All Cause Mortality in Britain: Vaccinated people under 60 are twice as likely to die as unvaccinated people. And overall deaths in Britain are running well above normal.

t.me ^ | November 20, 2021 | Alex Berenson

[ransomnote]

[H/T tatown]  

The basic data is available here, download the Excel file and see table 4:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland t.me/Alex_Berenson/613

1.7Kviewsedited  Nov 20 at 07:02

[bagster]

I don't know, and Berenson, who's lying about this....

Well, somebody's lying about this. And his name starts with Mo and ends with Jo, and he's a previously banned liberal troll, come back as a half-mojo.

#PantsOnFire

[Candor7]

The vax has been sold to the public by health governmental health agencies using padded , or inaccurate information.

Here is the truth about mRNA vaccine:

1) mRNA vaccine does not provide antibody based immunity or ANY immunity.

2) mRNA does not prevent the transmission of Covid 19

3) mRNA vaccine does not work in the basal cavitym the pharnyx or the lung, it works only in the blood.

4) MRNA vaccine works to attenuate the symptoms of Copvid 19 for a limited period of time. From Pfizer’s own survey we can see their vaccine attenuates symptoms for about 5 months, after whichi the attenuation is at 47%. Moderna is a littlelonger from 6 to 8 months.

5) Boosters will only postpone the infection with Covid 19

The only way to achive immunity is to be infected and beat the virus.

That is why Ivermectin is one of the best choices for any protocol.

The data is pretty clear:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/epidemiologic-analyses-on-covid19-and-ivermectin/?fbclid=IwAR1-2thqe_x5NUYOWACKQLwoAYY3HVmRWSyNp25jHDfFBgGqlOiZ2VHoO8Y

[Candor7]

My position is that the shots;

Feature the toxic spike protein.
Wear off after several months.
Do not protect from infection, hospitalization, or death despite being promulgated as “95% effective.”
And have killed and injured thousands. (the Sen. Johnson video, as well as countless others is informative).>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I agree with you. To be clear:

The vax has been sold to the public by governmental health agencies using padded , or inaccurate information.

Here is the truth about mRNA vaccine:

1) mRNA vaccine does not provide antibody based immunity or ANY immunity.

2) mRNA does not prevent the transmission of Covid 19

3) mRNA vaccine does not work in the nasal cavity, the pharnyx or the lung, it works only in the blood.

4) MRNA vaccine works to attenuate the symptoms of Covid 19 for a limited period of time. From Pfizer’s own survey we can see their vaccine attenuates symptoms for about 5 months, after which the attenuation is at 47%. Moderna is a little longer from 6 to 8 months.

5) Boosters will only postpone the infection with Covid 19

The only way to achive immunity is to be infected and beat the virus.

That is why Ivermectin is one of the best choices for any protocol.

The data is pretty clear:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/epidemiologic-analyses-on-covid19-and-ivermectin/?fbclid=IwAR1-2thqe_x5NUYOWACKQLwoAYY3HVmRWSyNp25jHDfFBgGqlOiZ2VHoO8Y

[Former Proud Canadian]

Exactly.

[rolling_stone]

exactly....i agree 100%

[Vlad0]

Are you suggesting the vaccinated cohort is between 6 and 15 years older than the unvaccinated?

We are only talking about the lowest of the four groups in the data: age 10-59. Now at first there was no vaccine even available to people under 18, then 16, then 12. And it's been well known that the younger you are the less likely you are to get Covid, and the less likely it is to hurt you.

So, given these two factors, yes, it's easy to believe the average age of the vaccinated (among those 10-59) is at least 6 years older than the unvaccinated in the same cohort.

[Vlad0]

The graph which the author used to illustrate his article is completely misleading. This is easily determined by looking at the data.

He has "interpolated" missing data points as lying on the graph between the existing points. But we do have data points, in the raw data. What we see is that, in terms of the "per 100,000" column H if the value of dead was 0,1 or 2 the data was marked as a -. Meaning "to low to meaningfully calculate". If you wanted to graph it the correct value would be ZERO. Not what ever value is between the last two numbers.

The graph is wildly incorrect. (I figured this out doing averages of the two data sets being graphed) Which means that the assertion being made using the graph is also wildly incorrect.

[rxsid]

Deaths occurring between 2 January and 24 September 2021 edition of this dataset
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland

Table 4: Weekly age-specific mortality rates by vaccination status for all deaths, per 100,000 people, England, deaths occurring between 2 January 2021 and 24 September 2021 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8

Week ending | Week number | Vaccination status | Age group | Number of deaths

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 10-59 | 68
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 60-69 | 65
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 70-79 | 78
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 80+ | 148

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 10-59 | 4
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 60-69 | 1
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 70-79 | 0
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 80+ | 1

24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 10-59 | 34
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 60-69 | 45
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 70-79 | 46
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 80+ | 92

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 10-59 | 400
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 60-69 | 638
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 70-79 | 1,553
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 80+ | 3,839

 

So, for the most recent week reported "under 60" "all deaths", the numbers are: 68 for unvax'd

Then 4 for vax'd within 21 days of 1st dose,
34 for vax'd 21+ days after 1st dose
400 for 2nd dose.

For a total of 68 "all deaths" for unvax'd, and 472 "all deaths" for partial or fully vax'd (with fully vax'd making up vast majority).

[Vlad0]

Which sounds like a big difference, but those are the raw numbers. We need to know what percent of the population is vaccinated before we can draw meaningful conclusions from them.

If there were, for instance, 100 million people who were vaccinated and 472 died and only 1 million unvaccinated people, and 68 people died then the unvaxxed are dying at a higher rate, despite the raw number of vaccinated dead being larger.

I've used these simple numbers to make it easy to see the math. The normalized numbers would be:

Unvaxxed: 6,800 per 100,000,000
Vaxxed: 472 per 100,000,000

In other words, as the notes explain, you have to take the denominator into consideration. Which the authors of the study have done for us. These are the rates per 100,000 figures which normalize the data to do just what we are all looking to see.

It is provided in column H Age Specific Rate per 100,000.

You didn't include those numbers in your post, unfortunately. So I will update it to include them.

At least then we are using the correct numbers to do apple-to-apples comparisons. (Which is why the name of the chart is:)

"Table 4: Weekly age-specific mortality rates by vaccination status for all deaths, per 100,000 people, England, deaths occurring between 2 January 2021 and 24 September 2021"

(See the "per 100,000" is in the title of the table! You should look at it, not the raw numbers).

Here is your post's data again (with missing Column H added at the end, in blue to make it easy to see):

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 10-59 | 68 | 0.9
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 60-69 | 65 | 24.0
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 70-79 | 78 | 59.6
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Unvaccinated | 80+ | 148 | 214.4

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 10-59 | 4 | 1.7
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 60-69 | 1 | ~0
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 70-79 | 0 | ~0
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Within 21 days of first dose | 80+ | 1 | ~0

24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 10-59 | 34 | 2.1
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 60-69 | 45 | 78.2
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 70-79 | 46 | 152.9
24-Sep-21 | 38 | 21 days or more after first dose | 80+ | 92 |
381.5

24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 10-59 | 400 | 2.0
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 60-69 | 638 | 11.9
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 70-79 | 1,553 | 35.4
24-Sep-21 | 38 | Second dose | 80+ | 3,839 | 182.4

Now, in your data analysis you wanted to incorporate all stages of Covid testing. So, to do that here we take the average of the three phases you want to combine. (They are ratios, you have to average them, not simply add them).

Death per 100,000 - all three post-vaccination phases vs. unvaccinated rate (in red), by age groups:

10-59 | 1.9 | 0.9
60-69 | 30.0 | 24.0
70-79 | 62.7 | 59.6
80-89 | 188.0 | 214.4

I don't think it's a good idea to use a single week's number s and try to get a trend from them, that's why I averaged them in my original post.

Based on this week, for instance, almost no one dies in the 21 days after the injection. That's probably just a statistical anomoly.

When you are looking at very small numbers, near zero (for instance, the claim this whole thing is built on, the 10-59 number where this week the death rate per 100,000 was indeedtwice as high, you have to realize how small it really is. Near zero in both cases. (If you are under 60 this is very good news. With or without the vax, you just probably aren't going to die).

On the other hand, if we were going to try to draw conclusions from one data point (never a good idea, but here we are, using only the most recent week's data) - it sucks to be 80. People in their 80s die with depressing regularity. Which is why there are relatively so many people in their 70s and so few in their 90s!

With the vax 188 / 100,000 without 214 / 100,000. A 14% higher likelyhood of death (if we tried to project from this, which (again) is ill-advised.

Anyway, these are the better numbers (ratio'd to normalize for population size differences) for comparison than the raw ones you were using.

Cheers!

[rxsid]

The UK is 68% fully vaccinated (https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_WRL), so...for that most recent week...if we add up all age groups in unvaccinated (359 people) vs all age groups in fully vaccinated (6,430), there about 17.9 times more “all deaths” in the fully vaccinated group, or about 91.6% out of the total of 7,012 “all deaths” recorded for all groups combined…which is significantly higher than the 68% fully vaccinated population.

That group, fully vaccinated (all ages) over represents “all deaths.”

Cheers!

[Brrr]

Full disclosure: I am not in favor of vaccinations. I am not vaccinated and have no plan to do so.

Having said that, the headline is misleading at best. Table 6 in the data shows that 92,711 unvaccinated people died and 229,981 vaccinated people died. Table 7 shows that the study included 4,363,715 unvaccinated people and 30,885,740 vaccinated people. According to those numbers the likelihood of dying is:
Unvaccinated: 92,711 / 4,363,715 = 2.12% died.
Vaccinated: 229,981 / 30,885,740 = 0.74% died.
So using the numbers from the study, the likelihood of unvaccinated people dying is 3 times higher than for those who are vaccinated according to this study.

So the data in this study does NOT support saying that “Vaccinated people under 60 are twice as likely to die as unvaccinated people”. This data shows quite the opposite.

[ransomnote]

I ran the numbers too. They are correct.
Note that those two lines are based on deaths per 100,000 for that age group. Checking Table 4 as Berenson notes reveals that the numbers per 100,000 for that age group are correct.

Actually, they are conservative. FOr ‘vaccinated’ he skipped all doses prior to after 2 doses, when those two separate ‘1 dose’ groups had some high numbers. Horrible to think what the true cost in human life these ‘vaccines’ are taking.