The useful information in the numbers in the chart I posted is that they are dramatically much higher soon after the vaccination and consistently trend down the further out you get from the injection.
Several people have mentioned “correlation or causation” and suggest that there are other things besides vaccination that could cause death. Yes, of course, but those things (cancer, heart attack, stroke, etc.) would be as likely to cause death during any other week as they would during the first. But, these numbers indicate that the only difference in the amount of death seen is how recently they have been vaccinated.
These are the same people being measured throughout this study. They are the same age as they were initially and have the same comorbidities they did at the time of injection.
Norway medical bureaucrats describe these immediate/early deaths as “suspected adverse drug reactions with fatal outcomes....and concluded that common adverse reactions of mRNA vaccines, such as fever, nausea, and diarrhoea, may have contributed to fatal outcomes in some of the frail patients.”
O.K.
I get your point.
However, then my questions would be:
that does not the analysis suggest more caution is needed when giving the vaccine to those with pre-existing comorbidity issues
and
does not that suggest the vaccines have the most risk for a group - already medically vulnerable - that the vaccines are considered most needed for
but also that MOST other groups do not have the same (as high) risks post-vaccine as the already medically vulnerable groups???
And all of that is statistically (odds) speaking, and even while higher risk still not what even most who are already medically vulnerabl are seeing?
And therefor what should MOST people see in all of that?