UK Government Data Shows 92.2 Percent Of All Covid Deaths Are Fully Vaccinated

a reply to: ScepticScot

I have a patient who has been in the ICU or my unit since basically last July. He's about 30 and in some ways looks like a 90 year old on their death bed.

Since Delta was replaced with Omicron I have seen almost no serious cases now though. Total cases jumped up about 800%, but serious cases all but disappeared.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yep, I have had multiple patients die from interstitial lung disease, with no previous history at all, all within weeks of having a vaccine. Steroids helped prolong their life a little, but nothing was able to stop the damage in any of the patients and all died.

My wife works at the same hospital for the neuro stepdown unit, she's had more than a few that had strokes with no previous history shortly after vaccination.

Both ILD and stroke can occur after covid infections as well, although the ILD I see after vaccination has been terminal every time, and post covid ILD has not been. My personal experience sample size would definitely be too small to draw any conclusions from in that regard though.

Not my area of expertise at all but quick search suggests that most references seem to be discussing individual and rare cases.

They also all seem to be non fatal.

It would seem incredibly bad luck to have multiple patients die from vaccine related side effects.

a reply to: ScepticScot

SK did not even grant authorization to use covid vaccines until Feb 2021, and they didn't really start vaccinations until March. The case I listed was from early April 2021, which means it happened almost as soon as vaccines were being given. Is it bad luck, or is it just not as rare as they claim.

Cases started as soon as vaccines started, and I had a patient die every few months from post vaccination ILD. That's not counting any of the other fatal complications that occur.

When covid first hit, when the vaccine worked, it was still a net positive for most people to get the vaccine. Highly unlikely it is a net positive now for most people.

ETA: Almost every patient I had with ILD the family was sure the vaccine caused it. There is no other explanation in any of the other cases, but the vaccine was never recognized officially as the cause in any of the cases. I would wager there's a lot more cases out there that were never officially attributed to the vaccine.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Jimy718

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: PerfectAnomoly

Were, not are. The vaccines were saving people, now with Omicron they are likely doing much more harm than good.

Actually, the vaxx only saved a very few, the rest were harmed...there is data to demonstrate that!

Omicron, considering it's timing; only served as a "Data Countermeasure" to help insure the truth is hidden.

The sources in my signature show that the vax has broken the link between infection and death, and infection and serious illness in the UK.

They demonstrate clearly that the level at which someone is considered to be at serious risk has risen, meaning that the vax has reduced the risk.

Well, it seems that your link1 and 2 go to the same place, and only has partial data for Jan. - July of 2021; so that data is grossly incomplete, you can't derive anything useful from that. The others are just "news" pieces with less meaning.

The "harm" that you're talking about in regards to the vax is fake. It doesn't exist.

No, actually the risk is VERY REAL!

Last year I did quite a lot of research into this; you see, my PCP didn't 'seem' to 'like' the idea of me getting the Vaxx. While She never told me explicitly to not get the shot, nor to get it. Instead She told me a bunch of stuff I didn't understand, and prescribed Ivermectin.

I don't typically do things "just because I'm told", so I started to do the research. I found, at the time (Sept 2021) the Vaxx was 0.16% more probable to cause a Cardiac Adverse reaction than the actual disease. With the newer variants that Delta% becomes vastly greater, making the Vaxx far more dangerous than the disease.

It seems that I have a rather fragile Heart, and even a slight instance of Myocarditis could be deadly

Some of this research involved "data mining" the CDC database.

We're also not seeing social media accounts going dark or being memorialized.

So, apparently hundreds of thousands of people are dead, but none of them are on Facebook, and none of their relatives are on Facebook either, except for the ones who create accounts especially to announce the deaths of relatives due to the vax, but not naming them, or including photographs.

Nobody is burying them either, probably because the coroners aren't declaring them dead. Which is probably because most can't be traced back to a birth certificate, so presumably they weren't born either.

Ludicrous; simply ludicrous! There are 2.8 BILLION active Facebook accounts worldwide; and YOU think you would know about 500,000 or even 5,000,000 going silent? BullScat! That constitutes less than 0.18% of active users...quite simply; you would NEVER know unless there was some connection between YOU and the person who dies on Facebook.

originally posted by: Narvasis

I’m sorry, are you talking mRNA trials that were for cancer and NOT a coronavirus?? You accuse me of “talking points” and yet use one in your response that is misleading and false pertaining to what we are discussing.

The first human trials with mRNA were actually for Rabies. I think mDNA is more in line with cancer. Those trials were like 10 years ago, other trials for other really nasty viruses have been done since then. I'm just making a point that mRNA has been around for decades now with human trials back 10 years.

You are no different then the people trying to say that people that got “vaxxed” aren’t really “vaxxed” unless they have 3 “vaccines” and now a 4th. It’s ridiculous.

I really do not care one way or the other. There is no magic number as to how many or not one should have, and it isn't people like you to decide....lol I had 6 or 7 anthrax shots as an example.

IT IS EXPERIMENTAL when there were not any peer reviewed studies on the affects of the shot they were mass distributing to people with no sort of informed consent. How you can say that is not experimental is beyond me. You’re operating outside the bounds of logic.

So what does that mean in any way shape or form? They have been giving it to humans for 10 years now, billions now have it and that is what 1.5 years with just COVID. We could call every drug outside of aspirin experimental as all those drugs are for public use.

The interesting part is mRNA isn't even a drug... chew on that for a while...

originally posted by: Narvasis

Also, please post your links and sources for saying that studies were done on mRNA gene therapies 10 YEARS AGO FOR CORONAVIRUSES.

I’ll wait.

I have a number of times, so keep waiting, don't care

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Narvasis

Also, please post your links and sources for saying that studies were done on mRNA gene therapies 10 YEARS AGO FOR CORONAVIRUSES.

I’ll wait.

I have a number of times, so keep waiting, don't care

No, you didn't. You see, there was no corona virus that needed studied back then, so, no mRNA for that; other stuff though...

Although, this current mRNA substance is the ONLY one ever given approval of any sort for mass distribution. And, it has NOT been adequately studied.

originally posted by: Jimy718

No, you didn't. You see, there was no corona virus that needed studied back then, so, no mRNA for that; other stuff though...

Although, this current mRNA substance is the ONLY one ever given approval of any sort for mass distribution. And, it has NOT been adequately studied.

Yes, I did a number of times, I get tired every time someone brings up the same old BS over and over for a year now. What would be nice if you all actually did some independent research on your own and quit rehashing the same old bs over and over.

The mRNA process is the same for any virus....Do you have issues with a new flu shot every year, or the fact that every drug that passes phase 3 are released to be used in public... Every drug.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Jimy718

No, you didn't. You see, there was no corona virus that needed studied back then, so, no mRNA for that; other stuff though...

Although, this current mRNA substance is the ONLY one ever given approval of any sort for mass distribution. And, it has NOT been adequately studied.

Yes, I did a number of times, I get tired every time someone brings up the same old BS over and over for a year now. What would be nice if you all actually did some independent research on your own and quit rehashing the same old bs over and over.

I will have to take back my statement that there was no Coronavirus that "needed" study 10 years ago. That was the SARS era; so my bad on that.

However, I found no reference to mRNA being used at that time for SARS.

As far as research goes; I've been doing just that for the past year, however, I focused more on the Cardiac events in both the disease and the vaxx.

The mRNA process is the same for any virus....Do you have issues with a new flu shot every year, or the fact that every drug that passes phase 3 are released to be used in public... Every drug.

I am very well aware of how mRNA works, and some of the disadvantages as well. No, I don't get a Flu shot every year, it makes me very sick (gastroenteritis) for about 12 hours; I don't do it anymore.

The Vax didn't complete phase 3 trials. They were started and then torpedoed; they destroyed their control, so sorry...no phase 3.

Please take a look at this data set. The second link will populate as a downloaded spreadsheet, though.

main source

data spreadsheet

a reply to: Jimy718

The links are a place to start, follow the links on the page for later data.

a reply to: Jimy718

There are 2.8 BILLION active Facebook accounts worldwide; and YOU think you would know about 500,000 or even 5,000,000 going silent?

100 percent yes. In fact we do, regularly. Facebook themselves monitor this as part of their own marketing purposes

Dozens of universities us ai to datamine social media looking for trends. It's how the initial claims of huge numbers dead of covid in China were debunked.

You guys with this vaccine stuff...please use common sense.

Once you vaccinate virtually all of the population of course the % of the dead that are vaccinated will rise.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
We've all seen the videos of the head of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky, who gets her medical information from CNN, explain to us that the vaccines wane fairly quickly. The thing is, no one seems to understand what "wane" means. I used to think "wane" meant gradually wear off, but it seems like wane is a euphemism for "fails horribly." Quickly after you "receive protection," you not only lose it, but you also lose the immune system you used to have. It seems like a good trade off though, right? A few weeks of at least the placebo effect of feeling like you have a slightly better chance of not dying from corona than your average unvaxxt cohort, to losing your innate immunity and developing VAIDS.

Pretty much every country is showing trend now.

So the mainstream narrative has changed from trying to manipulate the public into living a life of misery and compliance through fear of a virus with a 0.2% fatality rate, to trying to manipulate the public into living a life of misery and compliance through fear of World War III.

But whilst this Government has you solely focused on the conflict in Ukraine, they have been quietly publishing data that proves the experimental Covid-19 injection campaign has been an absolute disaster.

SOURCE REPORT

SOURCE

originally posted by: BingaTheGreat
You guys with this vaccine stuff...please use common sense.

Once you vaccinate virtually all of the population of course the % of the dead that are vaccinated will rise.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
We've all seen the videos of the head of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky, who gets her medical information from CNN, explain to us that the vaccines wane fairly quickly. The thing is, no one seems to understand what "wane" means. I used to think "wane" meant gradually wear off, but it seems like wane is a euphemism for "fails horribly." Quickly after you "receive protection," you not only lose it, but you also lose the immune system you used to have. It seems like a good trade off though, right? A few weeks of at least the placebo effect of feeling like you have a slightly better chance of not dying from corona than your average unvaxxt cohort, to losing your innate immunity and developing VAIDS.

Pretty much every country is showing trend now.

So the mainstream narrative has changed from trying to manipulate the public into living a life of misery and compliance through fear of a virus with a 0.2% fatality rate, to trying to manipulate the public into living a life of misery and compliance through fear of World War III.

But whilst this Government has you solely focused on the conflict in Ukraine, they have been quietly publishing data that proves the experimental Covid-19 injection campaign has been an absolute disaster.

SOURCE REPORT

SOURCE

Where is your data? Oh look another account with 6 posts coming in to defend AZ and friends.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Where's yours? People like you always abuse statistics and never do a proper comparison.

A proper comparison looks at like groups. So give me statistics for various groups with similar risk factors, with percent of that group vaccinated, deaths/serious illness vax vs unvax.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Jimy718

There are 2.8 BILLION active Facebook accounts worldwide; and YOU think you would know about 500,000 or even 5,000,000 going silent?

Well, Bless your Heart.

100 percent yes. In fact we do, regularly. Facebook themselves monitor this as part of their own marketing purposes

Dozens of universities us ai to datamine social media looking for trends. It's how the initial claims of huge numbers dead of covid in China were debunked.

There is a vast difference between you and me; for instance, YOU accept somebody's interpretation of data, where as I insist on access to the RAW data...so that I may see what that data actually says.

I prefer to form my opinion on what the data "says", and 'where' the data leads.

a reply to: Xtrozero

of course you can't be certain of number the absolutely zero reaction cases.
You can't even be certain who came in contact with the viral particles in a room full of people with half having a positive case.

originally posted by: puzzled2

of course you can be certain of number the absolutely zero reaction cases.
You can't even be certain who came in contact with the viral particles.

I guess we can sample people with anti-body test and ask if they had any reactions. Then count the number who have antibodies with zero reactions out of the total of all who tested with them. We could get around 99% +-1% accuracy by sampling 17,000 people with antibodies.

Then what will you do with the information?

a reply to: Xtrozero

not inject them with an unnecessary experiment mRNA formula for starters. But the antibody test only prove your body reacted to the infection not defend against before generating anti-bodies.

from the Challenge trial

only 36 participants chosen out of 26,000 volunteers. Among those exposed to the virus, only 18 developed COVID-19. Gregor said that this could be the subject of further study to investigate what biological factors may have protected some from infection.

36 given the virus 18 got the infection -- why is the comment "this could be the subject of further study " used and not "is the subject of further study" -
NOT Get infected because ???? seems pretty important to me.

originally posted by: puzzled2
36 given the virus 18 got the infection -- why is the comment "this could be the subject of further study " used and not "is the subject of further study" -
NOT Get infected because ???? seems pretty important to me.

OK lets see how it all plays out. I feel like you are debating something other than what I was trying to do.