Funnier than that time you f'd up and looked in the mirror?
Posted on 11/25/2021 4:41:41 PM PST by ransomnote
Funnier than that time you f'd up and looked in the mirror?
About 32% of Scotland is “fully vaccinated”.
82.4% have 2 shots.
But 89% of the COVID deaths are in the vaccinated group.
And 75% of the hospitalizations are in the vaccinated group.
You could know, if you read your own links.
Watch out for that MOH site you posted. My security system warns it is a risky site to visit.
An interesting comparison and conclusion by me.
One graph shows the number of Covid-19 “cases per week”. About (my guess) 60% vaxxinated, 40% unvaxxinated.
Another graph shows the number of Covid-19 “hospitalizations per week”. About (my guess) 65% vaxxinated, 35% unvaxxinated.
A third graph shows the number of Covid-19 “deaths per week” About (my guess) 85% vaxxinated, 15% unvaxxinated.
My conclusion... unvaxxinated are less likely to go to the hospital with COVID so they are less likely to DIE from COVID because the hospital is where THEY KILL YOU! And the unvaxxed KNOW THIS.
Thanks... I don’t spend much time there
ROFLMAO!!! You really are hilarious.
I did read ALL Vince Flynn's Mitch Rapp novels... that's as close to the CIA as I ever got.
Expect this story to be re-posted on FR when it gets picked up by the other COVID-19 sites. They report on other’s stories. Usually the same FReepers that repost the same stories, but just from different sites.
Exactly what a CIA derp would say.
You got it all figured out, don't ya Furry.
Still, they got a lot of catching up to do if they wanna keep up with the all-pervasive vax fear propaganda campaign and enablers like you, amirite?
| faucetman wrote: |
An interesting comparison and conclusion by me. One graph shows the number of Covid-19 “cases per week”. About (my guess) 60% vaxxinated, 40% unvaxxinated. Another graph shows the number of Covid-19 “hospitalizations per week”. About (my guess) 65% vaxxinated, 35% unvaxxinated. A third graph shows the number of Covid-19 “deaths per week” About (my guess) 85% vaxxinated, 15% unvaxxinated. My conclusion... unvaxxinated are less likely to go to the hospital with COVID so they are less likely to DIE from COVID because the hospital is where THEY KILL YOU! And the unvaxxed KNOW THIS. |
Good observation. I do think the unvaccinated are more aware of the weaponized hospital situation than 'vaccinated'.
It's complicated though. Some ( I don't know what proportion) hospitals are giving the 'vaccinated' Ivermectin and reserving the multi-organ failure inducing CDC Covid policy for the unvaccinated. (Remdesivir with Midazolam chaser)
So I believe there's still some of that immune system suppression some are seeing.
Can someone explain this to me?
P53, table 20 of the original document has the raw numbers of deaths. Plus the death rate per 100,000 plus standardized by age.
The expose article on its graph dealing with death, only used the raw numbers - 11 unvax deaths to 99 vax deaths Nov 6 - 12. But a higher percentage are vaxed, so that just comparing raw numbers doesn’t give the right picture.
I’m not happy with the original document standardizing for age without giving the data how they did that. And I’d need to see how they adjusted for the “per 100,000” numbers too. Without giving the original numbers, this just seems like they made up numbers without proof
I’m not vaccinated and never will be. But I did decide to look at these numbers since there was claims of falsification. And I found that. I don’t believe we need to weaken our argument by using wrong data. Unless I am seeing it wrong.
I would like anybody to explain, using numbers. Just saying that everything is incorrect isn’t specific enough
CottonBall wrote:Can someone explain this to me? P53, table 20 of the original document has the raw numbers of deaths. Plus the death rate per 100,000 plus standardized by age. The expose article on its graph dealing with death, only used the raw numbers - 11 unvax deaths to 99 vax deaths Nov 6 - 12. But a higher percentage are vaxed, so that just comparing raw numbers doesn’t give the right picture. ransomnote: What is the 'right picture' you wanted to see? I was comfortable knowing 110 persons total died, 99 were 'vaccinated'. I know most people are 'vaccinated' so I 'get' what the data means. I’m not happy with the original document standardizing for age without giving the data how they did that. And I’d need to see how they adjusted for the “per 100,000” numbers too. Without giving the original numbers, this just seems like they made up numbers without proof I gleaned useful information from the Expose article as written. I'm sorry to read that you are 'unhappy' with the original (Scott. gov) document. I don't know why you'd 'need' to see the Scottish government's numbers, but if so - perhaps research further on your own. I’m not vaccinated and never will be. But I did decide to look at these numbers since there was claims of falsification. And I found that. I don’t believe we need to weaken our argument by using wrong data. Unless I am seeing it wrong. You are seeing it 'wrong' if by 'wrong' one can mean 'different' from your preferred perspective. This data is not falsified or distored. It offers some analysis and correctly identified perspectives looking at data. Anyone can dig for more. It did not mislable or mislead. The fact that you doubt the Scottish government's numbers probably isn't going to be addressed on an article in the forum. I would like anybody to explain, using numbers. Just saying that everything is incorrect isn’t specific enough |
Oh wait... I thought you were talking about a different site. That one is the Singapore Ministry of Health. I've been on that site VERY frequently over the past several months. Never had any kind of security warning.
Another very important factor to consider when comparing "Deaths" between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Besides the fact that there are 4X as many vaccinated as unvaxxed in the general populartion, as a group, the vaccinated tend to be significantly older and sicker. It's primarily the young and healthy who have avoided vaccination now (for good reason).
Age and health are the two strongest correlating factors. Between these two groups it would be expected that the vaccinated would die at a much higher rate. The fact that they are close to the same in numbers as the general populations means, the vaccines are improving the chances of those who take them. Enough to compensate for significantly higher risk factors.
The explanation is in the fine print of Table 20. If you follow the links, it takes you here:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021
Where you will learn this:
The age-standardised mortality rate for deaths involving COVID-19 is 32 times higher for unvaccinated people than for those who received the second dose
It's basically a way of correcting for the factors I just mentioned in an earlier post. MOST Covid deaths are old people. But, MOST deaths of ANY kind, are also old people. In Scotland, as in most countries very close to 100% of elderly people are vaccinated. Thus, these "vaccinated" people are dying at a MUCH higher rate than the "unvaccinated" younger people. This factoring, done by Scottish Health authorities, corrects for this age bias.
They also mention the other factor I mentioned: Overall health is another factor. They don't have a way of correcting for this, but... typically, older people have significantly higher co-morbidities.
I'm fascinated by another factor that stands out...(one that I also see in the Singapore data) that is: People who receive only 1 dose are close to the same danger level as the unvaccinated. It really takes TWO doses, and some time for the benefits to become significant.
| In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled 89% of Covid-19 Deaths among the Fully Vaccinated – Latest Public Health Data proves this is a ‘Pandemic of the Fully Vaccinated’ and suggests the Vaccinated are more likely to die, SomeCallMeTim wrote: |
| Can someone explain this to me? The explanation is in the fine print of Table 20. If you follow the links, it takes you here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021 Where you will learn this: The age-standardised mortality rate for deaths involving COVID-19 is 32 times higher for unvaccinated people than for those who received the second dose It's basically a way of correcting for the factors I just mentioned in an earlier post. MOST Covid deaths are old people. But, MOST deaths of ANY kind, are also old people. In Scotland, as in most countries very close to 100% of elderly people are vaccinated. Thus, these "vaccinated" people are dying at a MUCH higher rate than the "unvaccinated" younger people. This factoring, done by Scottish Health authorities, corrects for this age bias. They also mention the other factor I mentioned: Overall health is another factor. They don't have a way of correcting for this, but... typically, older people have significantly higher co-morbidities. I'm fascinated by another factor that stands out...(one that I also see in the Singapore data) that is: People who receive only 1 dose are close to the same danger level as the unvaccinated. It really takes TWO doses, and some time for the benefits to become significant. |
SomeCallMeTim,
Since the official report states that the Age Standardized Mortality Rate (ASMR) for Deaths invovling Covid-19 ASMRs do not show a causal link between vaccines and a risk of mortality, how do you feel the ASMR information you quoted is best interpreted by the public?
Quoting it as you do, might people get the false impression that the ASMR actually indicates the 'vaccines' made the 32 fold difference in mortality when the document states that calculation does not mean that.
It seems you're refuting the Expose's article's title indicating the vaccines result in higher rates of illness among the vaccinated by misquoting the Age Standardized Mortality Rate.
The Expose's article title is correct - it truly is a Pandemic of The 'Vaccinated'.
Really? You look at that page, and ALL that data that shows vaccinated people are dying from Covid at far LOWER rates than unvaccinated, and THIS is your takeaway? I'm really starting to doubt that you are a serious person?
CORRELATION does not equal CAUSE.
As serious scientist, they went to great lengths to make this clear. They specifically state:
ASMRs take into account differences in age structure and population size to allow comparisons between vaccination status groups; however some differences between the groups such as health status may remain and partly explain the differences in ASMRs.
yes... there COULD be differences for other reasons. Younger people MIGHT be having a raging disease of some other kind that the older people are not seeing. It's HIGHLY unlikely. But, possible. These authors are simply stating that they did not dig deep enough to eliminate that chance.
What they DO SHOW is... VERY STRONG correlation. It's very convincing data to me.
You can ignore it if you like. I guess, ignorance is bliss.
“People who receive only 1 dose are close to the same danger level as the unvaccinated.”
I noticed that too. I imagine we’ll see booster after booster, since the effect fades.
“Thus, these “vaccinated” people are dying at a MUCH higher rate than the “unvaccinated” younger people.”
Yes, I do understand that. And that’s why the Expose article is disingenuous, giving straight numbers without giving the total vaccinated and total vaccinated or the rate of deaths for each category is intentionally misleading. Especially since the conclusion from it is in the headline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.