11 Comments

Images 4 &6 ...just 20 extra suicides could account for the higher red. Seemingly not the case.

https://sciencenorway.no/covid19-mental-health-suicide/fewer-suicides-during-the-first-months-of-covid-19-in-norway/1772219

In entirely unrelated matters, 30 extra drug overdoses..

https://sciencenorway.no/cancer-death-drugs/causes-of-death-in-norway-highest-number-of-overdose-deaths-in-norway-in-20-years/1873354

Expand full comment

Joel do you ever feel like a detective? Norway must be a difficult country to study since they banned certain experimental biologicals, then banned certain age groups from receiving experimental biologicals and appeared to be concerned about safety more so than most?

Expand full comment

Thank u for the research 👍

Expand full comment

Good article Joel. I'm sure you're all over the data from the ONS (ahem) in the UK... This was interesting to see: https://twitter.com/mk_hostile17/status/1479484758358962186?t=eQP5SKEvwyxw1NWmZ3ROrg&s=19

All cause mortality up in 2021 for 15-44 year olds and outside the 95% confidence interval...

I wonder why??

Expand full comment

Hi Joel,

I found your piece a few days ago, and I've been posting on Norwegian issues for some while, I'll have a look soon.

Btw, here's my most recent piece (linking to this one):

https://fackel.substack.com/p/covid-in-norway-vaccine-failure-too

Expand full comment

I have a few questions for all the number specialists, table designers and statistics interpreters:

After two years of data accumulation in the context of the ''pandemic'', does it make any sense at all to extract any statement from this mountain of data? Does the result of a data evaluation still serve any truth at all?

Why do I ask? Well, in the meantime there are so many overlaps in the definition of unvaccinated and vaccinated, of recovered and diseased, to which constantly changing definitions differing from country to country are added, that there are no longer any possibilities for comparison with which any trends or conspicuous features can be uncovered. All of the data only creates a nebulous, ever-changing picture that, in its constant succession of snapshots, creates more confusion than clarity.

Does it still somehow make sense to put so much energy into data evaluation day after day, if no one is able to produce ONE clear picture from all the different evaluations that could really help us? I don't want to diminish in any way the efforts and expertise of many people who make their evaluation skills available to the general public on a daily basis, I just wonder what drives you? Do you feel that your efforts are really bearing fruit, that something good is coming out of your work for the community? Something that will expose all those who have been lying to us and leading us around by the nose for months now. Something that many would like to see happen, of course, but is always unlikely to happen - at least that's how I feel.

It seems to me that this is exactly the intention behind all the constantly changing definitions using non-standardized tests with ever questionable interpretations on their part. As if the aim is to generate as much confusion as possible in the data jungle so that the general public completely loses its orientation and at some point stops asking questions altogether.

I would be very interested in your opinion on this and I would like to thank all of you who are always putting so much energy into bringing light into the darkness, even if the darkness never really seems to go away.

Expand full comment

Hi Guido, thanks for your comment. Yes, I do believe it is possible to decipher signals from noise in all this data. I do so in time series analysis. Others do so more formally in cross-sectional analyses. It does bear fruit. It would bear even more fruit if we had unfettered access to the raw data rather than after it has been manipulated by the gatekeepers.

As to what drives us, I can only speak for myself. I personally feel solace in truth but I also think it is important to maintain a public record of our discoveries so there can be no defence that it was not possible to know certain thins at certain times.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jan 9, 2022Edited
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jan 9, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

We'll talk offline and fill in the gaps.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jan 9, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Trond, I live here in Norway. If I understand correctly the unvaccinated and vaccinated admitted to the hospital are at about the same in numbers(278 more unvaxx vs the vaxx).

As far as deaths:

-There are 157 more vaccinated individuals who have died vs the unvaxx.

-Norway is supposed to be built in honesty. How do they reconcile the vaccine push vs the results?

-It seems like the vaxx is resulting in increasing ur chances of death. I know we have to look at other factors, but it is not even decreasing or keeping the same rates as in the unvaccinated group.

Expand full comment

Be careful with categorisation issues too. Is it possible to get the raw, unfettered data?

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Jan 9, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

The data provided by Trond is right on cue. It reveals the vax failure and deception.

Cov deaths:

Unvax 487 deaths = 487

Vax 417 deaths + 227 vax induced deaths = 644

This is how the policy makers can lie to the country. Hope this is revealed and that we can stop them

Expand full comment