UK Report Confirming the Vaccinated were 94% of COVID-19 Deaths, 90% were Triple/Quadruple Jabbed

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Source?

Already provided.

As always, sources are in my signature.

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Waterglass

This shows why you need to take more notice in math and stats classes.

What this data is saying is that 6 percent of all deaths were of unvaxxed people. Which in the UK is almost exclusively young healthy people.

That's actually pretty terrible ... for the unvaxxed.

Average age of death in the UK is the mid 80s with two or more comorbidity such as diabetes or hypertension. And this is the "with" covid figure, not the "of covide" figure.

So the data shows that the vax is highly effective, that it's protecting most people, and that being unvaxxed is worse than being unvaxxed.

As always, sources in my signature.

I hope others in the thread already told you but you might want to take a few extra lessons yourself before you say anything else.

And yet you haven't even attempted to provide an alternative answer.

If I'm wrong, what is right?

a reply to: AaarghZombies

No, I mean the actual statistics you’re referencing, not a link to the ONS which has various reports and articles.

I can’t find anything there to backup your claim.

originally posted by: Waterglass
To MODS; titled shortened to fit!

As published July 11, 2022 by "The Expose"

For the record I have been vaccinated with the Pfizer Covid-19 as of last September 2021. My doctor told me to hold off on any and all booster until we see whats ongoing in the world. He told me to follow the newspapers in Israel. He also told me DO NOT use Google as a browser. For the record I never wanted the jab. I only wanted to go into Canada but until they overthrow the current administration and DONT elect Klaus I dont think I will go their any time soon.

Hes no prepper nor a conspiracy guy. Hes pragmatic and thinks outside the box. This article is bothersome to the extreme.

A report that was quietly published by the UK Government, just hours before Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced his resignation, reveals that Covid-19 deaths have risen dramatically among the triple vaccinated population in England over the past couple of months whilst declining drastically among the unvaccinated population. With the most recent figures showing the vaccinated population in England accounted for a shocking 94% of all Covid-19 Deaths in April and May, and 90% of those deaths were among the triple/quadruple vaccinated population

Whilst you were distracted by Boris resigning, the UK Gov. quietly published a report confirming the Vaccinated account for 94% of all COVID-19 Deaths since April, 90% of which were Triple/Quadruple Jabbed

Once again a misrepresentation of the data... Come on.. It's not even maths... it's basic common sense...

The vast majority of people in the UK are vaccinated... SO you would expect more deaths in the vaccinated groups...

Really, the comparison that should be done is this:-

Compare deaths of 80+ year olds due to Covid before vaccines were available - VS - Deaths of 80+ after vaccination.. I bet you will see this number has fallen significantly...

That is a true comparison of vaccine effectiveness..

PA

originally posted by: tacoman101
Why is it that anytime any form of data is posted on this website that goes aganist the naritive you have the same handful of people wordsmithing the data to refit the naritive? What is going on here? I would understand if it was just a few posts BUT IT'S LITTERALY EVERY SINGLE TIME. Really makes one wonder what their motives are.

I personally would just ignore their responses and act as if they do not exist. All your doing by responding to them is throwing the thread off track. Maybe this is exactly what they want? I take everything they say with a grain of salt. Half the time i just see their names and i don't even read what they write because i already know what their response will be.

Now to the op's post.

It does seem as more time passes you have more information coming out about the dangers of these shots but it will never matter because it did not come from faucis mouth or the nih... So the cultists will not take it as legit info. They don't understand that everything has been compromised/bought paid for and that their "legit" info is actually "false information" they're so heavly invested in promoting.



As above, So below

Funnily enough are motives are this:- TRUTH, and truthfull representation of the data provided... That's all we ask..

You have proven in your response that you have already made up your mind and ignore all opinions that don't agree with you... This is just as bad as what you are accusing the "narative suporters" of, as you call them...

You're living in an echo chamber mate...

READ ALL INFORMATION, THEN MAKE UP YOUR MIND..... and appreciate that not everyone will agree with you on everything...

PA

originally posted by: AaarghZombies


Average age of death in the UK is the mid 80s with two or more comorbidity such as diabetes or hypertension. And this is the "with" covid figure, not the "of covide" figure.

The "of covid" figure is pure science fiction. Only in the rarest of cases can you reliably detangle which thing killed someone if they have both Covid and Heart Disease.

Be wary of any doctor that claims to know things that the current state of medical science isn't capable of telling them.

On that note, Heart Disease is a comorbidity with about 1000 different things, and around 50% of all Covid deaths are people with Heart Disease.

So the data shows that the vax is highly effective, that it's protecting most people, and that being unvaxxed is worse than being unvaxxed.

As always, sources in my signature.

It doesn't necessarily show it to be ineffective. It basically doesn't tell us anything at all.

You ever wonder why people allowed themselves to be bled by leeches for so many centuries? Same reason as all this Covid stuff. It couldn't be proven to be ineffective, and the "specialists" of the era all said it worked.


When a person with heart disease, or a person over 80 dies, there's really no way to be sure "cause X" *didn't* kill them, if "cause X" was present. No matter what "cause X" is.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: AaarghZombies


Average age of death in the UK is the mid 80s with two or more comorbidity such as diabetes or hypertension. And this is the "with" covid figure, not the "of covide" figure.

The "of covid" figure is pure science fiction. Only in the rarest of cases can you reliably detangle which thing killed someone if they have both Covid and Heart Disease.

Be wary of any doctor that claims to know things that the current state of medical science isn't capable of telling them.

On that note, Heart Disease is a comorbidity with about 1000 different things, and around 50% of all Covid deaths are people with Heart Disease.

So the data shows that the vax is highly effective, that it's protecting most people, and that being unvaxxed is worse than being unvaxxed.

As always, sources in my signature.

It doesn't necessarily show it to be ineffective. It basically doesn't tell us anything at all.

You ever wonder why people allowed themselves to be bled by leeches for so many centuries? Same reason as all this Covid stuff. It couldn't be proven to be ineffective, and the "specialists" of the era all said it worked.


When a person with heart disease, or a person over 80 dies, there's really no way to be sure "cause X" *didn't* kill them, if "cause X" was present. No matter what "cause X" is.

Not either 100% certainly but a medical professional can generally make responsible deductions on what caused or contributed to someone's death. It won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time but that applies to any cause of death.

If someone is decapitated by a chainsaw they don't overly worry about if he was about to have a burst appendix.

More importantly when assessing vaccine effectiveness (or side effects for that matter) it isn't based on individual results but on relative outcomes between omparsble groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: AaarghZombies


Average age of death in the UK is the mid 80s with two or more comorbidity such as diabetes or hypertension. And this is the "with" covid figure, not the "of covide" figure.

The "of covid" figure is pure science fiction. Only in the rarest of cases can you reliably detangle which thing killed someone if they have both Covid and Heart Disease.

Be wary of any doctor that claims to know things that the current state of medical science isn't capable of telling them.

On that note, Heart Disease is a comorbidity with about 1000 different things, and around 50% of all Covid deaths are people with Heart Disease.

So the data shows that the vax is highly effective, that it's protecting most people, and that being unvaxxed is worse than being unvaxxed.

As always, sources in my signature.

It doesn't necessarily show it to be ineffective. It basically doesn't tell us anything at all.

You ever wonder why people allowed themselves to be bled by leeches for so many centuries? Same reason as all this Covid stuff. It couldn't be proven to be ineffective, and the "specialists" of the era all said it worked.


When a person with heart disease, or a person over 80 dies, there's really no way to be sure "cause X" *didn't* kill them, if "cause X" was present. No matter what "cause X" is.

Not either 100% certainly but a medical professional can generally make responsible deductions on what caused or contributed to someone's death. It won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time but that applies to any cause of death.

If someone is decapitated by a chainsaw they don't overly worry about if he was about to have a burst appendix.

More importantly when assessing vaccine effectiveness (or side effects for that matter) it isn't based on individual results but on relative outcomes between omparsble groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Yeah and on the death certificates of gun shot victims and people who died in car accidents is death by covid 19. Because they tested positive within 30 days of death. They died WITH covid not FROM. Less than 6% actually died FROM it.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: AaarghZombies


Average age of death in the UK is the mid 80s with two or more comorbidity such as diabetes or hypertension. And this is the "with" covid figure, not the "of covide" figure.

The "of covid" figure is pure science fiction. Only in the rarest of cases can you reliably detangle which thing killed someone if they have both Covid and Heart Disease.

Be wary of any doctor that claims to know things that the current state of medical science isn't capable of telling them.

On that note, Heart Disease is a comorbidity with about 1000 different things, and around 50% of all Covid deaths are people with Heart Disease.

So the data shows that the vax is highly effective, that it's protecting most people, and that being unvaxxed is worse than being unvaxxed.

As always, sources in my signature.

It doesn't necessarily show it to be ineffective. It basically doesn't tell us anything at all.

You ever wonder why people allowed themselves to be bled by leeches for so many centuries? Same reason as all this Covid stuff. It couldn't be proven to be ineffective, and the "specialists" of the era all said it worked.


When a person with heart disease, or a person over 80 dies, there's really no way to be sure "cause X" *didn't* kill them, if "cause X" was present. No matter what "cause X" is.

Not either 100% certainly but a medical professional can generally make responsible deductions on what caused or contributed to someone's death. It won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time but that applies to any cause of death.

If someone is decapitated by a chainsaw they don't overly worry about if he was about to have a burst appendix.

More importantly when assessing vaccine effectiveness (or side effects for that matter) it isn't based on individual results but on relative outcomes between omparsble groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Yeah and on the death certificates of gun shot victims and people who died in car accidents is death by covid 19. Because they tested positive within 30 days of death. They died WITH covid not FROM. Less than 6% actually died FROM it.

Source for gun shot/Road accident claim?

Comorbidities does not mean only 6% died from covid. This has been covered repeatedly on this site.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: AaarghZombies

No, I mean the actual statistics you’re referencing, not a link to the ONS which has various reports and articles.

I can’t find anything there to backup your claim.

When he avoids quotes from his source then you know for sure that there is nothing there.

Deep south? Anyways are you jealous of what he does? Do you have a picture of Bill above your bed to keep you safe while you sleep? Maybe it is you that wants to go to the island and you never made enough money to be in the "exclusive" club. Funny, the time spent on here and other mind numbing sites, takes away from making any progress as intelligent beings. I guess you want the Wild West to stay alive and well in the good Ol U S of A. Dream is alive and well, world is watching and waiting. a reply to: Waterglass

a reply to: kevsbacon

Anyways are you jealous of what he does? Do you have a picture of Bill above your bed to keep you safe while you sleep? Maybe it is you that wants to go to the island and you never made enough money to be in the "exclusive" club. Funny, the time spent on here and other mind numbing sites, takes away from making any progress as intelligent beings.

No, I don't have a picture of bill above my bed and no interest in island girls. Its really too bad that you have NO respect for women, law and fundamental morals. Then we have the children issue.

So gol dang are you a registered Democrat?

a reply to: PerfectAnomoly

So you flunked basic math?

The bar and line graphs are simple to understand in the article along with the math. For whatever reason this study must have the boys over at The New World Order in a tiff.

Is that why you seem to try to infuse misinformation to perpetuate ignorance on such a serious issue?

Peoples lives are at stake here.

a reply to: PerfectAnomoly

You're 100% correct. I have already made up my mind.. I refuse to listen to people who only want data sponsored by one of the most evil companys to ever exist. In no way shape or form do i "ignore all opinions that dont agree with me" Only the repeat offenders that clearly have some agenda to push. These people only want one form of data and will demonize anything else because for some reason these people hold fauci in some christ like state and think he is only here to "save humaity" Aren't they doing the exact same thing you claim that i'm doing? I have read all the information from both sides.. I've even gone as far as totally going through the recent pfizer release.. SO please do not tell me what i should and should not do. I have weighed both sides.

As i've asked before. Please provide a non-bias independent study then we can talk.

originally posted by: ScepticScot


Not either 100% certainly but a medical professional can generally make responsible deductions on what caused or contributed to someone's death. It won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time but that applies to any cause of death.

If someone is decapitated by a chainsaw they don't overly worry about if he was about to have a burst appendix.

More importantly when assessing vaccine effectiveness (or side effects for that matter) it isn't based on individual results but on relative outcomes between omparsble groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Taking someone who dies who has heart disease, which in the USA kills 2% of all who have it, every year, and asking whether they have Covid, which "kills" 0.5% of those who get it, sounds kind of similar to your example.

Since about 10% of the population of the USA has heart disease, and around 50% of those who die "from Covid" also have heart disease, that means in any randomly sampled group of people without Covid, 0.2% would die this year who had heart disease. While in a randomly sampled group of people who all have Covid, 0.25% would die who had both heart disease and Covid.


Which would say killed them, just looking at the numbers? Heart Disease or Covid? The Chainsaw, or the burst appendix?

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: ScepticScot


Not either 100% certainly but a medical professional can generally make responsible deductions on what caused or contributed to someone's death. It won't be 100% accurate 100% of the time but that applies to any cause of death.

If someone is decapitated by a chainsaw they don't overly worry about if he was about to have a burst appendix.

More importantly when assessing vaccine effectiveness (or side effects for that matter) it isn't based on individual results but on relative outcomes between omparsble groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Taking someone who dies who has heart disease, which in the USA kills 2% of all who have it, every year, and asking whether they have Covid, which "kills" 0.5% of those who get it, sounds kind of similar to your example.

Since about 10% of the population of the USA has heart disease, and around 50% of those who die "from Covid" also have heart disease, that means in any randomly sampled group of people without Covid, 0.2% would die this year who had heart disease. While in a randomly sampled group of people who all have Covid, 0.25% would die who had both heart disease and Covid.


Which would say killed them, just looking at the numbers? Heart Disease or Covid? The Chainsaw, or the burst appendix?

That's not really how it works.

Doc1. He died from heart disease.

Doc2. But he was mauled by a man eating tiger?

Doc1. Yes but heart disease kills more people than man eating tigers so more likely to be it.

What is recorded on death certificates is based on the details of the individual patients.

In the early stages of the disease, there was no attempt, whatsoever to separate them.

www.aamc.org...

Early in the pandemic, some of the answers provided by public officials — who were scrambling to track the disease as it overwhelmed health systems — fed skepticism. Last April, Deborah Birx, MD, coordinator of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, said this when asked about people who have COVID-19 but die from preexisting conditions: “If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.”

That statement, combined with some state health officials saying they follow the same policy, sparked charges that the COVID-19 totals were inflated by deaths from other diseases and even auto accidents if the victims happened to have COVID-19. Federal and state governments gradually altered such policies over the spring and summer to say that in order for a death to be counted as a COVID-19 death, the disease had to have played a role.

This did gradually change, but a lot of our existing compiled statistics are from when actual determination of the disease's role was not being considered.

Of course, our best statistics came out of S. Korea, and I don't know what they did there.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
In the early stages of the disease, there was no attempt, whatsoever to separate them.

www.aamc.org...

Early in the pandemic, some of the answers provided by public officials — who were scrambling to track the disease as it overwhelmed health systems — fed skepticism. Last April, Deborah Birx, MD, coordinator of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, said this when asked about people who have COVID-19 but die from preexisting conditions: “If someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.”

That statement, combined with some state health officials saying they follow the same policy, sparked charges that the COVID-19 totals were inflated by deaths from other diseases and even auto accidents if the victims happened to have COVID-19. Federal and state governments gradually altered such policies over the spring and summer to say that in order for a death to be counted as a COVID-19 death, the disease had to have played a role.

This did gradually change, but a lot of our existing compiled statistics are from when actual determination of the disease's role was not being considered.

Of course, our best statistics came out of S. Korea, and I don't know what they did there.

Thee are 2 broad ways of counting covid deaths in the UK. Deaths after 28 days from a positive covid test or deaths where was recorded on death certificate.

The US I believe has something similar but slightly more complicated due to differences between states methodologies

The 28 day rule allows quicker results as there is not the lag in compiling death certificate data, however it is less accurate. I have said previously (maybe even this thread) that I don't think this is the best data for historical analysis.

However before people claim a conspiracy to inflate the mumber deaths its worth noting that the 28 day measure underreported the deaths compared to deaths certificates for much of the pandemic.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: ScepticScot

Nothing is mentioned about age groups.

Exactly.

To work out if 94% is actually good or bad you would need to consider the relative rates of vaccination and the relative rates of covid mortality across demographic groups.

94% deaths are vaccinated figure is meant to imply the vaccine doesn't work , however without context it actually tells us nothing.

This is bull#, it at least tells us that the ppl it was designed to protect the most, seniors, vulnerable and sick ppl isn’t work at all. It’s beyond terrible.

originally posted by: DaRAGE

originally posted by: baggy7981

originally posted by: ScepticScot
66% of of people killed in car crashes were wearing a seat belt.

Clearly wearing a seat belt makes you more likely to die.

Prior to the vaccines the survival rate was higher, if you got the rona.

After the vaccines the survival rate is still lower, if you get the rona.

Clearly taking the vaccines makes you more likely to die.

Is there any evidence anywhere that the vaccines have saved a single life? Perhaps someone near death who was given one and made a miraculous recovery? That would be good evidence.

Like i said earlier, it’s on page 45 of 58 of week 13. You can see the stats there. Clear indication the vaccines actually help prevent deaths compared to unvaxxed.

But damn, thats the only good it does. It has sooo many negatives and is such a dangerous vax to get. It does harm you in other ways.

Not the mRNA vaccines, they basically offer you nothing but a slew of potential side effects. The adenovirus vector vaccines actually do protect a bit.