She's just a puppet for anyone that will take her seriously. Look at some of her advisors Devi Sridhar for one with her World Bank, WEF and Clinton links. I'm just curious why she's so untouchable with the Scottish MSM. I wonder if the truth will come out about her lavender marriage, the Alex salmond issue or the NHS cover up in ayrshire when she was health minister involving an immediate family member of hers.
Table 16: Age Standardised Mortality Rate per 100,000 with 95% confidence intervals
you can clearly see the weekly death rates of those with 2 doses are higher than the unvaccinated. While booster shots have a low standardised mortality rate, many more people died along the way to getting their 3rd dose. The vaccine will kill anyone who just isn't strong/lucky enough to handle the initial 2 doses.
pg 51
"In Scotland, from the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination programme over 3 million individuals have received a booster or 3rd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 96 individuals (0.003%) tested positive by PCR for SARS-CoV-2 more than fourteen days after receiving their booster or third dose of COVID-19 vaccine and subsequently died with COVID-19 recorded as underlying or contributory cause of death. The majority of these individuals (99.0%) had several comorbidities which contributed to their deaths and the mean age was 78 years old (IQR 72 to 90 years old)"
They are only counting people that got Covid and died 14 days after receiving their booster/3rd dose of vaccine. What an evil way to manipulate the data. Sounds like a certain agency I know that starts with the letters C-D-C
pg 63
COVID-19 vaccination status is defined as per the following:
β’ Unvaccinated: An individual that has had no doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR or has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive less than or equal to 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 1: An individual that has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine or less than or equal to 14 days after their second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 2: An individual that has had at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Booster or 3 doses: An individual that has had a booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
Yes and the potency data is showing that these vaccines are less safe than if people didn't get a vaccine, regardless of what they discuss about it.
The booster death rate may be lower than the unvaccinated but you had to get a 1st dose and 2nd dose before getting a booster and those are showing higher death rates than if you just stayed unvaccinated.
Per Table 16: The death rate was higher for people with 1 dose or 2 doses of the vaccine than for the unvaccinated. The only people left taking the booster are the ones who survived that filter. Also you aren't considered to have the booster/be vaccinated until 14 days after your booster shot. It says so on Page 63.
COVID-19 vaccination status is defined as per the following:
β’ Unvaccinated: An individual that has had no doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR or has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive less than or equal to 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 1: An individual that has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine or less than or equal to 14 days after their second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 2: An individual that has had at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Booster or 3 doses: An individual that has had a booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
It doesn't fit their narrative. If they didn't like what the data says, they should state what the unaccounted biases and risk factors are. The data doesn't lie but politicians and statisticians will bend the narrative the way they want it to. If the report showed that the 1st and 2nd dosed subjects weren't associated with higher deaths than unvaccinated, they wouldn't have put that footnote there.
If they didn't want us to consider the data, why did they put it in the report? They could have just excluded it. They could've come up with a bs reason why the data shows people with 1 dose or 2 doses are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated. But they're not, they just have a crybaby footnote that says "The rates in Table 16 should not be used as a measures of vaccine effectiveness due to unaccounted for biases and risk factors."
What biases and risk factors? Give me the details, that's what the report is for. The data doesn't lie, but the report writers do to fit a narrative. That's not science that's politics. I look at the the data and from that data I can mathematically prove that people with their 1st or 2nd doses are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated.
The scientific method:
If I get a dose of covid-19 then I will have a higher likelihood of death than the unvaccinated because [the vaccine] is causing people to get sick and die.
Those who make it through the 1st and 2nd dose genocide will be much likelier to survive the covid-19 booster shot.
Athletes are dropping at a rate that is 60X normal in 2021. It's all happening in plain sight. It isn't COVID: they are all screened. So if it isn't the vaccine, what is causing these events? We know why!!!
Er... AC/DC? (OK, Scottish exports to Oz but there's a Bon Scott statue in Scotland so there is that...) Or the Sensational Alex Harvey Band? After these guys, it's slim pickings, agreed. I might give Big Country and Annie Lennox a slight pass but... nah, they're not rock. Lots of soft rock happened from the 80s onwards, in tandem with the softening of the culture, national psyche and so much else... Simple Minds, Texas, Primal Scream, Franz Ferdinand, Glasvegas... all corporate drones.
+1 for Simple Minds, one of the most underrated bands ever. Theme for Great Cities and New Gold Dream are excellent, never mind the Breakfast Club soundtrack shite.
Also Scottish are the Shamen, a 90s techno group. Vox Day has been posting antivaxx songs based on real songs, such as the Shamenβs Move Any Mountain.
I was there in the 90s when Ebeneezer's were good, those were one of the best decades of my life... Did not know there was a Scottish connection... You've reminded me that I should check in on Vox Day, I checked in just before Christmas and he was characteristically on point as always, speaking very much in militaristic terms to describe our current predicaments. His take now as we migrate to the next phase will be interesting...
Another factor I havenβt seen anyone consider is that the unvaccinated almost to a person knows that a couple days of ivermectin and zinc will fully heal them. Meanwhile, vaccinated people are much more likely to pass up true healing therapeutics.
Good point! I got a cold last fall and I just gave myself horse paste, zinc tablets, and vitamin D. I know other people that had got sick and didn't take Ivermectin until I told them about
I will state again what I think Boris plans are........
Lifting lockdown in the UK helps to fill the headlines with 'good news' instead of his partying. H O W E V E R.........
I think I have just worked out Boris' plan. He gives us all freedom back, because he knows the devastation coming from the vaccines, and he will blame the 'freedom' for it. Upon which he will lock everyone back up again making it mandatory to take the vaccine! The push back helped, but when they see everyone dropping dead, especially the fittest sports people, like whats happening right now. What say you?
Lovely to hear from you, I was wondering if you were still here.
Have been busy over Christmas, have things calmed down in NZ? Not heard much from my daughter, not that she shares much about vaccines, since her family have complied and taken them, and she knows I warned against them.
We are fine, located on Texas coast and are pure bloods, too, although 3 of our 4 kids took the jab. π Praying for all who have.π glad you had a good Christmas and are well!
We can hope that the deep state are being taken down behind the scenes, thats the only way these people will stop. They never give up. But then NEITHER DO WE!
Edit: My concerns stated here are false. I blame global warming. Thanks to Cucumber for working over the details with me.
I hate to dump cold water on this, but it looks like this is not a chart based on equal numbers of all categories (unvaxxed, 1 dose, 2 doses, 3 doses). It's based on 100k cases total. Therefore, if the clear majority of the population is double-vaxxed, it only makes sense that their numbers are higher.
Let's make sure we grasp the facts before forwarding this to all our normie friends.
It's plotted as per/100,000, isn't it? This makes it comparable. If totals were used, because there are more "vaxxed", there would appear to be much larger numbers. (but I haven't closely studied the graph)
The title of the chart states: "...age-standardized case rate per 100,000 individuals by vaccine status." This means the results are "organized" by vaccine status, not that 100,000 cases were tested "per" vaccine status.
age-standardized case rate per 100,000 individuals by vaccine status.
So the rate of cases 100,000 individuals is showing that those that are double-vaccinated are having higher rates of Covid-19 than the unvaccinated.
Where is your breakdown that there was an unequal number of double-vaccinated studied in this article than with the rest of the population?
They did not explicitly say this did they? The population of double-vaccinated may be higher than unvaccinated but the population of Scotland is not 100,000 people. Where in the pdf source that I linked to does it say of the 100,000 people studied:
Please see the fine italicized print under the chart. The final sentence reads: "Age-standardised case rates are per 100,000 people per week, standardised to the 2013 European Standard Population (see Appendix 6)".
This means they are testing 100,000 people per week, not per status per week. Nowhere in the document does it reference 400,000 people were tested.
On a second study, I realized I failed to view Table 14 as four separate studies. The way it is set up makes it appear at first view like two studies conducted each week.
I was never so delighted to be proven wrong! Thanks for hanging in there with me.
I'm glad we were able to get to the bottom of this, I probably wouldn't have looked deeper at it either if we didn't have our discussion π now we can share with our friends with a better understanding of the data.
They are properly infection rates (i.e. accounting for differences in population size), but there is a potential confounder in the methodology of age standardization - meaning they have some formula by which the adjust the data according to age. It would be better to have the data stratified by age.
Such data is available from the UK and shows quite similar results
The UK vaxxed population as been having higher rates of infection than the unvaxxed for months now but with Omicron the stats are off the charts bad. It appears likely that Omicron has evolved the capability to leverage the immune response from prior vaccination to its advantage somehow, increasing the odds of contracting COVID and, for those double vaxxed more than 6 months ago, even worsens the disease progression relative to an unvaxxed person. Boosters apparently restore some vaccine efficacy but only by a small margin.
And that's only if you make it past the first 2 weeks where you're injected but not yet officially "boosted".. check this out:
Finally a government accidentally released data showing the massive increase in risk directly after injection as it fucks over your immune system. This is why every time they roll out the "vaccine", the cases go through the roof.. but it's all listed as unvaccinated because it's inside of 2 weeks.
Scotland Department of Health Data - Table 11 shows the vaccinated account for more positive cases, Table 12 shows the vaccinated account for more hospitalizations.
Remember: the narrative is that the "unvaxxed are clogging the hospitals." This data destroys that - since the vaccinated are taking up more beds than then unvaccinated.
Most of the Twitter replies in the thread are pretty ignorant. The data is population rates not straight numbers so it accounts for the number of people vaxxed vs not.
That said there are confounding factors such as age (when presenting aggregate stats) and prior immunity in the different cohorts and possible differences in co morbidities etc etc. Still the numbers look bad for the vax. If the authorities want to counter this they can release better data to allow us to account for confounding variables.
One thing in the Scotland data is it is age standardized and that can hide a lot of shenanigans. More data would be better but for some odd reason they don't release it....
Showing some good data on how risk of infection goes up by a factor of 10 in the 2 weeks after injection, but those cases are conveniently labeled "unvaxed"
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/ . sometimes a little quick on the trigger but he's working really hard to organize resistance in 20 different ways and he has $ to throw at the problem (he commercialized the optical mouse) see also his website https://www.skirsch.io/
I agree with what you say but it's not just a number of "cases" of being diagnosed with Covid-19. People are actually dying at a higher rate after taking the vaccine than if they hadn't been vaccinated at all. Sure the rate of death is really low for booster shots in this data but they had to go through their initial first 2 doses of the vaccine and the death rates are higher on those than on the unvaccinated.
Also keep in mind that had a little note on pg 51 there that they don't count people as vaccinated until 14 days after receiving their booster/3rd dose.
"In Scotland, from the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination programme over 3 million individuals have received a booster or 3rd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 96 individuals (0.003%) tested positive by PCR for SARS-CoV-2 more than fourteen days after receiving their booster or third dose of COVID-19 vaccine and subsequently died with COVID-19 recorded as underlying or contributory cause of death. The majority of these individuals (99.0%) had several comorbidities which contributed to their deaths and the mean age was 78 years old (IQR 72 to 90 years old)"
Are they doing the same thing with the 1st dose and 2nd dose? Are people considered un-1st-dosed if they died before 14 days from their 1st dose shot?
Its nice to see some countries still produce actual data without regard to their political ramifications. Well done Scotland.
We're still the most locked down part of the UK
Thatβs how you know itβs working!
She's just a puppet for anyone that will take her seriously. Look at some of her advisors Devi Sridhar for one with her World Bank, WEF and Clinton links. I'm just curious why she's so untouchable with the Scottish MSM. I wonder if the truth will come out about her lavender marriage, the Alex salmond issue or the NHS cover up in ayrshire when she was health minister involving an immediate family member of hers.
Yeah this looks like SCIENCE to me!
Source:
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
Thank you, that archive link won't load on my end.
Something is up with the Archive website right now... I'm having problems on my end as well. Come back to it later, it should be working.
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
pg 50
Table 16: Age Standardised Mortality Rate per 100,000 with 95% confidence intervals
you can clearly see the weekly death rates of those with 2 doses are higher than the unvaccinated. While booster shots have a low standardised mortality rate, many more people died along the way to getting their 3rd dose. The vaccine will kill anyone who just isn't strong/lucky enough to handle the initial 2 doses.
pg 51
"In Scotland, from the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination programme over 3 million individuals have received a booster or 3rd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of these, 96 individuals (0.003%) tested positive by PCR for SARS-CoV-2 more than fourteen days after receiving their booster or third dose of COVID-19 vaccine and subsequently died with COVID-19 recorded as underlying or contributory cause of death. The majority of these individuals (99.0%) had several comorbidities which contributed to their deaths and the mean age was 78 years old (IQR 72 to 90 years old)"
They are only counting people that got Covid and died 14 days after receiving their booster/3rd dose of vaccine. What an evil way to manipulate the data. Sounds like a certain agency I know that starts with the letters C-D-C
pg 63
COVID-19 vaccination status is defined as per the following:
β’ Unvaccinated: An individual that has had no doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR or has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive less than or equal to 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 1: An individual that has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine or less than or equal to 14 days after their second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 2: An individual that has had at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Booster or 3 doses: An individual that has had a booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
A BIG part of their experiment is accumulating potency data.
Yes and the potency data is showing that these vaccines are less safe than if people didn't get a vaccine, regardless of what they discuss about it.
The booster death rate may be lower than the unvaccinated but you had to get a 1st dose and 2nd dose before getting a booster and those are showing higher death rates than if you just stayed unvaccinated.
Understood ππ½ SURPRISE!!! You have VAIDS.
VAIDS will aid you to your grave. VAIDs!
VAIDs - think like a band-aid of death!
VAIDs - Very much AIDing in depopulation!
(future NFL Halftime chant)
Yeah pg 50 and 51 as well as 63
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
Per Table 16: The death rate was higher for people with 1 dose or 2 doses of the vaccine than for the unvaccinated. The only people left taking the booster are the ones who survived that filter. Also you aren't considered to have the booster/be vaccinated until 14 days after your booster shot. It says so on Page 63. COVID-19 vaccination status is defined as per the following:
β’ Unvaccinated: An individual that has had no doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR or has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive less than or equal to 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 1: An individual that has had one dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 21 days after their 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine or less than or equal to 14 days after their second dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Dose 2: An individual that has had at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
β’ Booster or 3 doses: An individual that has had a booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine and has tested positive for COVID-19 by PCR more than 14 days after their booster or 3rd dose of COVID-19 vaccine.
It doesn't fit their narrative. If they didn't like what the data says, they should state what the unaccounted biases and risk factors are. The data doesn't lie but politicians and statisticians will bend the narrative the way they want it to. If the report showed that the 1st and 2nd dosed subjects weren't associated with higher deaths than unvaccinated, they wouldn't have put that footnote there.
If they didn't want us to consider the data, why did they put it in the report? They could have just excluded it. They could've come up with a bs reason why the data shows people with 1 dose or 2 doses are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated. But they're not, they just have a crybaby footnote that says "The rates in Table 16 should not be used as a measures of vaccine effectiveness due to unaccounted for biases and risk factors."
What biases and risk factors? Give me the details, that's what the report is for. The data doesn't lie, but the report writers do to fit a narrative. That's not science that's politics. I look at the the data and from that data I can mathematically prove that people with their 1st or 2nd doses are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated.
The scientific method:
If I get a dose of covid-19 then I will have a higher likelihood of death than the unvaccinated because [the vaccine] is causing people to get sick and die.
Those who make it through the 1st and 2nd dose genocide will be much likelier to survive the covid-19 booster shot.
Athletes are dropping at a rate that is 60X normal in 2021. It's all happening in plain sight. It isn't COVID: they are all screened. So if it isn't the vaccine, what is causing these events? We know why!!!
https://greatawakening.win/p/140InFkK8H/athletes-are-dropping-at-a-rate-/c/
Research shows that 2003 to 2018, a total of 7 or 8 athletes died from cardiac issues from playing soccer. (6.8 per 100,000 athletes)
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1714719
Move to post vaccine era:
Repeat This After Reading Each Line
βThe COVID vaccine is a normal vaccine. The COVID vaccine is safe. These injuries and deaths are normal.β
433 Athlete Cardiac Arrests, Serious Issues, 256 Dead, After COVID Shot
https://goodsciencing.com/covid/athletes-suffer-cardiac-arrest-die-after-covid-shot/
Welp. That's only because those 2-dose slackers never got their booster!
Auch Aye!
π΄σ §σ ’σ ³σ £σ ΄σ Ώ π΄σ §σ ’σ ³σ £σ ΄σ Ώ π΄σ §σ ’σ ³σ £σ ΄σ Ώ
Wow. Double vexed are twice the rate of unvexed.
Very vexing indeed!
Scotland has to produce a good rock band before we begin taking them seriously.
Nazareth was great, but that was 40-years ago. Nothing important since.
Er... AC/DC? (OK, Scottish exports to Oz but there's a Bon Scott statue in Scotland so there is that...) Or the Sensational Alex Harvey Band? After these guys, it's slim pickings, agreed. I might give Big Country and Annie Lennox a slight pass but... nah, they're not rock. Lots of soft rock happened from the 80s onwards, in tandem with the softening of the culture, national psyche and so much else... Simple Minds, Texas, Primal Scream, Franz Ferdinand, Glasvegas... all corporate drones.
Big Country was close enough.
Was gonna say.
+1 for Simple Minds, one of the most underrated bands ever. Theme for Great Cities and New Gold Dream are excellent, never mind the Breakfast Club soundtrack shite.
Also Scottish are the Shamen, a 90s techno group. Vox Day has been posting antivaxx songs based on real songs, such as the Shamenβs Move Any Mountain.
I was there in the 90s when Ebeneezer's were good, those were one of the best decades of my life... Did not know there was a Scottish connection... You've reminded me that I should check in on Vox Day, I checked in just before Christmas and he was characteristically on point as always, speaking very much in militaristic terms to describe our current predicaments. His take now as we migrate to the next phase will be interesting...
Gonna look him/them up! ππ½
ALESTORM has entered the chat
Halestorm?
Nay. "ALESTORM"
The best (only?) "pirate metal" band!
Arrrrrgh! Blacksmith approves!
Keelhauled that filthy landlubber
Send him down to the depths below...
Awesome! I have a new groove.
https://youtu.be/f55CqLc6IR0
YO THAT WAILED!!! I love the banjo & electric mandolin useage. Big Leftover Salmon & Sam Bush phan here. Manβ¦that song is epic tho!!
Primus sucks!
ALWAYS WAS!!
Dudeβ¦THANKS ππ½
Hair of the dog?
Do bagpipes count?
Another factor I havenβt seen anyone consider is that the unvaccinated almost to a person knows that a couple days of ivermectin and zinc will fully heal them. Meanwhile, vaccinated people are much more likely to pass up true healing therapeutics.
Good point! I got a cold last fall and I just gave myself horse paste, zinc tablets, and vitamin D. I know other people that had got sick and didn't take Ivermectin until I told them about
https://c19ivermectin.com/ and how easy it was to get.
The vaccinated are going to their doctor and hospital and getting treatments that'll not help them or make them worse (Remdesivir for example).
Cheers Pure Blood Fren! Here's to your health!
π₯π»ππ₯³
I will state again what I think Boris plans are........
Lifting lockdown in the UK helps to fill the headlines with 'good news' instead of his partying. H O W E V E R......... I think I have just worked out Boris' plan. He gives us all freedom back, because he knows the devastation coming from the vaccines, and he will blame the 'freedom' for it. Upon which he will lock everyone back up again making it mandatory to take the vaccine! The push back helped, but when they see everyone dropping dead, especially the fittest sports people, like whats happening right now. What say you?
I believe you are spot on Trisha! Take care fren!
Lovely to hear from you, I was wondering if you were still here.
Have been busy over Christmas, have things calmed down in NZ? Not heard much from my daughter, not that she shares much about vaccines, since her family have complied and taken them, and she knows I warned against them.
We are fine, located on Texas coast and are pure bloods, too, although 3 of our 4 kids took the jab. π Praying for all who have.π glad you had a good Christmas and are well!
We can hope that the deep state are being taken down behind the scenes, thats the only way these people will stop. They never give up. But then NEITHER DO WE!
Edit: My concerns stated here are false. I blame global warming. Thanks to Cucumber for working over the details with me.
I hate to dump cold water on this, but it looks like this is not a chart based on equal numbers of all categories (unvaxxed, 1 dose, 2 doses, 3 doses). It's based on 100k cases total. Therefore, if the clear majority of the population is double-vaxxed, it only makes sense that their numbers are higher.
Let's make sure we grasp the facts before forwarding this to all our normie friends.
It's plotted as per/100,000, isn't it? This makes it comparable. If totals were used, because there are more "vaxxed", there would appear to be much larger numbers. (but I haven't closely studied the graph)
Could you please point on what page it says that? To fight disinformation we must source our facts.
The title of the chart states: "...age-standardized case rate per 100,000 individuals by vaccine status." This means the results are "organized" by vaccine status, not that 100,000 cases were tested "per" vaccine status.
age-standardized case rate per 100,000 individuals by vaccine status.
So the rate of cases 100,000 individuals is showing that those that are double-vaccinated are having higher rates of Covid-19 than the unvaccinated.
Where is your breakdown that there was an unequal number of double-vaccinated studied in this article than with the rest of the population?
They did not explicitly say this did they? The population of double-vaccinated may be higher than unvaccinated but the population of Scotland is not 100,000 people. Where in the pdf source that I linked to does it say of the 100,000 people studied:
X are unvaccinated
X are single dose
X are double vaccinated...
etc
Please see the fine italicized print under the chart. The final sentence reads: "Age-standardised case rates are per 100,000 people per week, standardised to the 2013 European Standard Population (see Appendix 6)".
This means they are testing 100,000 people per week, not per status per week. Nowhere in the document does it reference 400,000 people were tested.
Page 38 of the sourced material
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
It was not 100,000 people, much more for each category of "unvaccinated", "1 dose", "2 dose", "3 dose", "4 dose".
Page 40 will show you the graphs from the archived tweet.
By George, I do believe you are right!
On a second study, I realized I failed to view Table 14 as four separate studies. The way it is set up makes it appear at first view like two studies conducted each week.
I was never so delighted to be proven wrong! Thanks for hanging in there with me.
No problem!
I'm glad we were able to get to the bottom of this, I probably wouldn't have looked deeper at it either if we didn't have our discussion π now we can share with our friends with a better understanding of the data.
They are properly infection rates (i.e. accounting for differences in population size), but there is a potential confounder in the methodology of age standardization - meaning they have some formula by which the adjust the data according to age. It would be better to have the data stratified by age.
Such data is available from the UK and shows quite similar results
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/unboostered-brits-infected-and-dying
The UK vaxxed population as been having higher rates of infection than the unvaxxed for months now but with Omicron the stats are off the charts bad. It appears likely that Omicron has evolved the capability to leverage the immune response from prior vaccination to its advantage somehow, increasing the odds of contracting COVID and, for those double vaxxed more than 6 months ago, even worsens the disease progression relative to an unvaxxed person. Boosters apparently restore some vaccine efficacy but only by a small margin.
And that's only if you make it past the first 2 weeks where you're injected but not yet officially "boosted".. check this out:
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/alberta-gets-caught-palming-cards
Finally a government accidentally released data showing the massive increase in risk directly after injection as it fucks over your immune system. This is why every time they roll out the "vaccine", the cases go through the roof.. but it's all listed as unvaccinated because it's inside of 2 weeks.
Scotland Department of Health Data - Table 11 shows the vaccinated account for more positive cases, Table 12 shows the vaccinated account for more hospitalizations.
Remember: the narrative is that the "unvaxxed are clogging the hospitals." This data destroys that - since the vaccinated are taking up more beds than then unvaccinated.
Table 14 is important as well!
The vaccinated are taking up more hospital beds at a higher rate than the unvaccinated.
Here is a good analysis of this data showing the same conclusion and with more of an explanation
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/new-data-on-vaccine-efficacy-from
Plus a bonus showing similar results in the UK
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/unboostered-brits-infected-and-dying
Most of the Twitter replies in the thread are pretty ignorant. The data is population rates not straight numbers so it accounts for the number of people vaxxed vs not.
That said there are confounding factors such as age (when presenting aggregate stats) and prior immunity in the different cohorts and possible differences in co morbidities etc etc. Still the numbers look bad for the vax. If the authorities want to counter this they can release better data to allow us to account for confounding variables.
One thing in the Scotland data is it is age standardized and that can hide a lot of shenanigans. More data would be better but for some odd reason they don't release it....
Thank you sir! Much appreciated!
Here's another interesting article:
Showing some good data on how risk of infection goes up by a factor of 10 in the 2 weeks after injection, but those cases are conveniently labeled "unvaxed"
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/alberta-gets-caught-palming-cards
Thank you Bidensbrain2020! π That name makes me laugh
substack is a goldmine of high quality analysis. there's a bunch of legit scientists there, undercover for obvious reasons
Know where I can find a list of reputable authors?
here is my list
https://eugyppius.substack.com/ -- generally very solid scientifically, i think he is an academic in germany (possibly in virology) but it's unclear
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/ . - robert malone
https://boriquagato.substack.com/ . - good biostatistics person, very solid work
https://aaronsiri.substack.com/ - legal aspects of covid bullshit
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/ . - largely political and legal aspects but great optimistic viewpoint, it's a pleasant daily read
https://unglossed.substack.com/ - amateur biostats (not his area of expertise) but actually quite good
https://ianmsc.substack.com/ - focus on mask bullshit
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/ . sometimes a little quick on the trigger but he's working really hard to organize resistance in 20 different ways and he has $ to throw at the problem (he commercialized the optical mouse) see also his website https://www.skirsch.io/
https://jessicar.substack.com/ - biostatistics and vaers analysis, published author
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/ - a little on the conspiracy side but generally quite solid with statistics
https://popularrationalism.substack.com/ - publishes on biostats and molecular biology
https://doyourownresearch.substack.com/ - debunked a debunk of ivermectin (rebooonked?)
Wow thank you so much! Your brain is full of helpful knowledge and frens to find!
I checked the guy's twitter feed and didn't see it, so perhaps it has already been taken down. I screen-shot it and re-posted to twitter :)
whats the point of taking tha jab
To pleash the government godsh of Shiensh
Makes sense considering the virus in the wild is fake, and they are shooting people up with the dangerous shit.
Table 16
The death rate is higher for 2 doses than unvaccinated.
pg 50
Table 16: Age Standardised Mortality Rate per 100,000 with 95% confidence intervals
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/11223/22-01-19-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf
I agree with what you say but it's not just a number of "cases" of being diagnosed with Covid-19. People are actually dying at a higher rate after taking the vaccine than if they hadn't been vaccinated at all. Sure the rate of death is really low for booster shots in this data but they had to go through their initial first 2 doses of the vaccine and the death rates are higher on those than on the unvaccinated.
Also keep in mind that had a little note on pg 51 there that they don't count people as vaccinated until 14 days after receiving their booster/3rd dose.
Are they doing the same thing with the 1st dose and 2nd dose? Are people considered un-1st-dosed if they died before 14 days from their 1st dose shot?
Damn good point! Thanks for your insight!