Mar 9, 2023Liked by NE - nakedemperor.substack.com
Um, the stats aren’t just wrong; they’ve been adjusted. The fact that the data stops in March 2022 raises serious questions. Could it be that the data aren’t cooperating?
I recall that Scotland stopped publishing its weekly and monthly assessments of hospitalization and death by vax status in December 2021, soon to be followed by England, Wales and Northern Ireland. At the time, the data was showing increased COVID-19 mortality among the vaxxed with each passing week. More ominous was the notable rise in slope of the curve for all cause mortality among the fully vaxxex (whereas the unvaxxed curve was flat).
So now they’ve managed to squeeze out the data in early 2022.
Mar 9, 2023·edited Mar 10, 2023Liked by NE - nakedemperor.substack.com
It's kind of hilarious (apart from the obvious inconsistency with freshly vaxxed counting as unvaxxed and other aspects) - the apparent "Healthy User Bias" is huge!?
If you substract the "fully adjusted" values in Figure 3 (effectiveness against non-Covid mortality) from those in Figure 2 it gives the following "corrected" vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 mortality:
After the introduction of the magic sauce all cause mortality in the unvaccinated began to increase.
All of a sudden thousands upon thousands of unvaccinated began to die from blood clots, heart attacks, heart failure, strokes and a host of other illnesses at never before seen rates.
Its almost like the people compiling the ONS stats are full of shit.
When are the ONS going to do a graph proving that masks extend your life?
What does Norman Fenton say? This smacks of outright scientific fraud. It's a very British tradition. Was Matt Hancock ever anywhere these data? I'd not be surprised if someone plucked these data out of their arse. In fact, I'd be surprised if this hasn't happened.
Mar 9, 2023Liked by NE - nakedemperor.substack.com
The variables adjusted for are big data low hanging fruit. Stuff that can be obtained from public records. What has not been taken into account is the behavior of individuals, their health and mitigation practices. That is much tougher to measure, because you have to communicate with them directly. Does ONS even mention this?
As said elsewhere, it seems that the people that have a vested interest in showing the vaccine is effective should not be the same people who also share statistics regarding said data.
I hope the ONS people never consider a career change to stuff like building bridges, flying planes or trapeze artists- just stick to what you don't know.
Um, the stats aren’t just wrong; they’ve been adjusted. The fact that the data stops in March 2022 raises serious questions. Could it be that the data aren’t cooperating?
I recall that Scotland stopped publishing its weekly and monthly assessments of hospitalization and death by vax status in December 2021, soon to be followed by England, Wales and Northern Ireland. At the time, the data was showing increased COVID-19 mortality among the vaxxed with each passing week. More ominous was the notable rise in slope of the curve for all cause mortality among the fully vaxxex (whereas the unvaxxed curve was flat).
So now they’ve managed to squeeze out the data in early 2022.
I’m very skeptical.
Once they started faking their data results like “covid cures death” will appear☠️
It's kind of hilarious (apart from the obvious inconsistency with freshly vaxxed counting as unvaxxed and other aspects) - the apparent "Healthy User Bias" is huge!?
If you substract the "fully adjusted" values in Figure 3 (effectiveness against non-Covid mortality) from those in Figure 2 it gives the following "corrected" vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 mortality:
*******UPDATE:********
I think I messed up, see: https://twitter.com/jsm2334/status/1633498850924060674?s=20
Dividing the relative risk ratios is apparently the appropriate adjustment:
Efficacy = 100*(1-Hazard_Ratio);
Hazard_Ratio = vaccinated rate : unvaccinated rate
adjusted Hazard_Ratio = HR_ Covid/HR_non-Covid
adjusted Efficacy = 100*(1 – ((100-covid_efficacy)/(100-noncovid_efficacy)))
Taken from tweet above:
First dose 21 days to 3 months 58.7% Covid; 24.2% non-Covid =>45.6%
First dose 3+ months 50.3% Covid; - 40.5% non-Covid =>64.6%
Second dose 21 days to 3 months 88.6% Covid; 27.2% non-Covid => = 84.3%
Second dose 3-6 months 84.2% Covid; 28.3% non-Covid => 78.0%
Second dose 6+ months 73.5% Covid; 21.3% non-Covid => = 66.3%
Third dose 21 days to 3 months 93.2% Covid; 49.2% non-Covid => = 86.6%
Third dose 3+ months 87.4% Covid; 49.5% non-Covid => = 75.1%
After the introduction of the magic sauce all cause mortality in the unvaccinated began to increase.
All of a sudden thousands upon thousands of unvaccinated began to die from blood clots, heart attacks, heart failure, strokes and a host of other illnesses at never before seen rates.
Its almost like the people compiling the ONS stats are full of shit.
When are the ONS going to do a graph proving that masks extend your life?
We are from the government and we are here to help you. Not really.
What does Norman Fenton say? This smacks of outright scientific fraud. It's a very British tradition. Was Matt Hancock ever anywhere these data? I'd not be surprised if someone plucked these data out of their arse. In fact, I'd be surprised if this hasn't happened.
The variables adjusted for are big data low hanging fruit. Stuff that can be obtained from public records. What has not been taken into account is the behavior of individuals, their health and mitigation practices. That is much tougher to measure, because you have to communicate with them directly. Does ONS even mention this?
We see this type of stuff nearly everywhere now. There's a constant stream of data exactly until it turns "bad", and then it's gone forever.
If it's all the same to you, I'll stay unvaxxed. Vaxxed and probably dying isn't my cup of tea.
They certainly don't call it "The Sacred Miracle Elixir" for nothing!
Brilliant work. May Daily Sceptic reprint again? (I wonder if we can adjust the VE using the residual confounding?)
The stupid bureaucrats with PhD’s in ideas never took statistics and most likely can’t even add.
As said elsewhere, it seems that the people that have a vested interest in showing the vaccine is effective should not be the same people who also share statistics regarding said data.
Tritorch makes a great point ...https://tritorch.com/doormat/
Yep, live forever. In memory.
I hope the ONS people never consider a career change to stuff like building bridges, flying planes or trapeze artists- just stick to what you don't know.