The journey that COVID-19 will take us on

[speedpro]

The UKHSA stopped providing useful Vaccine Surveillance reports in week 13 of 2022. Anyone monitoring the data could see why. The last report showed that vaccinated in all age groups were 4-5 times(per 100,000) more likely to contract covid than the unvaccinated within the same age group. The rate of hospitalization was very close for both cohorts. The rate of death was higher among the unvaccinated.

The actual rates were not the interesting bit. What I found interesting were the trends. In week 13 there was a slight +ve trend in the infection rate for the UNvaccinated and a huge rapidly accelerating trend for the vaccinated. The vaccinated were the triple jabbed. The UKHSA had removed those who only had 2 shots in week 3 of 2022. When you looked at the charts it was obvious why.

The difference between the cohorts for hospitalization was getting very close to even. The vaccinated had previously been hospitalized at a lower rate, but their rate was rising and was close to matching the UNvaccinated. I expected parity within a week or so.

The rate of death was lower for the vaccinated, but it too was following the same inclination as infection and hospitalization. Without the data I can't say where it ended up but it wouldn't surprise me if the vaccinated now had a higher rate of death than the UNvaccinated.

[speedpro]

Here's another stats website, OECD.Stat, it's even in the name. Despite Reuters "fact check" they also are under the misapprehension that excess deaths are a thing and have even erroneously labelled columns in their tables as such. It's difficult to believe that such a previously reputable site could get it so wrong and it makes me wonder what incentive they have for doing it.
The image is for NZ alone in 2023. To get the full picture you need to visit the web site and enter/restrict the search criteria for the country and time of interest.
https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?qu...f1yu_AG9sMZjE#

[husaberg]

It appears whilst you can manually navigate an equine to a reservoir it's not always possible to encourage them to partake in the resheshments.

Me ,i prefer the interpretation of the vast majority of health professionals and the people who actually publish their data as too what is concluded and what the data is trending.
These people don't seem to agree with your assertions. They actually refute them quite strongly.
As they are medical professionals and scientists and people that publish the data i tend to back their experience and rationally ahead of others unable to substantiate their own claims. i am not talking a few qooks or those that like to quote others out of context.
Life life is too short to waste it on an alice in wonderland hunts with people that clearly have an agenda.
unsub

[speedpro]

For some reason the word "desperate" keeps springing to mind.

As for the health professionals whose opinions are to be considered I presume that Doctor Jonathon Pearson-Stuttard, Head of Health Analytics at Lane Clark & Peacock, and the Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health at Imperial Collage London, doesn't make the cut despite being published in the Lancet and others. Can't have been the preferred views I suppose.

It doesn't matter my own views. The people whose work I refer to are well qualified to analyze various medical issues. Whether you agree with me or not I really don't give a shit. As many point out, I have no relevant formal qualification. Neither do they of course. The people I often refer to however are leaders in their fields, Professor Vinay Prasad, for instance.

[speedpro]

With the attached image I'm not interpreting the data or making any claims. The chart is simply data taken weekly from the UKHSA vaccine surveillance reports. There is no adjustment made by me. The UKHSA removed the "only" double jabbed in week 3(2022) as can be seen by the sudden decrease in numbers. Make of it what you will.

The chart is not available on the UKHSA website. It is my own work but the only thing it contains is the values from tables provided each week by the UKHSA

Edit: chart is of covid cases per 100,000, as reported by the UKHSA. It is for the "over 30 year olds" only and is divided into vax'd & unvax'd for each age group.

[Moise]

With the attached image I'm not interpreting the data or making any claims. The chart is simply data taken weekly from the UKHSA vaccine surveillance reports. There is no adjustment made by me. The UKHSA removed the "only" double jabbed in week 3(2022) as can be seen by the sudden decrease in numbers. Make of it what you will.

The chart is not available on the UKHSA website. It is my own work but the only thing it contains is the values from tables provided each week by the UKHSA

What period does this cover? I assume it's 2021-22?

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[speedpro]

The data for the chart ended in week 13 of 2022. This and other charts I created, using only the UKHSA data, made it obvious why.

[speedpro]

Professor Norman Fenton reviewing various published papers and their "dubious" use of data to reach favourable conclusions.
https://youtu.be/Y_QldhGFuWQ?si=FUDUOdYCpjQnJri9

[Moise]

The data for the chart ended in week 13 of 2022. This and other charts I created, using only the UKHSA data, made it obvious why.

It will be interesting to see the excess deaths for year end 2023. If the trend has continued, there will be about 100,000 excess deaths for 2022-23.

I am sure this now has the full attention of some researchers in the UK, although it appears to have been ignored by the media.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[speedpro]

Igor is as baffled as the rest of us that there seems to be an association between a certain pharmaceutical and excess deaths.
It does look like the trend is continuing.

https://open.substack.com/pub/igorch...m_medium=email

[Moise]

Against my better judgement, I followed that link and very quickly wished I hadn't!

Back in the real world, there is also an article in the BMJ, but it does not present the same detail as the Lancet paper and appears to assume that the excess deaths are somehow Covid related. https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2371









Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[speedpro]

Closer to home - "The New Zealand Herald has recently reported some grim statistics with the almost doubling in heart attack rates reported in some DHBs, and the drop in survival of community cardiac arrests from 30% in 2018 to 10%."

Apart from a supposed drop in survivability of community cardiac arrests what is not mentioned is an increase in the number of community cardiac arrests. Hopefully nobody actually thinks there has been a doubling of heart attack rates without an associated increase of community cardiac arrests.

Good job that dying of a heart attack doesn't contribute to excess all-cause mortality.

https://x.com/nzdsos/status/1752205009129971747?s=20

[speedpro]

. . . the Lancet paper and appears to assume that the excess deaths are somehow Covid related. https://www.bmj.com/content/383/bmj.p2371

They wish, depending on their jab status. Edit: I had a read. They aren't really saying much.

[Moise]

https://www.today.com/health/covid-h...ople-rcna69903

It's taken 3 months since my last Covid infection for my heart rate to get back to normal while exercising. I might be a bit more careful next time.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

[pete376403]

https://www.today.com/health/covid-h...ople-rcna69903

It's taken 3 months since my last Covid infection for my heart rate to get back to normal while exercising. I might be a bit more careful next time.

Sent from my SM-S906E using Tapatalk

Interesting - I had a mild heart attack about 10-12 years ago and since then I've been on the triple A meds (aspirin, atorvastatin, amlodipine - thinner, cholestereol and blood pressure respectively) and have yet to contract covid in any of its variants. Triple vaxed and probably due for another. Maybe the heart meds are doing something useful