Volgens Britse gegevens sterven de gevaccineerden duidelijk sneller af dan de niet-gevaccineerden
Donderdag 02
december 2021 door: Lance D
Johnson
Tags: badhealth , badmedicine , Big
Pharma , Dangerous Medicine , death by medicine , pandemie , farmaceutische fraude , wetenschappelijk bedrog , wetenschapsfraude , spike
protein , Verenigd
Koninkrijk , gevaccineerde sterfgevallen , vaccinfalen , vaccinschade , vaccins
7,510KEER BEKEKEN
(Natural News) De samenleving lijkt tegenwoordig geobsedeerd door covid 'vaccins'. Echte vaccins doen er lange tijd over om op de markt te komen, dus waarom deze toewijding aan een gevaarlijke nieuwe technologie die nauwelijks is getest? En hoe hebben ze het voor elkaar gekregen? Om de covid-injectiezwendel te lanceren, bedacht elke vaccinmaker een klinische studie waarin de uitkomsten van ernstige ziekte, ziekenhuisopname en overlijden niet werden vergeleken . Deze onderzoeken vergeleken alleen vage symptomen en PCR-testresultaten gedurende een bepaalde periode. In deze onderzoeken werd alleen het aantal milde symptomen vergeleken tussen degenen die waren gevaccineerd en degenen die een placebo kregen, terwijl de symptomen werden genegeerd die daadwerkelijk door de vaccins werden veroorzaakt.
Britse gegevens
tonen tekenen dat covid-prikken ernstige ziekten verergeren
De voordelen van het vaccin wegen alleen op tegen de risico's als het sterftecijfer door alle oorzaken lager is in de gevaccineerde groep over
een redelijk langere periode. De beste manier om de effectiviteit van
vaccins in de populatie te meten, is door de sterftecijfers door alle oorzaken
te onderzoeken, waarbij wordt gecorrigeerd voor leeftijd. Omdat een hoger
percentage ouderen volledig is gevaccineerd en een hoger percentage jongere
mensen niet, kunnen de gegevens vertekend zijn om aan te tonen dat de
mortaliteit hoger is bij gevaccineerden. (Leeftijd is een verstorende
factor omdat de oudere bevolking inherent een kortere verwachte sterfte
heeft). In het Verenigd Koninkrijk zijn vaccinatiegegevens per
leeftijdsgroep beschikbaar, dus het is veel makkelijker om de sterfte aan te
passen aan leeftijd om een duidelijker beeld te krijgen wie er sneller sterft. Is
het de gevaccineerde of de niet-gevaccineerde?
Overheden over de hele wereld napraten vaccinpropaganda en beweren dat
vaccins levens redden, maar de Britse gegevens over sterfte door alle oorzaken
zijn in tegenspraak met het officiële verhaal van de regering. Volgens het
Office for National Statistics stijgt het sterftecijfer voor degenen die
volledig zijn gevaccineerd tegen covid-19 in de eerste helft van 2021. De
gegevens omvatten alle sterfgevallen die wel en niet gerelateerd zijn aan
covid-19, geregistreerd tussen januari en juli 2021 De gegevens categoriseren
sterftecijfers op verschillende niveaus van covid-19-vaccinatiestatus,
waaronder "binnen 21 dagen na de eerste dosis", "21 dagen of
meer na de eerste dosis" of "na de tweede dosis". Door
leeftijdsgestandaardiseerde sterftecijfers te verstrekken, werden de gegevens
berekend op een manier die corrigeerde voor de verstorende effecten van
leeftijd. Zelfs nadat de leeftijd is aangepast, is het sterftecijfermomenteel hoger onder de gevaccineerden .
Covid-vaccins
verhogen de totale mortaliteit in minder dan zes maanden
Volgens de gegevens leek de niet-gevaccineerde
bevolking een hoger sterftecijfer te hebben in het begin van de uitrol van het
vaccin, maar deze sterftecijfers volgden de normale sterftetrends die piekten
in de wintermaanden. Na de piek in februari 2021 begon het aantal
niet-gevaccineerde sterfgevallen te dalen, zoals het aantal sterfgevallen dat
normaal in de bevolking gebeurt. Het aantal gevaccineerde sterfgevallen is
echter niet gedaald na februari; het sterftecijfer bleef stijgen, wat niet
kenmerkend is voor normale sterftetrends. Het aantal gevaccineerde
sterfgevallen steeg tijdens de zomer , terwijl ze hadden moeten
dalen en slechts een fractie van het totale sterftecijfer vertegenwoordigden.
Tussen week 26 en 2 juli bedroeg het aantal
niet-gevaccineerde sterfgevallen ongeveer 25 per 100.000. In de
gevaccineerde categorie met de titel "21 dagen na de eerste dosis",
was het sterftecijfer ongeveer 89 per 100.000 sterfgevallen. Naarmate de
tijd verstrijkt, blijft dit cijfer stijgen, aangezien elke gevaccineerde
categorie stijgende sterftecijfers blijft zien. Van 19 maart tot heden is
het sterftecijfer constant gestegen voor mensen die dubbel gevaccineerd
zijn. Zoals de Britse gegevens laten zien: de vaccins kunnen ernstige
ziekten versterken en/of andere medische problemen/risico's veroorzaken die de
algehele mortaliteit verhogen.
Bronnen zijn onder meer:
UK Data Shows No All-Cause Mortality Benefit for COVID-19 Vaccines
The Vaccine Wars Part I
 |
|
Are the vaccinated dying at
two-to-three times the rate of the unvaccinated in
the UK as Alex Berenson's recent article suggests?
Let's
be clear: Alex Berenson has
done an excellent and courageous job during the pandemic. I follow his work and
recommend that you do as well. He definitely digs into data better than most
journalists, though we should not expect for him to do everything and be
everything. He doesn't have to be perfect and you don't have to
agree with every take to understand how important his work is. I
am writing this before I analyze the data. However, I will note that my
first instinct is to think that the [twice] Vaccinated cohort has an
older age profile than the Unvaccinated cohort. Thus, we should expect
to see greater all cause mortality in that group. This means what we are seeing
is an illusion of data aggregation often called a Simpson's paradox,
something I've written about several times before (here and here).
If
you don't want to read through my discussion of this particular statistical
illusion, skip down to the next section to read the conclusion.
Let's
be clear: I've seen statisticians and Wall Street quants at the highest levels
fall for a Simpson's paradox here or there. Recognizing the way an
aggregate can or should be disentangled
is a different job than just doing the statistics. It often
takes domain knowledge (and humility in reining in
expectations) in addition to statistical awareness to spot a Simpson's paradox.
Reversed trends in aggregates have probably fooled every human that walked the
planet at one point or another, assuming they were numerate enough to view any
data at all.
When
I teach my Combinatorics, Probability, and Statistics courses, I stop and spend
10% of every course at every level on Simpson's paradox's and similar
conditional data twists alone, giving students a chance to noodle over the
strange "contradictions" in the results. This is from curriculum I've used with
students ages 10-70:
This
story is based on circumstances similar to those I've personally witnessed in
baseball statistics. Here is the punch line: Peakoles is
clearly the superior hitter (at least so far as batting average is concerned):
I
spend so much time in class focusing on this kind of paradox and conditionality
in probability and statistics for several reasons:
·
I want for students to understand that
problems aren't always straight-forward.
·
Understanding these problems is the
difference between an elite professional data geek and somebody with
enough knowledge to be dangerous (which appears to be the substantial
majority of the medical profession and all but the most elite epidemiologists
during this pandemic).
We
may reach a point at which having more problem solvers trained in teasing apart
this kind of data results in millions of lives saved and hundreds of billions
or even trillions of dollars saved annually in recovered lost productivity
associated with poor management and governance decisions.
Modeling
the UK Data Shows No All-Cause Mortality Benefit
I
wrote the first half of this article prior to modeling the data.
I
took the period mortality tables from
the UK's Office of National Statistics (ONS).
Next, I painstakingly (yuck) estimated every relevant point on the cumulative
vaccinated chart by age from the UK's vaccination surveillance
report, using some reasonable interpolations along the way.
Then I realized that I needed population proportions for the
subgroups of the age 10-59 cohort (Can we get a little
granularity, please? Or just open source data?). Now, I can put
together a projected mortality profile for each group during an ordinary year
using weighted averages (where each age group's projected mortality gets
multiplied by its proportion within each cohort, and the
results are summed) for each week.
I
then took the raw data Berenson pointed to out
to one more decimal place, and plotted the actual 2021 all cause mortality data
versus the expected all cause mortality data. As we can see, the Vaccinated
cohort, due to having a generally older age profile, was expected to
have higher all cause mortality. (Lighter hues are projected, heavier hues are
what actually happened.)
So,
Alex was wrong to suggest that the data showed prima facie higher
mortality in the Vaccinated cohort due to the vaccines. However,
this result is quite interesting! It's hard to look at these graphs and easily
determine which cohort has suffered more excess mortality during the middle
months of 2021! So, I took the excess mortality from each cohort for each week,
and also cumulatively, and plotted them:
The
cumulative trends go back-and-forth, and it seems reasonable to dismiss any
difference as statistical noise. But
when we do compute the tiny overall
observed benefit at the end of the 28 week stretch to the vaccinated group, it
amounts to a mere 5 deaths per million doses (at over $6 million per life
saved).
I wonder who could have predicted all this?
Also,
understand that the single dose all cause mortality rates in the 10-59 range
were higher than for either of these cohorts, which is to say that the
Unvaccinated cohort is doing just a tiny bit better than the average UK citizen
during this time span! This is all very consistent with my hypothesis
that the vaccines have no real efficacy.
Even worse, they have come at the expense of hundreds of thousands of serious
adverse events in the UK alone (possibly over a million at this point), and
several billion pounds from the public treasury.
It's
also unclear exactly how the laundering of post-vaccination
mortality plays into official mortality categorizations,
but the charts above are made playing by their rules,
with their data. All this provides us with a frightening, if
illuminating look at what the Kunlangeta are
doing during (provoking?) an international governance and economic crisis.
Addendum: Note
that I still think there are excess deaths among the vaccinated group not
visible in this time frame because they occurred en masse at the outset of the UK's
vaccination program among the elderly. It certainly
appears that these vaccines are killing more people than they save.
Addendum
2: In response to a question on Twitter…from
March 13 and for several months, the oldest among the 10-59 age group get vaccinated
faster (think in proportions), while the youngest get vaccinated slower, which
is why the age profile of the Vaccinated cohort grows (and the Unvaccinated
gets lower). Hopefully
this visualization helps.
Addendum
3: Note that the 10-16 year olds remain almost entirely
unvaccinated through week 38. As the older groups shift into the Vaccinated
cohort, this distills a lower mortality rate among the Unvaccinated cohort.
Addendum
4: As the Vaccinated cohort might get slightly younger
at the tail end of the week 11-38 time period, the older people who are added
to the vaccinated group, while perhaps fewer, add more risk to the baseline
than the more numerous younger people subtract from it. It’s like this: if the
average weight of the people on the elevator is 150 pounds, and you add 1
person who weighs 800 pounds along with 12 children who each weigh 100 pounds,
the average still creeps up just a bit.
