Had to laugh about your kitchen story. My late wife would make me get out of the kitchen as she worked. She did train me to prepare a few things by coaching from the sidelines on occasion. Has come in handy now. I must admit the spice rack remains a mystery of discovery.
I once again decided to take a close look at one of your links, the one that says 92% of UK COVID deaths are among the vaccinated. The author (unknown, not a good sign) relied on a UK health report - particularly Table 10 to make his case. Here a just a few issues:
1. The author failed to publish the footnote to the table:
"In the context of very high vaccine coverage in the population, even with a highly effective vaccine, it is expected that a large proportion of cases, hospitalisations and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated and no vaccine is 100% effective.
This is especially true because vaccination has been prioritised in individuals who are more susceptible or more at risk of severe disease. Individuals in risk groups may
also be more at risk of hospitalisation or death due to non-COVID-19 causes, and thus may be hospitalised or die with COVID-19 rather than because of COVID-19."
2. The author relies on raw numbers to make case. Raw numbers, as you should know, do not tell the full story. Roughly 73% of the UK is fully vaccinated. Of course, there are higher deaths among the vaccinated: there are simply a lot more of them.
3. None of the conclusions the author made about the data agree with the report's conclusions. Nowhere in their report do the indicate that the vaccine is causing more deaths.
4. In another part of the article, the raw data refers to folks that died "with COVID" not because of COVID. Again, that caveat inflates the numbers.
5. The author does not and cannot address why the UK would be such an outlier. There are nearly 200 nations in the world that are dealing with COVID. Why would only one nation seem to have problems with the vaccine? Shouldn't the effect be repeatable in other countries?
I've got other stuff at the moment. I have liked their coverage in the past, but I did no more than read these headlines. Daily Expose is getting material from elsewhere.
We're not going to change minds here. You are committed to your course of action. Gotta hope for the best. While I'm free to change my mind, I see nothing that will sway me.
The data for the UK, Scotland and Israel are used because of the detail of the reporting. If you don't collect the data suitably shredded out you can draw very different conclusions particularly for a virus that has a 1000x differential effect by age. Igor Chudov (https://igorchudov.substack.com/) collects those data nearly constantly and reports his analyses. I suspect others may use those data in their reporting as well. The vaccine efficiency is becoming negative after a period of time, particularly with the Omicron variant.
The over 80 group in the UK is seeing a higher share of deaths, some of which is likely anyway. We over 80 don't have much left anyway, although the odds of reaching 90 improve if you make it to 80.
“ 2. The author relies on raw numbers to make case. Raw numbers, as you should know, do not tell the full story. Roughly 73% of the UK is fully vaccinated. Of course, there are higher deaths among the vaccinated: there are simply a lot more of them.”
It’s ridiculous because the 73% of “fully vaccinated” population ought not to be supplying dead people from the virus. Not if the “vaccines” are of any use.
Recall the claims that these “vaccines” reduced the risk of getting symptomatic covid19 by around 90%?
To a first approximation, it would now be expected that the 73% if the population which is vaccinated ought now to provide only 0.9*0.73 or 7% of the dying.
Obviously we’ve new numbers. The 27% are still catching the virus & dying, but they’re expected far fewer as before.
The 73% now supply only 10% of their pre-vaccination numbers.
I find that after vaccination (assuming they behave as guided by the clinical trial) we should find a reversed.
Of each 100 Covid deaths. Only around 25 will have been vaccinated. Around 75% of deaths will be in the unvaccinated.
As a comment, the less effective a vaccine, the more those have been fooled will attribute to vaccination all sorts of unusual phenomena.
Fun with numbers! Igor has them in spades and now simply impossible to ignore. Since they are not really being ignored, hiding them now suggests an understanding, It's sad they simply can't admit the truth. Maybe: "Sorry folk, all that stuff didn't work as planned. We have no ability to undo anything. Good luck, all."
They cannot pretend they’d believed in what they imposed.
Non scientists can, for sure.
But I knew they couldn’t work. Lockdown presumes all human contacts are of equal importance in epidemic spreading.
But we knew that wasn’t true. Only sick people, those with symptoms, are good sources of infection. Those people are already home. Transmission was always known to be dominated by symptomatic contacts with susceptible people. That’s mostly in hospitals, care homes & domestic settings.
Not the general, ambulatory population. So closing those interactions off makes no difference, while destroying civil society & trashing the economy & taking the financial system to its limits & beyond.
So they knew that lockdown would have no beneficial effect and would be utterly destructive.
Similarly, masks were known for certain not to impact respiratory virus transmission. Lots of peer reviewed journal articles.
The PCR test in mass testing mode was also known for sure to be unsuitable for making clinical diagnoses. There wasn’t any question that it might be reliable. And they were run deliberately to make them even less useful.
No: they can pretend they were well intentioned & yet nothing worked. But we know that, too, is lies.
Mike – You are right that they are telling lies. They told lies from the beginning. It was systematic. It was coordinated. The question that has never been adequately answered is why. The best answer seems to be a Malthusian drive to depopulate the earth. Judy Mikovits proposed it two years ago in Plandemic. The elites have determined that we are a weed species that needs to be radically thinned out.
Beyond that it gets fuzzy. There does not seem to be any group that has been earmarked for survival. The Jews, Chinese and even Russians are the most enthusiastic about the jabs.
Can mass formation explain it? That meme seems to have risen and faded very quickly. Are we left on our own to figure this out for ourselves and our children?
All I can fathom is that the early Chinese reports that suggested a death rate like SARS but even more infectious affected judgement. The terrible projections from the UK modelling effort added to excessive fear. The Event 201 planning proposed most of what had to happen to counter a SEVERE pandemic of 1918 scale. The most extreme measures seemed to be in order so as one nation did that, others followed. BUT as data began to arrive indicating the 1000x:1 age differential for death and the projection was way wrong, they didn't reflect. Worse, they didn't reflect anywhere. Any place that deviated from the mitigation measures was pronounced foolish, killing grandma, ruining society, bad leaders, etc. That was caused by he mass hysteria of fear. The fear was required and organized to achieve compliance because the mitigation measures were for only a short period to flatten the curve. Group think, fear of the illness and fear of criticism drove authorities, not science.
I'll let others think the grand conspiracies but I think it's simple inertia and incompetence at nearly every level of public health coupled with that group think. They aren't even brave enough to admit error even as the data are obvious. Admission would confirm incompetence which they surely are. And the king is Fauci. His power comes through control of billions to his acolytes.
1. Initial estimates of lethality of a new pathogen tend to be way too high. That’s because they don’t have sight of infected people with milder symptoms or none at all & these dilute the same number of deaths. I believe IFR falls 3-10x from earliest estimates & nearly always does. The public health experts knew this.
2. If it was panic & error, then here’s something important. Several papers appeared in June 2020, absolutely killing any possibility that lockdown worked. Yet what did they all do in autumn? Lockdown. So I don’t buy panic.
3. Everything they said was lies & all measures imposed not only didn’t work but we knew they didn’t work. Any challenges at that time had you attacked like crazy online.
I do think there’s no question that the whole thing was a wrecking ball to get the economy crushed & make people keen on vaccination, which was toxic & killed many.
I have encountered a surprisingly large number of peopole who are supporting or making excuses for Putin because they dislike Biden/dems. It's actually quite interesting psychologically, people really do perceive the world in binary terms, a goodie and a baddie.
The idea that Biden/dems can be revolting and that Putin can also be revolting is too much for them to grasp. I think it's something to do with how their brains are physically made, it seems to be such an inbuilt blindness.
Agree totally. Life is more often grey than black or white and there are no good or bad people. Just people who do things which others deem to be good or bad. The people we think are good often do the worst of things and vice versa.
Had to laugh about your kitchen story. My late wife would make me get out of the kitchen as she worked. She did train me to prepare a few things by coaching from the sidelines on occasion. Has come in handy now. I must admit the spice rack remains a mystery of discovery.
I once again decided to take a close look at one of your links, the one that says 92% of UK COVID deaths are among the vaccinated. The author (unknown, not a good sign) relied on a UK health report - particularly Table 10 to make his case. Here a just a few issues:
1. The author failed to publish the footnote to the table:
"In the context of very high vaccine coverage in the population, even with a highly effective vaccine, it is expected that a large proportion of cases, hospitalisations and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated and no vaccine is 100% effective.
This is especially true because vaccination has been prioritised in individuals who are more susceptible or more at risk of severe disease. Individuals in risk groups may
also be more at risk of hospitalisation or death due to non-COVID-19 causes, and thus may be hospitalised or die with COVID-19 rather than because of COVID-19."
2. The author relies on raw numbers to make case. Raw numbers, as you should know, do not tell the full story. Roughly 73% of the UK is fully vaccinated. Of course, there are higher deaths among the vaccinated: there are simply a lot more of them.
3. None of the conclusions the author made about the data agree with the report's conclusions. Nowhere in their report do the indicate that the vaccine is causing more deaths.
4. In another part of the article, the raw data refers to folks that died "with COVID" not because of COVID. Again, that caveat inflates the numbers.
5. The author does not and cannot address why the UK would be such an outlier. There are nearly 200 nations in the world that are dealing with COVID. Why would only one nation seem to have problems with the vaccine? Shouldn't the effect be repeatable in other countries?
I've got other stuff at the moment. I have liked their coverage in the past, but I did no more than read these headlines. Daily Expose is getting material from elsewhere.
We're not going to change minds here. You are committed to your course of action. Gotta hope for the best. While I'm free to change my mind, I see nothing that will sway me.
I'm on to other topics. War and raising kids.
Graham
The data for the UK, Scotland and Israel are used because of the detail of the reporting. If you don't collect the data suitably shredded out you can draw very different conclusions particularly for a virus that has a 1000x differential effect by age. Igor Chudov (https://igorchudov.substack.com/) collects those data nearly constantly and reports his analyses. I suspect others may use those data in their reporting as well. The vaccine efficiency is becoming negative after a period of time, particularly with the Omicron variant.
The over 80 group in the UK is seeing a higher share of deaths, some of which is likely anyway. We over 80 don't have much left anyway, although the odds of reaching 90 improve if you make it to 80.
I’ve seen this ridiculous remark over & again;
“ 2. The author relies on raw numbers to make case. Raw numbers, as you should know, do not tell the full story. Roughly 73% of the UK is fully vaccinated. Of course, there are higher deaths among the vaccinated: there are simply a lot more of them.”
It’s ridiculous because the 73% of “fully vaccinated” population ought not to be supplying dead people from the virus. Not if the “vaccines” are of any use.
Recall the claims that these “vaccines” reduced the risk of getting symptomatic covid19 by around 90%?
To a first approximation, it would now be expected that the 73% if the population which is vaccinated ought now to provide only 0.9*0.73 or 7% of the dying.
Obviously we’ve new numbers. The 27% are still catching the virus & dying, but they’re expected far fewer as before.
The 73% now supply only 10% of their pre-vaccination numbers.
I find that after vaccination (assuming they behave as guided by the clinical trial) we should find a reversed.
Of each 100 Covid deaths. Only around 25 will have been vaccinated. Around 75% of deaths will be in the unvaccinated.
As a comment, the less effective a vaccine, the more those have been fooled will attribute to vaccination all sorts of unusual phenomena.
Fun with numbers! Igor has them in spades and now simply impossible to ignore. Since they are not really being ignored, hiding them now suggests an understanding, It's sad they simply can't admit the truth. Maybe: "Sorry folk, all that stuff didn't work as planned. We have no ability to undo anything. Good luck, all."
They cannot pretend they’d believed in what they imposed.
Non scientists can, for sure.
But I knew they couldn’t work. Lockdown presumes all human contacts are of equal importance in epidemic spreading.
But we knew that wasn’t true. Only sick people, those with symptoms, are good sources of infection. Those people are already home. Transmission was always known to be dominated by symptomatic contacts with susceptible people. That’s mostly in hospitals, care homes & domestic settings.
Not the general, ambulatory population. So closing those interactions off makes no difference, while destroying civil society & trashing the economy & taking the financial system to its limits & beyond.
So they knew that lockdown would have no beneficial effect and would be utterly destructive.
Similarly, masks were known for certain not to impact respiratory virus transmission. Lots of peer reviewed journal articles.
The PCR test in mass testing mode was also known for sure to be unsuitable for making clinical diagnoses. There wasn’t any question that it might be reliable. And they were run deliberately to make them even less useful.
No: they can pretend they were well intentioned & yet nothing worked. But we know that, too, is lies.
Mike – You are right that they are telling lies. They told lies from the beginning. It was systematic. It was coordinated. The question that has never been adequately answered is why. The best answer seems to be a Malthusian drive to depopulate the earth. Judy Mikovits proposed it two years ago in Plandemic. The elites have determined that we are a weed species that needs to be radically thinned out.
Beyond that it gets fuzzy. There does not seem to be any group that has been earmarked for survival. The Jews, Chinese and even Russians are the most enthusiastic about the jabs.
Can mass formation explain it? That meme seems to have risen and faded very quickly. Are we left on our own to figure this out for ourselves and our children?
All I can fathom is that the early Chinese reports that suggested a death rate like SARS but even more infectious affected judgement. The terrible projections from the UK modelling effort added to excessive fear. The Event 201 planning proposed most of what had to happen to counter a SEVERE pandemic of 1918 scale. The most extreme measures seemed to be in order so as one nation did that, others followed. BUT as data began to arrive indicating the 1000x:1 age differential for death and the projection was way wrong, they didn't reflect. Worse, they didn't reflect anywhere. Any place that deviated from the mitigation measures was pronounced foolish, killing grandma, ruining society, bad leaders, etc. That was caused by he mass hysteria of fear. The fear was required and organized to achieve compliance because the mitigation measures were for only a short period to flatten the curve. Group think, fear of the illness and fear of criticism drove authorities, not science.
I'll let others think the grand conspiracies but I think it's simple inertia and incompetence at nearly every level of public health coupled with that group think. They aren't even brave enough to admit error even as the data are obvious. Admission would confirm incompetence which they surely are. And the king is Fauci. His power comes through control of billions to his acolytes.
Fair dos, but worth considering:
1. Initial estimates of lethality of a new pathogen tend to be way too high. That’s because they don’t have sight of infected people with milder symptoms or none at all & these dilute the same number of deaths. I believe IFR falls 3-10x from earliest estimates & nearly always does. The public health experts knew this.
2. If it was panic & error, then here’s something important. Several papers appeared in June 2020, absolutely killing any possibility that lockdown worked. Yet what did they all do in autumn? Lockdown. So I don’t buy panic.
3. Everything they said was lies & all measures imposed not only didn’t work but we knew they didn’t work. Any challenges at that time had you attacked like crazy online.
I do think there’s no question that the whole thing was a wrecking ball to get the economy crushed & make people keen on vaccination, which was toxic & killed many.
Graham,
This isn’t my field & I’m constantly disappointed in my fellow humans.
But I guess mass formation plays an important role, especially in societies which pride themselves in independent thinking.
I am not saying you are wrong, but if the sites you recommend for Covid are 'on the money' so to speak then why would they not be in terms of Ukraine?
People are sometimes wrong. I'm sometimes wrong. So many people despise Biden and the Dems that they want to believe in anything that is not them.
I have encountered a surprisingly large number of peopole who are supporting or making excuses for Putin because they dislike Biden/dems. It's actually quite interesting psychologically, people really do perceive the world in binary terms, a goodie and a baddie.
The idea that Biden/dems can be revolting and that Putin can also be revolting is too much for them to grasp. I think it's something to do with how their brains are physically made, it seems to be such an inbuilt blindness.
Agree totally. Life is more often grey than black or white and there are no good or bad people. Just people who do things which others deem to be good or bad. The people we think are good often do the worst of things and vice versa.