Select to expand quoteD3 said..psychojoe said..D3 said..Flying Dutchman said..remery said..
In addition, the vaccine rollout ramped up slowly from February 2021, with high rates of vaccination in August to October 2021 and again in January 2022, but has been low for most of 2022. This does not fit with the timing or shape of the excess mortality. Likely impact in Australia: Negligible.
High vaccination rates 2021 into early 2022. High excess death rates 2022. Negligible connection. Sounds suss.
So, wouldn't there be some sort of correlation between increases in doses with increases in observed deaths?
TLDR: The spikes in excess death rates do not correlate well (or at all) with increases in vaccination rates.
You'd expect there'd be some consistent increase in excess deaths over the course of 2021? 10 million doses by the middle of the year when Delta reared its head, increasing to 40 million doses by the end of the year, but the observed death rate pretty well stuck close to the expected rate for the second half of the year.
Until that big spike in January - Feb 2022, then the rate decreased again until winter.
Peak vaccination rates were July - October 21 (consistently daily 200k - 300k +) not really correlating with a significant increase in observed death rate for 2nd half that year.
The vaccination rates increase again at end of year and progressing through into March, you could almost argue there's correlation with observed increase in death rate. Except the death rate spike drops off sharply while the vaccination rates stay high past the peak before tapering off in March.
Then for the winter increase in death rates, there is an observed increase starting in April/May and peaking in July before rapidly dropping off. Vaccination rates dropped off through out that period, suddenly increasing for Mid-late July before dropping off again (it almost looks like vaccination rates are lagging behind the peak deaths in this case)
By September, the death rate is almost matching 2019s, vaccination rates remain low even when there is an uptick in deaths in December.
It could be that there's significant lag between vaccination and death rate, but if so it's not consistent.
Or maybe the increase in excess deaths from vaccination is actually very small and we need to look at other means of tracking them accurately.
Wow! What a long winded way of saying nothing.
The case fatality ratio of covid was very low, almost statistically insignificant when comparing all cause mortality year on year, vaccine fatality has been much much less than that. No-one's government forced them to get the virus. See the difference, now?
Hence the TLDR.
Did you miss that bit?
FDs comment was implying that the high vaccination rates had something to do with high excess deaths in 2022. I just pointed out it was unlikely.
And it seems you agree with me that vaccine related deaths are an extremely low number.
Yeah I did miss that bit, I've moved from regular fact checking to occasional skimming, and I do agree with you on this one point although my attitude to the low numbers is unlikely to match yours.
Select to expand quotelotofwind said..
We all die in the end, stop stressing about it.
Some of you guys have just wasted the last 3 years of your life stressing, googling your conspiracy info and posting all day on Seabreeze twitter.
Has it made a difference??
Imagine all the thing you could have done in the last 3 years with those 100's of hours that you have now missed out on.
Ya'll living in your own personally enforced lockdown.
Good point. I've been spending the last three years windsurfing and riding motorbikes.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..ok said..
Formula nova your ignorance is alarming. Especially if you're still so pro vaxx. My immunologist Professor Michael Boyle has told me and others who now suffer from auto immune disorders caused by the vaccines. "You cannot stop the spread or infection of an airborne virus with vaccination"
He told me that he was telling the powers that be this from the beginning.
See, this is where a smart person can be dumb. Saying something like that is not incorrect, but its not quite right either.
Sure, its very difficult to stop in infection in the upper respiratory tract. I think I have mentioned this before, in that it is effectively like a different immune system. This has been a problem for any approach and there were/are mentions of specific approaches for this including nasal sprays I think.
But, clearly the vaccines do limit the impact this disease has on the body. They get infected, but does the infection go on to trash people's lungs? If the infection is not that major, is it going to get passed as easily? I still argue 'no'. If the host is not coughing and spluttering all over the place, its sure going to cut down the chances of infecting other people.
Has your immunologist explained to you why you specifically are getting an auto-immune reaction and not everyone else? He must know this as he seems to know more than everyone he has been telling from the beginning. It's okay to understand something, but surely it's better to see the overall picture. Looking at just part of the effect of a virus is not looking at the total picture.
PRIOR TOO BEING POISONED. (Pfizered)
I was a fit healthy contributing member to society. I was a 31 year old surfing regularly, fishing compatibly offshore and ****en winning, self employed for 11 years in a physically and mentally demanding career and didn't even have a Medicare card. I had to get a Medicare card so I could get vaccinated so I could get back to work which I was locked out off for not being jabbed. I was owed tens of thousands of dollars for completed and future works which I wouldn't have been paid if I didn't get vaccinated n back on the job.
The only time I went to hospital in the last 17 years was to get stitches n prior to that broken hand twice and appendicitis. The immunologist has explained that I have a very well functioning immune system. This was obvious from my enlarged lymph nodes a week after getting jabbed which the CT scans showed.
"THE OVERALL PICTURE "
If you can't see the overall picture now of a product that was promoted and promised soooo effffing much but delivered none of it, you're either on the pat roll or delusional.
Anyways to get back on topic. If you've been unlucky enough to be given an AstraZeneca jab / jabs please keep a close watch on your health as it's not blatantly obvious this "vaccine" is not what is was made out to be.
Imagine if I went and told you to eat a delicious salad sandwich and it turned out to be dog poo in between two bits of bread which then poisoned you to the point where you can't function anymore. You'd be furious! And as I've said before it's all irrelevant until it happens to you or a close family member..
Select to expand quotepsychojoe said..D3 said..psychojoe said..D3 said..Flying Dutchman said..remery said..
In addition, the vaccine rollout ramped up slowly from February 2021, with high rates of vaccination in August to October 2021 and again in January 2022, but has been low for most of 2022. This does not fit with the timing or shape of the excess mortality. Likely impact in Australia: Negligible.
High vaccination rates 2021 into early 2022. High excess death rates 2022. Negligible connection. Sounds suss.
So, wouldn't there be some sort of correlation between increases in doses with increases in observed deaths?
TLDR: The spikes in excess death rates do not correlate well (or at all) with increases in vaccination rates.
You'd expect there'd be some consistent increase in excess deaths over the course of 2021? 10 million doses by the middle of the year when Delta reared its head, increasing to 40 million doses by the end of the year, but the observed death rate pretty well stuck close to the expected rate for the second half of the year.
Until that big spike in January - Feb 2022, then the rate decreased again until winter.
Peak vaccination rates were July - October 21 (consistently daily 200k - 300k +) not really correlating with a significant increase in observed death rate for 2nd half that year.
The vaccination rates increase again at end of year and progressing through into March, you could almost argue there's correlation with observed increase in death rate. Except the death rate spike drops off sharply while the vaccination rates stay high past the peak before tapering off in March.
Then for the winter increase in death rates, there is an observed increase starting in April/May and peaking in July before rapidly dropping off. Vaccination rates dropped off through out that period, suddenly increasing for Mid-late July before dropping off again (it almost looks like vaccination rates are lagging behind the peak deaths in this case)
By September, the death rate is almost matching 2019s, vaccination rates remain low even when there is an uptick in deaths in December.
It could be that there's significant lag between vaccination and death rate, but if so it's not consistent.
Or maybe the increase in excess deaths from vaccination is actually very small and we need to look at other means of tracking them accurately.
Wow! What a long winded way of saying nothing.
The case fatality ratio of covid was very low, almost statistically insignificant when comparing all cause mortality year on year, vaccine fatality has been much much less than that. No-one's government forced them to get the virus. See the difference, now?
Hence the TLDR.
Did you miss that bit?
FDs comment was implying that the high vaccination rates had something to do with high excess deaths in 2022. I just pointed out it was unlikely.
And it seems you agree with me that vaccine related deaths are an extremely low number.
Yeah I did miss that bit, I've moved from regular fact checking to occasional skimming, and I do agree with you on this one point although my attitude to the low numbers is unlikely to match yours.
Indeed, just as my attitude towards the 'very low case fatality rate' from a new disease is unlikely to match yours.
Select to expand quoteok said..
PRIOR TOO BEING POISONED. (Pfizered)...
What are your chances of making a full or at least partial recovery?
I understand your medication has some undesirable side affects. What do you think would happen if you went off your medication?
We are all hoping you make a full recovery soon, good luck.
Select to expand quoteok said..
...
Anyways to get back on topic. If you've been unlucky enough to be given an AstraZeneca jab / jabs please keep a close watch on your health as it's not blatantly obvious this "vaccine" is not what is was made out to be.
...
I had two AstraZeneca and three Moderna.
Select to expand quoteremery said..
I had two AstraZeneca and three Moderna.
It didn't happen to you, so there can't be anything wrong with any one else. The pinnacle of scientific research. We get it.
Select to expand quotemyscreenname said..ok said..
PRIOR TOO BEING POISONED. (Pfizered)...
What are your chances of making a full or at least partial recovery?
I understand your medication has some undesirable side affects. What do you think would happen if you went off your medication?
We are all hoping you make a full recovery soon, good luck.
Currently reducing my prednisone and trying to swap it out with methotrexate. Unfortunately the methotrexate gave me symptoms of renal failure last week. Everytime they've tried to take me off the immuno suppressant medication my heart pain returns.
Could be worse though. My auntie had a mild stroke from her 2nd Pfizer and her daughter/ my cousin miscarried at 6 months after being boosted. I know of two people who died from covid in the beginning of this sh!tshow. They both had diabetes , were smokers and elderly.
Apart from these two I know of many more people who have been ruined by the "vaccines" that don't work.
Be interesting to know the numbers of unvaccinated who have died in the last 18 months from the mild flu that is covid.
Select to expand quote
Be interesting to know the numbers of unvaccinated who have died in the last 18 months from the mild flu that is covid.
And compare those numbers with the impact this 'mild flu' has had in places where vaccination rates are lower.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..Be interesting to know the numbers of unvaccinated who have died in the last 18 months from the mild flu that is covid.
And compare those numbers with the impact this 'mild flu' has had in places where vaccination rates are lower.
www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00320-6/fulltext
In COVAX Advance Market Commitment countries, we estimated that 41% of excess mortality (7?4 million of 17?9 million deaths) was averted. In low-income countries, we estimated that an additional 45% of deaths could have been averted had the 20% vaccination coverage target set by COVAX been met by each country, and that an additional 111% of deaths could have been averted had the 40% target set by WHO been met by each country by the end of 2021.
Select to expand quotehitch_hiker said..
What ever the numbers are don't trust the quokkas with them !
Sorry I don't have time to read that story I'm too busy reading his latest 'exclusive' on a Perth Pop star cast in an animated movie.. Hard hitting journalism from Benny.
Select to expand quoteFlying Dutchman said..hitch_hiker said..
What ever the numbers are don't trust the quokkas with them !
Sorry I don't have time to read that story I'm too busy reading his latest 'exclusive' on a Perth Pop star cast in an animated movie.. Hard hitting journalism from Benny.
He'd have to be up for a Walkley award or is it Wokely?
Select to expand quoteFlying Dutchman said..
Sorry I don't have time to read that story ..
I made the mistake of reading it. I'll sum it up it for you. It says (all quotes):
....because we know Omicron rarely kills healthy people
.... the mean age of those who died was 75.5 and 97% ALSO had co-morbidities
... What's the lesson in all this ?...
Vaccine efficacy is so clear (that bit is the headline)
What I think the actual point the waffle is proving is that if you are old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death) then you are more likely to die whether you are vaccinated or not than someone who is not old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death), whether that person is vaccinated or not.
And this is a revelation proves how mathematically savvy quokkas are.
Mmm, probably also proves that on Sunday January 30 2022, the editor of The West was really struggling for content by page 19.
From the screenshot looks like page 21 was just dedicated to random cartoons. I suppose they assumed any old random text was better than two pages of cartoons.
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..Flying Dutchman said..
Sorry I don't have time to read that story ..
I made the mistake of reading it. I'll sum it up it for you. It says (all quotes):
....because we know Omicron rarely kills healthy people
.... the mean age of those who died was 75.5 and 97% ALSO had co-morbidities
... What's the lesson in all this ?...
Vaccine efficacy is so clear (that bit is the headline)
What I think the actual point the waffle is proving is that if you are old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death) then you are more likely to die whether you are vaccinated or not than someone who is not old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death), whether that person is vaccinated or not.
And this is a revelation proves how mathematically savvy quokkas are.
I think you missed a few numbers in there.
Old and only double dose ( last dose more than 6 months prior) 14.05 deaths/100,000
Unvaccinated: 10.4 deaths/100,000
Boosted (or up to date): 1.5 deaths/100,000
With 95% of over 60s having booster shots, looks like the unvaccinated are overrepresented
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..Flying Dutchman said..
Sorry I don't have time to read that story ..
I made the mistake of reading it. I'll sum it up it for you. It says (all quotes):
....because we know Omicron rarely kills healthy people
.... the mean age of those who died was 75.5 and 97% ALSO had co-morbidities
... What's the lesson in all this ?...
Vaccine efficacy is so clear (that bit is the headline)
What I think the actual point the waffle is proving is that if you are old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death) then you are more likely to die whether you are vaccinated or not than someone who is not old, sick, close to death (or old, sick and close to death), whether that person is vaccinated or not.
And this is a revelation proves how mathematically savvy quokkas are.
Hindsight would imply that the so-called vaccine efficacy isn't so clear after all.
Anti-vaxxers could have the last laugh, but that has never been the point.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..remery said..
I had two AstraZeneca and three Moderna.
It didn't happen to you, so there can't be anything wrong with any one else. The pinnacle of scientific research. We get it.
Research
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
I think you missed a few numbers in there.
Old and only double dose ( last dose more than 6 months prior) 14.05 deaths/100,000
Unvaccinated: 10.4 deaths/100,000
Boosted (or up to date): 1.5 deaths/100,000
With 95% of over 60s having booster shots, looks like the unvaccinated are overrepresented
By about 14 times according to research I read a while back.
Select to expand quoteFlying Dutchman said..hitch_hiker said..
What ever the numbers are don't trust the quokkas with them !
Sorry I don't have time to read that story I'm too busy reading his latest 'exclusive' on a Perth Pop star cast in an animated movie.. Hard hitting journalism from Benny.
Here's the important part, "antivaxxers twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility of others."
Select to expand quotejapie said..
Research
When Seabreeze's scientific journal impact factor gets over 1.5 I'll start providing references.
Select to expand quoteremery said..Flying Dutchman said..hitch_hiker said..
What ever the numbers are don't trust the quokkas with them !
Sorry I don't have time to read that story I'm too busy reading his latest 'exclusive' on a Perth Pop star cast in an animated movie.. Hard hitting journalism from Benny.
Here's the important part, "antivaxxers twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility of others."
Maybe I missed the context?
I mean now that I look at his comment again, it seems pretty ironic that he misrepresented statistics and quoted out of context, an article that was all about people quoting scientific papers out of context and misrepresenting the statistics in them.
Select to expand quoteD3 said..
I think you missed a few numbers in there....
Yep, that was I was saying.
Numbers missing - like deaths from covid along with deaths "with" covid, the % of the group over 60, the average age of death excluding the covid factor etc. etc. Yep, lots of numbers missing but I guess that if you rely on a quokka for your statistical analysis you might miss a few things. Quokkas might be good at many things, but I don't think maths is one of them.
The latest advice from the WHO seems to be if you are otherwise fit and healthy then don't bother with anything more than the vax and one booster because it isn't worth it. If you are under 17 then don't even bother with the vax.
So the 'must have booster within 6 months' part of the efficacy statistics argument seems to be old news, no longer considered relevant, only to be dragged up to (as the article says) "twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility..."
Most official advice seems to be getting back to where it started. Herd immunity, vax for the at risk and carry on with normal life.
Then again I think the medical advice has always been that. It was the political and media advice that wasn't.
Select to expand quoteFormulaNova said..
.....People were complaining about isolation as it was. People were crying about this and vaccination seemed to be the only way out....
Yep, FN - that has been my argument from day 1. No idea why you cancel me for having the same opinion as yourself.
The pollies imposed the lockdowns. The only way out was either a magic bullet of a vaccine or the pollies letting everyone out anyway and admitting therefore, there was no reason to lock everyone up.
So the vaccine it was.
Whether the vaccine actually worked or not was irrelevant. It was the only way out, so it was going to be shown to work.
"pandemic of the unvaccinated"
"vaccinated people don't transmit COVID-19"
"the vaccine keeps people from getting infected in the first place"
As soon as the many eminent scientists and medical experts began to be censored in the press and social media it was obvious that the narrative was not robust enough to weather criticism and debate.
Robust scientific hypothesis welcomes debate and examination. Same reason the justice system operates in the way it does. Anyone whose had anything to do with kids knows that to find out the truth of a matter it is essential to listen to both sides.
Our eminent Seabreeze researchers appear to have waived this tenet.
It would be amusing were it not for the misery this period of history has witnessed.
Select to expand quoteTonyAbbott said..
Royal commission now
Jail time for fear mongers
SAGE (scientific advisory group England) is on record stating that the fear factor had to be ramped up.
Select to expand quotejapie said..
As soon as the many eminent scientists and medical experts began to be censored in the press and social media it was obvious that the narrative was not robust enough to weather criticism and debate.
Robust scientific hypothesis welcomes debate and examination. Same reason the justice system operates in the way it does. Anyone whose had anything to do with kids knows that to find out the truth of a matter it is essential to listen to both sides.
Our eminent Seabreeze researchers appear to have waived this tenet.
It would be amusing were it not for the misery this period of history has witnessed.
Here we go again.
Which eminent scientists were censored?
I know there were many who claimed to be so when their scientific hypotheses and methodology were examined and found to be insufficient.
Many of these would cry they were being censored while still being free to publish as they wished, because they couldn't admit they made some incorrect assumptions.
They cried they were being censored even when they were invited to the Whitehouse to brief the president and his staff (the 45th, not the current guy).
If they were truly being censored instead of being scientists unwilling to admit hat their analyses, studies, papers, investigations were proven to be incorrect or inaccurate at best (all the while claiming the same about the mainstream information that they were challenging), how did you hear about it?
Why is their 'censored' material still widely available?
(Edit for typo)
Select to expand quoteD3 said..remery said..Flying Dutchman said..hitch_hiker said..
What ever the numbers are don't trust the quokkas with them !
Sorry I don't have time to read that story I'm too busy reading his latest 'exclusive' on a Perth Pop star cast in an animated movie.. Hard hitting journalism from Benny.
Here's the important part, "antivaxxers twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility of others."
Maybe I missed the context?
I mean now that I look at his comment again, it seems pretty ironic that he misrepresented statistics and quoted out of context, an article that was all about people quoting scientific papers out of context and misrepresenting the statistics in them.
Here's the important part, "antivaxxers twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility of others."
Select to expand quoteCarantoc said..D3 said..
I think you missed a few numbers in there....
Yep, that was I was saying.
Numbers missing - like deaths from covid along with deaths "with" covid, the % of the group over 60, the average age of death excluding the covid factor etc. etc. Yep, lots of numbers missing but I guess that if you rely on a quokka for your statistical analysis you might miss a few things. Quokkas might be good at many things, but I don't think maths is one of them.
The latest advice from the WHO seems to be if you are otherwise fit and healthy then don't bother with anything more than the vax and one booster because it isn't worth it. If you are under 17 then don't even bother with the vax.
So the 'must have booster within 6 months' part of the efficacy statistics argument seems to be old news, no longer considered relevant, only to be dragged up to (as the article says) "twist legitimate information to exploit the gullibility..."
Most official advice seems to be getting back to where it started. Herd immunity, vax for the at risk and carry on with normal life.
Then again I think the medical advice has always been that. It was the political and media advice that wasn't.
If only the organisation that tracked population data, including deaths from various diseases, would state that recorded COVID deaths are in fact people who died from COVID and not 'with COVID '
And it does seem crazy, doesn't it, that scientific organisations would change their recommendations based on changing situations? Why recommend everyone gets vaccinated if 18 months later it turns out the virus has mutated (and continues to do so) and they will have to change their recommendations?
Although I would like to hear your take on what herd immunity should look like in Australia.
