UKHSA's Own Data Shows Triple Vaccinated Die At 3x The Rate As Double Single And Unvaccinated

This is what pro jab does not want to talk about it, and stick over and over the same rhetoric, why in the heck with all the people now trashing their mask and going everywhere with not jabs, they are not dying in millions or dropping dead everywhere.

Because it was all a lie, that is why.

Jabs will kill more people that the virus itself.

Here in the south, we got the biggest population of unjabbed and unmasked, but we are not dropping dead and up today hospitals have not more influx of sick and dying from covid.

What that tells you.

Fools.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: underpass61

Yes.

Because they are older.

Are you kidding? Let me dumb it down a little more-

EX:
100 people 60+ in group A, 24 die
50 people 60+ in group B, 3 die

Group A is dying at 4X the rate of group B

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

It's actually a matter of common sense and not being gullible but never mind.

a reply to: underpass61

Let's just agree to disagree?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Let's just agree that you can't face facts.

a reply to: underpass61

Whatever makes you feel superior.

How many hours a day do you spend searching for things that you want to be true?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

The people who get vaxxed 3 times are the people who are most vulnerable.

Take a look at the curve, seniors with multiple comorbidity.

The single and double vaxxed are more likely to be young and fit.

So you admit the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate?

Can you say those words?

"I, AZ, admit that the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate as the rest of the population."

That should do.

Not really - triple vaxxt people that are dying at 3-4X the rate would also be people with 3-4X the comorbidity and have age-related issues contributing to a bad outcome - that's the problem with stats and we are still learning about this disease, so we are most likely missing information.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

The people who get vaxxed 3 times are the people who are most vulnerable.

Take a look at the curve, seniors with multiple comorbidity.

The single and double vaxxed are more likely to be young and fit.

So you admit the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate?

Can you say those words?

"I, AZ, admit that the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate as the rest of the population."

That should do.

Not really - triple vaxxt people that are dying at 3-4X the rate would also be people with 3-4X the comorbidity and have age-related issues contributing to a bad outcome - that's the problem with stats and we are still learning about this disease, so we are most likely missing information.

It's not missing information. It's a yes or no question. What you're doing is asking another question. But before you do that you have to admit that 3x are dying.

originally posted by: underpass61
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Sure, but "4X the rate" is a percentage is it not?

Percentages confuse a lot of people.

Math is racist, don't ya know?

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Yes or no question?

Here's one for you.

"Will you please stop posting nonsense."

Please answer "yes" or "no".

See how that works?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

The people who get vaxxed 3 times are the people who are most vulnerable.

Take a look at the curve, seniors with multiple comorbidity.

The single and double vaxxed are more likely to be young and fit.

So you admit the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate?

Can you say those words?

"I, AZ, admit that the triple vaxxt are dying at 3x the rate as the rest of the population."

That should do.

Not really - triple vaxxt people that are dying at 3-4X the rate would also be people with 3-4X the comorbidity and have age-related issues contributing to a bad outcome - that's the problem with stats and we are still learning about this disease, so we are most likely missing information.

It's not missing information. It's a yes or no question. What you're doing is asking another question. But before you do that you have to admit that 3x are dying.

Actually people over 85 yrs old are dying at 12X the rate...now here comes a question for you...why?

a reply to: quintessentone

Exactly. It's not rocket science although some posters wilfully twist simple maths and common sense.

You have to wonder, why?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Exactly. It's not rocket science although some posters wilfully twist simple maths and common sense.

You have to wonder, why?

Doom porn, that's why.

I looked at the worst data on COVID deaths and vaccines. The worst study said that people over 60 who are triple vaccinated die at a rate 170 times higher than the non-vaccinated.

The non-vaccinated over 60 die at a rate of 0.01%

The triple vaccinated over 60 die at a rate of 1.70%

That means if you are triple vaccinated your CHANCE of LIVING if you get COVID is 98.3%, not very scary if you ask me.

I also checked out the percentage of deaths from the flu for over 60's. People over 60 with the flu die at a rate of 2.1% and people over 60 live after getting the flu at a rate of 97.9%. It appears even worse than COVID because most people don't rush to get a flu test at the first sign of what just might be the flu, many just ride it out.

Looks about the same to me. Should we all mask up and close down all businesses and schools every flu season?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: underpass61

Whatever makes you feel superior.

That’s actually you, the ppl that think they are morally superior to everyone because they are vaxxed.

a reply to: PurpleFox

Really.

Then perhaps you can show where I have ever posted any such thing.

As in "morally superior"?

Over to you.

Or just shut your yap.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Exactly. It's not rocket science although some posters wilfully twist simple maths and common sense.

You have to wonder, why?

How is explaining the difference between sum totals and rates "twisting" anything? It's basic math.
Why are you deliberately trying to muddy the waters on this?

Glad you're not a rocket scientist.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: quintessentone

Exactly. It's not rocket science although some posters wilfully twist simple maths and common sense.

You have to wonder, why?

Can you post a peer-reviewed, triple-blind, Big-Pharma-funded study that demonstrates co-morbidities is the only reason for the discrepancy?

Because that's the burden of proof the Big Pharma defenders demand of anyone who questions their religion. Just holding ya'll to your own standard.

If you cannot provide such, you are a science denier.

So the vaccines/boosters won't stop you from getting COVID. They won't stop you from transmitting COVID. They won't make you less likely to contract COVID. They won't make you less likely to be hospitalized. They won't make you less likely to die. They're not helping the immuno-compromised.

Wonder what bs excuse they'll come up with next to keep pushing the mrna experiment into people's arms?