 deaths vaccinated with one dose, and 2,338 deaths after two vaccine doses. I’m sure you’ll try to wangle some idiotic nonsense out of that!
I just didn’t know how you did the calculation. The problem here is you have lumped all the age groups together which means you haven’t even allowed for the confounding effect of age – at least Will did that much by stratifying by age. The result is you are suffering from Simpson’s paradox. You may want to call this idiotic nonsense – many people would call it basic statistics.
As for finding a country with high vaccination rates and lower mortality rates than last year…you didn’t find one did you…!
I did – the UK. Total Covid deaths in 2020: 76,449 deaths in 2021: 60,494.
But that is not a fair comparison because 2021 is not complete (although Covid did not really arrive in the UK in 2020 until mid-March).
I assume what you really want to compare is deaths when there was very little vaccination with deaths when there was a lot of vaccination. It is hard to because Covid proceeds in waves so we really need to compare a wave in 2020 with a wave in 2021. How about comparing the wave in Nov 20 to Jan 21 (62,145 deaths) with the wave Jul 21 to Sep 21 (8,593 deaths) – that is two three month periods with a high case rate?
Tell you what – find me a country that had a wave in a period of high vaccination with more deaths than a similar wave in a period of little or no vaccination.
No, there’s no case regardless of the performance of the so-called vaccines.
This virus is not more harmful than seasonal influenza in most people & those to whom it is a greater risk (the elderly and ill) there is mitigation in the form of rational, multi drug treatments, pioneered among others by McCullough, Kory, Zelenko, etc etc
Maybe one day I will accumulate all the insults and obscenities that are presented here instead of arguments and publish them as representative of the vaccine sceptical community.
Agreed, I also have a list of many true-believers who, (in true1930s German style) are totally inured to any scientific arguments, and are assisting governing juntas in the massive amount of deaths and injuries these medications are causing. I want to remember every single one of you.
I do agree with you on this point.
Not scepticism. Fact based assessment.
MTF: Must Try Fantasy
Motivate Thinking FTW
Motivated Thinking FTW
It is likely the under 30’s have only recently been vaccinated. In a few months time it is also likely that the under 30’s will be catching Covid and “vaccine” (experimental jab) injuries.
Yes – we can make all sorts of “it is likely” hypotheses about what is behind the figures. We can even seek out what is actually going on and allow for it. That wasn’t Will’s approach and I was just exploring the consequences.
Bottom line is that anyone under 45 is at more risk from the experimental jab than from Covid.
“ we can make all sorts of “it is likely” hypotheses”
Indeed. Ever since I discovered that Covid virulence was based on a lie, I’ve been indulging my projective ability – just like the tyros of the government Narrative.
And guess what? I’ve beaten them hands down almost every time at every twist and turn – in terms of NPI effectiveness, the flow of lies about the next policy, and predictions of ‘the waves that aren’t’.
That tells us something – and it’s not about my outstanding brilliance. Just about not falling for the equivalent of those telephone scams.
🤦♂️
“. . . The vaccine effectiveness in the groups most affected by vaccine passports – the under 30s – is extremely high and increasing.”
MTF,
Given that patients aged 39 and under with no underlying health condition who have died in hospitals in England having tested positive for Covid-19 come to a grand total of just 136 – claiming that vaccines are effective in those under 30 makes no sense at all, as this age group is almost entirely unaffected by Covid 19. No vaccine can protect someone from something that poses no threat to their health – just as an umbrella won’t protect someone from rain on a dry sunny day without a cloud in the sky.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/COVID-19-total-announced-deaths-30-September-2021-weekly-file-1.xlsx
Scroll down to: ‘Covid 19 total announced deaths 30th September 2021 – weekly file’ > Tab 3: Deaths by Condition
1) I was discussing effectiveness against infection not death.
2) Effectiveness for those with an underlying condition is useful as well. It is preferable not to die even if you have an underlying condition.
3) It is hard to measure effectiveness against death when the absolute risk is very low but it is possible. I note that Will’s figures give effectiveness against death for the under 39 age group in the 75% to 85% range.
Hi MTF,
Vaccine effectiveness against infection (as opposed to death) is only rising in the under 18s: it’s falling in the 18 – 29 age group. Given that deaths in the under 18s are almost as rare as hens teeth, the only possible argument to vaccinate them is to protect granny, as it matters not one jot to the youngsters if they themselves get infected. Using the under 18s as a shield to protect the elderly and vulnerable is morally reprehensible. Besides which, granny is double jabbed, so is already protected from hospitalisation and death. The evidence is clear: the only cohort that merit receiving the jab are those at or above retirement age and those with an underlying health condition. All this is before taking into account any possible adverse effects associated with the vaccines – of which there are many.
With regard to passports, based on this evidence, a much more logical and sensible policy would be to have passports for the unvaccinated, so they can mix with other unvaccinated people who pose less of a risk to them than do most of the vaccinated – certainly all those over 40.
Hi timsk
Vaccine effectiveness against infection (as opposed to death) is only rising in the under 18s: it’s falling in the 18 – 29 age group
First remember this is a hypothetical discussion on the basis that Will’s analysis actually means something when, without allowing for confounding factors, it doesn’t. However, using Will’s figures VE is falling very slowly in the 18-29 group (8.3 percentage points in three months) while it is rising quite fast in the under 18s: (23.6 percentage points in three months).
Given that deaths in the under 18s are almost as rare as hens teeth, the only possible argument to vaccinate them is to protect granny, as it matters not one jot to the youngsters if they themselves get infected. Using the under 18s as a shield to protect the elderly and vulnerable is morally reprehensible.
That’s an interesting moral position which is not at all obvious an deserves proper debate not slogans.
Consider
Granny will be much better protected if she is vaccinated but we know they are not 100% effective
If Granny goes into hospital it is not only Granny who suffers
Even for the young, getting Covid can be extremely unpleasant and cause you to miss school or college.
In general our society accepts the principle that people who cannot possibly suffer from something should nevertheless make small sacrifices to reduce the risk to those who can suffer. I guess it all comes down to how much of a sacrifice it is to get vaccinated. And that is the root of our disagreement.
Hi MTF,
“. . .That’s an interesting moral position which is not at all obvious an deserves proper debate not slogans. . .”
Err, it might not be obvious to you, but it’s been discussed ad nauseam on here since the JCVI advised against vaccinating 12-15 year olds and I suspect you’ll likely be in a tiny minority of 1 who thinks it’s anything other than grossly morally reprehensible.
” . . .If Granny goes into hospital it is not only Granny who suffers. . .”
You’re assuming granny gets infected from an unvaccinated under 18 as opposed to a double jabbed person over 40. Really?!
Your position might have some validity if the vaccines in all age groups across the board prevented infection significantly. That they don’t and those over 40 who are vaccinated are more infectious than the unvaccinated renders your argument, at best, gossamer thin.
“. . .Even for the young, getting Covid can be extremely unpleasant and cause you to miss school or college. . .”
C’mon – the numbers are small! Children are more at risk of seasonal flu than they are of Covid 19 – yet we don’t coerce them into getting jabbed for that. Sorry, you’re clutching at straws I’m afraid!
“. . .In general our society accepts the principle that people who cannot possibly suffer from something should nevertheless make small sacrifices to reduce the risk to those who can suffer. I guess it all comes down to how much of a sacrifice it is to get vaccinated.”
The extent of the sacrifice hasn’t been quantified – that’s the problem. And it can’t be quantified until we know the medium to long term effects of the vaccines. Only then will we be able to determine whether or not the sacrifice is one we should be asking those who themselves aren’t at risk from Covid 19 to take.
Err, it might not be obvious to you, but it’s been discussed ad nauseam on here since the JCVI advised against vaccinating 12-15 year olds and I suspect you’ll likely be in a tiny minority of 1 who thinks it’s anything other than grossly morally reprehensible.
The fact that most members of this forum agree on something does not make it obviously true! The majority of the world outside this bubble does not agree with you – and this is based on opinion surveys not what I suspect.
those over 40 who are vaccinated are more infectious than the unvaccinated renders your argument, at best, gossamer thin.
I have never heard this. Do you have a link to the evidence?
The extent of the sacrifice hasn’t been quantified – that’s the problem. And it can’t be quantified until we know the medium to long term effects of the vaccines.
And, of course, the medium to long term effects of getting Covid.
Hi MTF,
“The fact that most members of this forum agree on something does not make it obviously true! . . .”
Agreed. But, equally, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong!
“. . . The majority of the world outside this bubble does not agree with you – and this is based on opinion surveys not what I suspect. . .”
If you can link to any opinion survey that thinks it’s right to coerce the under 18s to take an experimental vaccine from which they will derive zero benefit and make may cause serious side effects, including death – I’d like to see it.
“. . . I have never heard this. Do you have a link to the evidence? . . .”
Easy: this article!
If you want a different take on the same stats – watch this video:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MaLV6uexWog5/
“. . . And, of course, the medium to long term effects of getting Covid.”
Given that corona viruses are as old as the hills, it’s reasonable to assume that the long term impact will be in line with all predecessors. By stark contrast, the same can not be said for a novel experimental vaccine, still in trial phase and administered to huge swathes of the population who will not benefit from it and may incur serious harm from it.
I admire and appreciate your efforts in preventing this forum from being an echo chamber for sceptics, but there’s no getting away from the fact that (in this case) the evidence is clear: vaccines don’t stop infection in adults and actually aid infection in the over 40s.
If you can link to any opinion survey that thinks it’s right to coerce the under 18s to take an experimental vaccine from which they will derive zero benefit and make may cause serious side effects, including death – I’d like to see it.
If you phrase it like that then clearly there is no such survey and the question is so loaded it is inevitable what the answer would be. My point was simply that it is fallacious to use the fact that most people on this forum think something is wrong as evidence that it is wrong, especially as most people on this forum do not reflect the opinions of the majority of the public on most issues.
“. . . I have never heard this. Do you have a link to the evidence? . . .”
Easy: this article!
This article (and the video) has some prima facie evidence that vaccinated over 40s are more likely to be infected than the unvaccinated. Of course that is very different from claiming they are more likely to be infectious which is what you seemed to be claiming. Even then, the evidence they are more likely to be infected takes no account of confounding factors which Will himself accepts are important.
Given that corona viruses are as old as the hills, it’s reasonable to assume that the long term impact will be in line with all predecessors.
Which would be bad news.
For example, on long term effects of SARS: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02598-6
People with more severe infections might experience long-term damage not just in their lungs, but in their heart, immune system, brain and elsewhere. Evidence from previous coronavirus outbreaks, especially the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic, suggests that these effects can last for years.
By stark contrast, the same can not be said for a novel experimental vaccine, still in trial phase .
I believe there are no examples of vaccines which have had side effects which emerged more than two years after they were first used (always difficult to make a negative claim and am happy to be corrected). Although mRNA is novel in vaccines it has been used as therapy for many years: https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd4278 and there is already an approved adenovirus vaccine for Ebola.
and administered to huge swathes of the population who will not benefit from it and may incur serious harm from it
That is assuming your conclusion.
I admire and appreciate your efforts in preventing this forum from being an echo chamber for sceptics,
Thanks
but there’s no getting away from the fact that (in this case) the evidence is clear: vaccines don’t stop infection in adults and actually aid infection in the over 40s.
Sorry I still disagree. It is based on a shallow interpretation of statistics which are clearly labelled as being unsuitable for this purpose.
Hi MTF,
“. . .My point was simply that it is fallacious to use the fact that most people on this forum think something is wrong as evidence that it is wrong, especially as most people on this forum do not reflect the opinions of the majority of the public on most issues. . .”
The principle of using children who have no need for the vaccines and may derive harm from them as a shield to protect the elderly who have already been vaccinated and are therefore protected from hospitalisation and death is, clearly, mortally reprehensible. That really isn’t – or at least ought not to be – in the least bit contentious!
“. . .that vaccinated over 40s are more likely to be infected than the unvaccinated. Of course that is very different from claiming they are more likely to be infectious. . .”
You can’t argue that the infection rate / infectiousness is falling in the under 18s – thereby proving the effectiveness of the vaccines -without accepting the corollary, i.e. that the vaccines are ineffective in the over 40s where the infection rate / infectiousness is rising. To distinguish between infection and infectiousness is not germane to the discussion: each applies to your argument as much as they do to mine. As for confounding factors, we only have the data we have, the confounding is the fault of PHE and government who have deliberately withheld data from the start of the pandemic to make it as hard as possible to prove categorically what’s going on. It ought to be obvious by now why that is.
“. . .For example, on long term effects of SARS: . . “
The numbers involved are small and there’s very little in the way of firm evidence of long Covid – especially in the young which is the cohort we’re discussing here. I’ll see your Nature study and raise you with this medRxiv study which is much more relevant as it relates to teenagers:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.11.21257037v1.full
“. . .I believe there are no examples of vaccines which have had side effects which emerged more than two years after they were first used. . .”
If this was a real emergency and bodies were piling up in the streets – then your argument may have merit. Clearly not the case; children have zero need of the vaccines and may be seriously harmed by them. Ergo, it is utterly reckless and morally reprehensible to take such unnecessary risks.
“. . .It is based on a shallow interpretation of statistics which are clearly labelled as being unsuitable for this purpose.”
Only a totalitarian government publishes incomplete data (the confounding factors) and then says its reports are only to be used in a way and for the purposes it specifies. If they/you don’t want Will, me and others on here to draw the conclusions we have – then all they have to do is to be above board, open and transparent. Pigs can fly! That they don’t do that tells one all one needs to know.
I feel our exchanges have run their course – so I’ll sign off with this post – feel free to have the last word if you’d like to. 😉
Hi timsk,
I will take advantage of your offer to have the last word but you are right that it should end there.
The principle of using children who have no need for the vaccines and may derive harm from them as a shield to protect the elderly who have already been vaccinated and are therefore protected from hospitalisation and death is, clearly, mortally reprehensible. That really isn’t – or at least ought not to be – in the least bit contentious!
This is not the moral principle you originally proposed which was simply:
Using the under 18s as a shield to protect the elderly and vulnerable is morally reprehensible.
Your rephrased principle contains black and white assumptions that I don’t accept:
* children have no need of vaccines – very little need for their own health although some get ill -however there are other benefits
* children children may derive harm from vaccines – possibly but how likely and how much harm – in particular how does it compare to the harm they may derive from getting Covid (see below)
* the elderly are protected from hospitalisation and death by the vaccine – to some extent but not 100%
You can’t argue that the infection rate / infectiousness is falling in the under 18s – thereby proving the effectiveness of the vaccines -without accepting the corollary, i.e. that the vaccines are ineffective in the over 40s where the infection rate / infectiousness is rising.
I only pointed out that if you use Will’s analysis then the infection rate in the under 18s is falling dramatically. In fact I don’t accept Will’s analysis and therefore don’t accept his rates for any age group.
To distinguish between infection and infectiousness is not germane to the discussion: each applies to your argument as much as they do to mine.
You do accept there is a difference between being infected and being infectious? You claimed there was evidence that vaccinated people were more likely to be infectious. There is no mention of infectiousness in the paper – much less data on it -so no evidence so far.
As for confounding factors, we only have the data we have, the confounding is the fault of PHE and government who have deliberately withheld data from the start of the pandemic to make it as hard as possible to prove categorically what’s going on. It ought to be obvious by now why that is.
I am not convinced the government has deliberately withheld the relevant data but whatever the explanation, the fact we don’t have data on confounding factors doesn’t magically make them go away.
“. . .For example, on long term effects of SARS: . . “
The numbers involved are small and there’s very little in the way of firm evidence of long Covid – especially in the young which is the cohort we’re discussing here. I’ll see your Nature study and raise you with this medRxiv study which is much more relevant as it relates to teenagers:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.11.21257037v1.full
I wasn’t referring to Covid or long Covid. I was referring to SARS and the evidence of long term issues many years later – in some cases 15 years. The point being we know coronaviruses can have very nasty long term effects.
If this was a real emergency and bodies were piling up in the streets – then your argument may have merit. Clearly not the case; children have zero need of the vaccines and may be seriously harmed by them. Ergo, it is utterly reckless and morally reprehensible to take such unnecessary risks.
Well in some countries at some times, bodies did come close to piling up in the streets. But really this just reiterates the assumptions I don’t accept.
“. . .It is based on a shallow interpretation of statistics which are clearly labelled as being unsuitable for this purpose.”
Only a totalitarian government publishes incomplete data (the confounding factors) and then says its reports are only to be used in a way and for the purposes it specifies. If they/you don’t want Will, me and others on here to draw the conclusions we have – then all they have to do is to be above board, open and transparent. Pigs can fly! That they don’t do that tells one all one needs to know.
I won’t speculate on why the government publishes the data it does, it can’t publish everything. However, that doesn’t change the fact that you need the data to do the proper analysis.
They tell me that when you get the Flu you will know about it, too ill to work, bedded down etc.
Seems I’ve never had the flu(though I presume I have been infected by the influenza virus). The worst I’ve ever had is a cold, and rarely get those these days.
Ideal candidate to test the effectiveness of a flu vaccine.
I am new to this forum. This makes convincing reading, but so does the following, from the alledged Pfizer documents seeking US approval for their booster:
“… Although not independently verified by FDA, the post hoc analysis appears to indicate that the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 during the analysis period among 18,727 study participants originally randomized to BNT162b2 (mean of 9.8 months post-Dose 2 at the beginning of the analysisperiod) was 70.3 cases per 1,000 person-years, compared with an incidence of 51.6 cases per 1,000 person-years among 17,748 study participants originally randomized to placebo and crossed over to BNT162b2 (mean of 4.7 months post-Dose 2 at the beginning of the analysis period)…)
As you can see it implies greater protection in the placebo/unvaccinated than the Vaccinated.
Just what is going on and why? For example, the UK government’s use of statistics in their presentations were often meaningless if not misleading. Data on criteria for risk which I knew to be true in April last year appeared to be unknown by the government its advisers or our abysmal MMS. I find it hard to believe it is all about a New World Order and mass extermination as some believe, or to put it down to sheer incompetence.
Yes there are a lot of “conspiracy theories” all of which have some credibility.
However, the facts are that a global investment conglomerate like Blackrock own Big Pharma, the main stream media and governments.
It has been quite easy to set the agenda and brainwash the masses which maybe just a money and power grab or something more nefarious.
The quadrillion dollar question my friend! I also find ‘depopulation’ a bridge too far, but I have do some ideas about the bigger picture. To me, the only plausible explanation I’ve heard is the one provided by this guy: https://odysee.com/@LongXXvids:c/Ernst-Wolf-speech—summary:3
In a nutshell, this is all happening in the context of a collapse of our debt-based Western economic system which has been happening behind the scenes in slow motion since 2008 (or to be more precise since 1971 when they removed the gold standard from the US dollar and our economic system became akin to a casino played with non-existent money. And in this context, the financial/political elite are attempting to disguise the collapse by rolling out a pandemic provided by their friends in the pharmaceutical industry. The result is a divided, chaotic society that believes their sudden drop in living standards and loss of freedoms is the result of a virus, and thereby accept all sorts of harms in the ‘battle’ against this invisible enemy. Individuals like MTF on this thread are so entrenched in the idea that they will sit around all day trying the calculate the efficacy of a vaccine that nobody needs. On the 20th century parallel timeline, we are in the late stages of the Weimar Republic, and fascism (or authoritarian top-down government) are emergent properties of the underlying economic conditions. That’s what it feels like to me, looking forward to be proven wrong.
To add credence to this idea – doesn’t it seem odd that there such a striking correlation between the closeness of a state to the US Empire economically and the severity of its Covid-19 outcomes?
I agree money & resources have a lot to do with this. See any long form interview with Catherine Austin Fitts.
She appears to concur with my opinion that depopulation is a key part of this.
It makes little sense to smash the global economy yet end up with a greater obligation for feeding & clothing us.
Its rather easy to top a few billion of us using the Nth booster, while mass media feeds us stories of more lethal pathogens.
Greed? That’s certainly a big part of it.
Greed is definitely a huge part of it but I don’t think that’s what this is about. The desperation with which they are trying to inject everything that moves points to something more than that… they were already impossibly wealthy.
It’s most unfortunate that, having spent decades in pharma R&D (& 17 years at Pfizer) I’m no longer playing the role I used to, which was defending what we did, at least in research.
I was able to do it in good conscience because it was my experience that most people were honest & trying to find truly useful new medicines.
With these vaccines the industry & many people have utterly destroyed themselves as good agents, which happen to have a profit motive (regulated by MHRA, EMA, FDA etc as well as by DDMAC & others).
The original Pfizer trial used for the EUA filing is almost certainly fraudulent. This isn’t an embittered former employee. I enjoyed my years at Pfizer & had an excellent professional relationship afterwards as we collaborated on Ziarco Pharma Ltd.
Its in sorrow that I note there were 4-5 fold more exclusions for unspecified protocol violations in the vaccine arm than the control arm. In a double blind study, that’s impossible. The trial must somehow have been unblinded. That can happen by bad luck but if so (eg a characteristic side effect) it would be known. No such disclosure has been made.
Crucislly, had there not been those exclusions, the trial wouldn’t have returned a 95% efficacy but <20%, ie way below consideration by the regulatory authorities (min 50%).
If anyone cheated, I don’t understand how they can live with themselves. All treatments have unwanted effects. In this case, enough fatal adverse effects that it would be far better if it didn’t exist & early treatments were not suppressed.
https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(20)30673-2/fulltext
The Doshi blog & links to BMJ Editorial (he is deputy editor of BMJ).
https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/
“. . . Its in sorrow that I note there were 4-5 fold more exclusions for unspecified protocol violations in the vaccine arm than the control arm. In a double blind study, that’s impossible. . .”
Hi Mike,
Apologies if this is a stupid question but, in simple layman’s terms, can you outline why it’s impossible? I assume that all other things being equal one might expect the number of exclusions to be split roughly 50/50 between the two groups. However, I’m mindful that in a fair coin toss you’d roughly get 50 heads and 50 tails per 100 throws. However, within that, you could get say, 10 or 20 consecutive heads (or tails). Might this not explain what happened in the trial?
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58775881
Maybe someone can send this report and an updated explanation of what the vaccines can and can’t do to Klopp and the Reds.
He is not the brightest cookie in the jar, but that he still spouts and quite apparently genuinely believes such outdated nonsense is pretty shocking. As would be the BBC publishing it un-fact checked if they were still into journalism.
I am hoping Patrick Vieira is not such a plonker as Klopp.
Question: why is the “delta outbreak” dragging on in the uk, when it was over in the bat of an eye in India (something the MSM never talk about)? Anything to do with excessive testing with wildly inaccurate tests? Anyone would think the government are trying to make it drag on, but why would they? Oh, hey…
The BIGGER question being Helen… if the UK govt and NHS were really so concerned with the nations collective well being… why were out of patent meds effective against SARS Cov2 so actively suppressed?
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/indias-ivermectin-blackout-secret-revealed
Plus what a coincidence then…that Pfizer’s now looking to launch its own tweaked version of generic Stromectol?
https://newsrescue.com/pfizermectin-pfizer-starts-final-study-for-covid-drug-thats-suspiciously-similar-to-horse-paste/
Yes. It’s all powerful circumstantial evidence.
I’m not going to rush into claiming that Ivermectin is a miracle cure, but the evidence is certainly stronger than that for the jabber-woke. The neglect of other treatments has no rationale except manipulation.
And Merck’s pill has exactly the same ingedients as HCQ albeit tweaked around the number of bonds between molecules.
So of this new 15 minutes symptom ‘bud’ saliva test keeps looking OK and the Pharmas make money out of peddling us Ivermectin2 and HCQ2, will the fascists back pedal?
Not holding my breath.
I just can’t think .. 🤔
Keep up the good work Will, you’re clearly getting under someone’s skin, exposing them for the Orwellian doublespeakers that they are (to put it politely).
When are PHE going to provide similar stats according to vaccination status and age for all-cause mortality and people hospitalised for any reason?
When they stop being sinister deceptive torchbearers for a criminal enterprise perhaps?
They did. It doesn’t help the case for vaccines at all.
https://www.normanfenton.com/post/comparing-age-adjusted-all-cause-mortality-rates-in-england-between-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated
Thanks for the link. Makes interesting reading! As you say, not looking good for the so-called vaccines (or for the vaccinated).
An interesting post by Norman Fenton. Under the criticism of ONS data, it says: “Ultimately we need to exclude unnatual (sic) deaths such as murders, accidents and suicides since these may introduce bias between the cohorts, especially in the young age categories where the overall death numbers are small.”
Why? Are not some of these incidents caused by the panic, after all? Or even caused by the so-called ‘vaccine’ in some cases.
They must know those data. The silence, like the silence over the summer, concerning vaccine efficacy, is deafening…
the lack of providing obvious data says so much more than the published manipulated stats.
Just like criminal PONAs (persons of no appearance) in MSM articles i.e. when the cultural background of a criminal harms globalists.
Interesting how suddenly keen is PHE on accurate and meaningful data!
we are in our 70’s. The only people we know with Covid in the past month, are also over 70 (10 people). All double jabbed🤫
Slightly off topic, but relevant….. given that PHE tells us that, at any given time 1 in 60 etc. are carrying the virus each week, and that we are now into week 78 of flattening the sombrero, surely we, the great unwashed, scum of the earth unjabbed, who have gone about unmasked, enjoying normal human interactions, attending, shock horror, mass protests etc……….
Can we safely say that we have probably encountered the virus and now have, whisper it in hushed tones, NATURAL IMMUNITY?
I have been on, refreshingly unmasked, packed tubes in London all weekend, chasing around the marathon course. I have been in busy restaurants and bars. I normally spend a fairly anti social, country bumpkin existence. It will be interesting to see if I get the lurgy. I will be taking a daily aspirin this week, following doctor Kendrick’s advice, along with the vitamin regime I follow because of my daughter’s compromised immune system. Let’s see what happens.
“Vaccine passports” AKA “Covid-status documents” are not about fighting a disease and never have been. The UK government (and all the other governments that are promoting them) isn’t going to give up on them just because they do nothing to reduce the spread of a disease. The endgame is a Global Digital ID linked to digital money and a health status and it has been the endgame all along. China is trialling the Social Control technologies, but they’re coming to your town too, driven by the Davos set who want total control over the entire human population. It’s their wet dream to be able to coerce people to behave in “approved” ways and to instantly punish anyone who dares to step out of line.
The difficulty with these numbers is knowing what exactly is being counted.
‘Cases’: actually means positive PCR/antigen tests and cannot distinguish between active infection, previous infection, or presence of inactive viral particles.
Hospitalisations: are these patients admitted because they have CoVid or patients admitted for non-Covid but tested Positive on admission or during stay?
Deaths: are these deaths caused by CoVid or deaths with CoVid and how diagnosed?
Thanks for presenting these. We have very little equivalent data available here in Ireland but I’m sure we’ll be similar. Is it possible to get the figures broken down by age bracket and with/without underlying conditions? Or this data not made available?
Here’s a question. According to the latest NHS figures, 7924 people under 60 have died of Covid in England across the entire pandemic, from the start of recording deaths until 8 October 2021.
Why, on the strength of less than 8000 deaths across two years, are the entire under 60 population being directed to get the mRNA/Viral vector injections. This is a serious question.
Get the truth about pandemic mismanagement;
Bold New Book PANDEMIC BLUNDER – FAUCI AND PUBLIC HEALTH BLOCKED EARLY HOME COVID TREATMENT by Joel S. Hirschhorn
A huge amount of data and information not covered by mainstream media are in Pandemic Blunder that tells the story of how over 600,000 Americans have died from COVID-19 unnecessarily because the government has blocked early home/outpatient treatment and prevention. With over 600,000 COVID American deaths, learning about safe and effective treatment is more important than ever.
About the Book:Pandemic Blunder contains considerable medical information and data to support a number of proven safe, cheap generic medicines and protocols that knock out the coronavirus when given early. Read about the pioneering, courageous doctors who have been using innovative approaches to prevent their COVID patients from needing hospital care and facing death. The book includes many expert opinions and Real World Evidence from doctors that show 70 to 80 percent of COVID deaths could have been prevented—and still can be. Don’t be victimized by disinformation and propaganda. Learn how corrupt forces are aiming to make billions of dollars from expensive medicines and vaccines, and how hundreds of thousands of deaths could have—and should have—been prevented! Detailed information is given to help people protect their lives by using simple prevention protocols, an alternative to vaccines.
https://www.amazon.com/Pandemic-Blunder-Public-Blocked-Treatment/dp/197723822X/ref=nav_signin?dchild=1&keywords=Pandemic+Blunder&qid=1612289098&sr=8-1&&