Don’t say it too loud, you’ll give the globalists ideas.
Maybe we should start faking our deaths so they forget about us.
Hey, that could work.
They scream about all us unvaccinated dying, then when they discover our scam, we tell them, “hey, if you fuck with us, you’re going to have to explain how all these unvaccinated dead are suddenly alive again.”
I think many of "vaccinated" covidians have a parallel society where CNN is watched (not for humor but for information) and they will never hear about things going against the narrative. Think many will be getting shots as long as government tells them to and government hasn't slowed down in demands for further "vaccinations". Boy are they going to be surprised when they (finally) find out the truth. Figure that cannot be too much longer, but I've been wrong about truth escaping every time so far. Of course they'll be encouraged to blame the unvaccinated because every society needs a scapegoat, and they'll just transfer their anger, shock and despair to blaming us. I'm sure MSM will help. WEF knows you gotta break eggs to make a omelet- they need a LOT of ", broken eggs to take over the world.
"Interesting" that corporate America sure seems to be on WEFs side, guess they'll be "stakeholders" in this brave new world.
Hello my dear friend. Superb title for sharing on Reddit. Makes it so much easier when it populates the field with a title which says it all… and a bit snarky…
Control Group. At ease!🫡
Thank you for the great work. I’m assuming I can extrapolate for the US😁😁😁
Pretty much in line with what I was seeing earlier on. I used to compile the weekly reports in a spreadsheet and look at the weekly cases and also the accumulated cases and the movements between categories week to week, particularly the “under investigation” category which has now become the “unknown” category and there are some odd movements in there, “knowns” become “unknown” they eventually just got dumped in the “unvaccinated” category with the great Omicron “game changer”. There is a “missing report” just before the format change. If you follow the trend in the data it was moving to a point where it was “almost certain” on any metric that vaccine had no benefit what so ever for transmission, hospitalization, ICU or death. Conveniently, along comes Omicron and Boosters to muddy the waters. When I say “almost certain” I mean that you have to start making some pretty generous assumptions like all the “unknowns” are “unvaxxed” and “effectiveness” can’t be “negative”. You’ll find something like effectiveness is 0%+30%/0. If you allow negative effectiveness you get something like -30% +60%/-60%. The value cannot be outside this range. The upper limit is the highest possible value and the lower limit I calculated wasn’t even assuming all the “unknowns” were vaccinated, I think it was just “known” vs “known” from memory. On a population level it’s a failed experiment, on an individual level there may be some benefit to the elderly, I don’t really know because there is no age stratified data I can find for NSW. I’m pretty sure if there was supporting data to back up the claim of effectiveness in the elderly they’d be shouting it from the roof top. They’ve got the data, it’s not that hard to get it in Australia with our centralized health care system. They just won’t release it, Andrew Madry (Data Wise substack) has tried to get it under FOI, they just dick him around by the look of it with the Federal/State divide i.e. hospitals are a state issues, vaccination registry is Federal database, private medical records excuses etc. It’s not that hard ABS could do it, but they don’t. I’m pretty sure they’ve done the sums and it doesn’t support the narrative otherwise we’d be hearing about it. Otherwise the explanation is they just aren’t looking at the data they have available at their disposal which is a tragedy if true.
Thanks, NSW health will use any trick available to massage the data to try and get themselves out of the trap they’ve set themselves. But the truth will out. We just have to wait.
I wonder if some batches are actually that effective.
But no. However, I think the globalist elite have whet their appetite on what is possible. Now they know what they can push on an entire world by population and can cause sterility, injury, and death over time, short life spans and brain 🧠 power in whoever remains they must be giddy.
I really think that they are going to try for more of the same or even something even more deadly.
Imagine that you are a psychopath and you walk into a neighborhood where crime is basically unknown and you like to hunt little children and women. What a playground! You cut up and rape a few people and the cops rule it as some freak storm that hit.
Would you possibly be able to stop yourself at that point if you even wanted to?
They now have a globalized platform for moving product from Concept to assembly line to distribution worldwide across borders! They have a psychological media network across the entire earth and owns the United Nations World Health Organization along with all of his daughter organizations and just about every country!
There is no way they are not going to do this again and very soon. Unless they don’t get a chance because their agricultural and economic pathologies destabilize their hunting grounds due to their gleeful overzealous activity.
It’s like that movie Armageddon I have a front seat to the end of the world. I’m like George Carlin just kind of rubbing my hands together enjoying the show
when you have 97% vaccine coverage the idea that vaccinated people are more frail holds no water, if anything the unvaxxed would only be so because they were too sick to take the jab, or had known allergies.
The irony here is that the very same report notes, "However, people who are not vaccinated are far more likely to suffer severe Covid-19". I think they assume we don't look at their data; maybe they should look at it themselves ...
Yep. What’s the metric they’re using? Certainly, not based on their data. I think it’s just wishful thinking, or maybe it’s their attempt at some kind of Jedi mind trick.
To me it reads like “Despite evidence to the contrary, people who are not vaccinated remain far more likely to suffer severe COVID-19.”
Just did a spot check (n=7). I’m pretty sure it’s been the same comment in every report since 26/2/22 Week 8 i.e. the new format after the mysterious missing Week 7. It’s just padding in the pro-forma report. Just like the paragraph below it. They probably haven’t read it since February when they first wrote it, they just fill in the different numbers as appropriate and leave the words the same.
I follow along really well and never miss a post, but please explain for us in the cheap seats what exactly this means: “ Unless, of course, you're using dose-dependency as a proxy for comorbidity or moribund level? Seems to be something of a correlation there?”
Please bear in mind that the deaths I quote here, didn’t all occur in the same time period. eg. It’s the number of days post vaccination that death occurs. Within 7 days - 10,031. Within 14 days - 27,463. Within 28 days 69,466
“Age-standardised mortality rates for deaths by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 1 January 2021 and 31 May 2022”
Starting to see the effects of retaining an intact innate immune system (undiminished by 'vaccines'), whilst attaining a Covid19 trained adaptive immune system (exposure to virus). Natural immunity is optimised, with a consequent minimising of ongoing risk from Covid19.
Who would have thought this could be possible?
Well, about 95% of our medical practitioners didn't.
Now, there's an indictment of the woeful state of our health systems.
If our MDs had supported their patients right to informed consent and the effectiveness of current treatments this pandemic would’ve been stopped in its tracks.
On Twitter he assumes a 3% rate of being unvaccinated...
I looked up the official stats provided by Google and it's more like 12%.
So there are just 7 times more vaccinated people than unvaccinated people. Yet 16x more deaths. So the vax overall more than doubles the death rate given the average number of jabs and it's surely higher if you take just the ones with higher jab numbers. They don't show stats on Google for how many got a booster anymore.
I was surprised to read 3%. 12% is more reasonable. Also, there are workarounds. A young relative went to a party in a restaurant, unvaxed, but he has a vax pass. All young business people. This is when no one except the vaxed were allowed into restaurants. There were about 20 young business men. A friend sidled up to him and said 'I am surprised to see you here. i wouldn't have thought you were vaxed.' My relative said 'Well, I must be right? I have a vax pass. It isn't like there are any workarounds.' The other fellow laughed, catching his drift, and said 'ha, me too. Where'd you get yours?' They exchanged info. My relative knew six young men of the 20. He sidled up to each of them and asked if they actually were vaxed, or just had figured out a way around it. EVERY ONE of the people he knew weren't vaxed, but were registered as vaxed. Another acquaintance is very good friends with an assistant in Doug Ford's office. He is the Premier of Ontario Canada. Ontario was reporting 70% fully vaxed, this was pre boosters. The friend of my acquaintance said Doug Ford wasn't vaxed. Nobody in the Premier's office was vaxed, and their internal numbers were 48% were vaxed, not 70%. They lie, over and over. I would assume if 12% is the official unvaxed number, it is higher than that.
Your dismissal of age as a factor is weak. If you look elsewhere in the report, you will see that 28 of the 35 deaths were in people aged 80 or above. Your statement "the jab does not appear to be working at improving their outcomes either, does it" is utterly unsubstantiated by evidence here, since you lack data which is stratified both by age and vaccination status.
On the other hand, it's worth pointing out that unvaccinated people make up 3.07% of the over 16 population in NSW (and 2.25% of over 30s in which all the deaths here occured), and yet they made up 5.7% of the deaths.
I'll bite. It is inconceivable that the actual percentage of unvaccinated is just 3.07. The authorities wish it was that low, but I know scads of people who "got vaccinated" who did not get vaccinated, and that is all you're going to hear from me on *that* subject.
If your response is "I don't believe the data", then frankly we can't have a meaningful discussion.
It is, however, quite strange that you are jumping to the defence of a data analyst who is analysing NSW govt data, by completely denying the accurancy of a different piece of data from exactly the same source. If you don't believe the data in my comment, surely Joel's analysis is equally meaningless because it's based on the same, apparently worthless, source?
My response is certainly that I do not believe the data as published by those with the agenda of 100% double-jabbed plus two boosters. Why should I?
I take Joel's analysis with a grain of salt, but the fact is that those of us who are *definitely, vociferously* unvaccinated are not dying in droves or overwhelming the health care system.
As others have pointed out here, the manner in which stratification of data has been quietly eliminated or massaged to support the narrative makes it very hard to accept the argument that these products have a risk:reward profile that a healthy, rational person would see as favourable to the jab.
>the manner in which stratification of data has been quietly eliminated or massaged to support the narrative
Well that's precisely the point in my original comment! Joel is making a claim which is not substantiated by the stratification of data provided. In this case, Joel is making this mistake, not NSW.
Again, if you choose not to believe data which doesn't support your claim, and make unsubstantiated claims yourself ("I still believe many who have been vaccinated end up miscategorized on death reports, though I cannot prove it."), we can't have a constructive discussion.
You're welcome to believe what you believe; my criticism is of Joel's conclusions, not yours.
I don't take issue with questioning Joel's conclusion in this particular matter, with this particular data. What I do mean to point out is that data on the percentage who remain unvaccinated is highly questionable, unless you disbelieve a) reports from various nations about fake vaccine passports and b) that health authorities have a motive to claim success based on a high percentage vaccinated. A reasonable person has to accept that there is almost definitely a skew in the direction of too high a percentage double- (or more) jabbed.
As for my claim of a skew toward too high a number of deaths among those listed as "unvaccinated", it depends on jurisdiction, but in Canada those who died within two weeks of the jab were considered "unvaccinated", as were many who did not have "Vaccinated? Yes" manually entered in their charts.
It is important to know that such shenanigans have been skewing the percentages for many months, as we all have to make a personal risk:reward assessment.
Fair enough. I guess we can continue this if you're able to supply any evidence of your claim that NSW are skewing vaccination data. If not, I'm inclined to stick to my claim, and I'm not likely to change your mind, so we're at an impasse.
However, on the subject of "unvaccinated" deaths, I still believe many who have been vaccinated end up miscategorized on death reports, though I cannot prove it. There is certainly motive, however.
For months now in the state of NSW the number of unvaccinated deaths has been greater than the number or unvaccinated cases in ICU. Does this mean that unvaccinated people are dying before they realise they should be in hospital? Or does this mean that of the unvaccinated, only people who are already in some form of palliative care are dying? Or is there another possible explanation?
Hence the, surprisingly convenient, gain of function development of the lethality of an early covid variant combined with the transmissibility of Omicron.
Don’t say it too loud, you’ll give the globalists ideas.
Maybe we should start faking our deaths so they forget about us.
Hey, that could work.
They scream about all us unvaccinated dying, then when they discover our scam, we tell them, “hey, if you fuck with us, you’re going to have to explain how all these unvaccinated dead are suddenly alive again.”
I think many of "vaccinated" covidians have a parallel society where CNN is watched (not for humor but for information) and they will never hear about things going against the narrative. Think many will be getting shots as long as government tells them to and government hasn't slowed down in demands for further "vaccinations". Boy are they going to be surprised when they (finally) find out the truth. Figure that cannot be too much longer, but I've been wrong about truth escaping every time so far. Of course they'll be encouraged to blame the unvaccinated because every society needs a scapegoat, and they'll just transfer their anger, shock and despair to blaming us. I'm sure MSM will help. WEF knows you gotta break eggs to make a omelet- they need a LOT of ", broken eggs to take over the world.
"Interesting" that corporate America sure seems to be on WEFs side, guess they'll be "stakeholders" in this brave new world.
Don't forget to get your jabs and all of your boosters right away!
Hello my dear friend. Superb title for sharing on Reddit. Makes it so much easier when it populates the field with a title which says it all… and a bit snarky…
Control Group. At ease!🫡
Thank you for the great work. I’m assuming I can extrapolate for the US😁😁😁
Well, it's the same pattern in the UK so it would be a reasonable thing to do. https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/covid-is-becoming-increasingly-vaccine
The favourite Covidian comeback is 'but all the Unknowns are Unvaccinated'. Problem with that is,
a) It's a speculative claim
b) We know that Unknown can also include those vaxxed overseas, vaxxed but with interstate address, vaxxed but recently changed name (eg: marriage)
Here is at least one week from NSW surveillance reporting in which EVERY SINGLE Unknown was vaccinated (see page 1):
https://www.nooows.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/0-weekly-daily-reconciliation-covid-overview-with-links-20220423.pdf
I saw the similarity in the numbers and did wonder. Thank you for clearing it up!
Pretty much in line with what I was seeing earlier on. I used to compile the weekly reports in a spreadsheet and look at the weekly cases and also the accumulated cases and the movements between categories week to week, particularly the “under investigation” category which has now become the “unknown” category and there are some odd movements in there, “knowns” become “unknown” they eventually just got dumped in the “unvaccinated” category with the great Omicron “game changer”. There is a “missing report” just before the format change. If you follow the trend in the data it was moving to a point where it was “almost certain” on any metric that vaccine had no benefit what so ever for transmission, hospitalization, ICU or death. Conveniently, along comes Omicron and Boosters to muddy the waters. When I say “almost certain” I mean that you have to start making some pretty generous assumptions like all the “unknowns” are “unvaxxed” and “effectiveness” can’t be “negative”. You’ll find something like effectiveness is 0%+30%/0. If you allow negative effectiveness you get something like -30% +60%/-60%. The value cannot be outside this range. The upper limit is the highest possible value and the lower limit I calculated wasn’t even assuming all the “unknowns” were vaccinated, I think it was just “known” vs “known” from memory. On a population level it’s a failed experiment, on an individual level there may be some benefit to the elderly, I don’t really know because there is no age stratified data I can find for NSW. I’m pretty sure if there was supporting data to back up the claim of effectiveness in the elderly they’d be shouting it from the roof top. They’ve got the data, it’s not that hard to get it in Australia with our centralized health care system. They just won’t release it, Andrew Madry (Data Wise substack) has tried to get it under FOI, they just dick him around by the look of it with the Federal/State divide i.e. hospitals are a state issues, vaccination registry is Federal database, private medical records excuses etc. It’s not that hard ABS could do it, but they don’t. I’m pretty sure they’ve done the sums and it doesn’t support the narrative otherwise we’d be hearing about it. Otherwise the explanation is they just aren’t looking at the data they have available at their disposal which is a tragedy if true.
Thanks, NSW health will use any trick available to massage the data to try and get themselves out of the trap they’ve set themselves. But the truth will out. We just have to wait.
Yep they are dirty dawgs.
".....assuming ... 90% vaccine effectiveness"?????????????????????
I’m always confused when I hear about vaccine effectiveness. Does that mean the ratio of kills to shots?
Very droll....
😁
90% effective at injuring and killing
Yeah…
I wonder if some batches are actually that effective.
But no. However, I think the globalist elite have whet their appetite on what is possible. Now they know what they can push on an entire world by population and can cause sterility, injury, and death over time, short life spans and brain 🧠 power in whoever remains they must be giddy.
I really think that they are going to try for more of the same or even something even more deadly.
Imagine that you are a psychopath and you walk into a neighborhood where crime is basically unknown and you like to hunt little children and women. What a playground! You cut up and rape a few people and the cops rule it as some freak storm that hit.
Would you possibly be able to stop yourself at that point if you even wanted to?
They now have a globalized platform for moving product from Concept to assembly line to distribution worldwide across borders! They have a psychological media network across the entire earth and owns the United Nations World Health Organization along with all of his daughter organizations and just about every country!
There is no way they are not going to do this again and very soon. Unless they don’t get a chance because their agricultural and economic pathologies destabilize their hunting grounds due to their gleeful overzealous activity.
It’s like that movie Armageddon I have a front seat to the end of the world. I’m like George Carlin just kind of rubbing my hands together enjoying the show
Remember how much we were exposed to the mantra; “this is a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” Blah, blah, blah!!
when you have 97% vaccine coverage the idea that vaccinated people are more frail holds no water, if anything the unvaxxed would only be so because they were too sick to take the jab, or had known allergies.
The irony here is that the very same report notes, "However, people who are not vaccinated are far more likely to suffer severe Covid-19". I think they assume we don't look at their data; maybe they should look at it themselves ...
https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Documents/weekly-covid-overview-20221008.pdf
Yep. What’s the metric they’re using? Certainly, not based on their data. I think it’s just wishful thinking, or maybe it’s their attempt at some kind of Jedi mind trick.
To me it reads like “Despite evidence to the contrary, people who are not vaccinated remain far more likely to suffer severe COVID-19.”
Just did a spot check (n=7). I’m pretty sure it’s been the same comment in every report since 26/2/22 Week 8 i.e. the new format after the mysterious missing Week 7. It’s just padding in the pro-forma report. Just like the paragraph below it. They probably haven’t read it since February when they first wrote it, they just fill in the different numbers as appropriate and leave the words the same.
I follow along really well and never miss a post, but please explain for us in the cheap seats what exactly this means: “ Unless, of course, you're using dose-dependency as a proxy for comorbidity or moribund level? Seems to be something of a correlation there?”
I'll rephrase it in the notes.
Thank you, read it, totally understand. Thanks for taking the time!
Please bear in mind that the deaths I quote here, didn’t all occur in the same time period. eg. It’s the number of days post vaccination that death occurs. Within 7 days - 10,031. Within 14 days - 27,463. Within 28 days 69,466
“Age-standardised mortality rates for deaths by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 1 January 2021 and 31 May 2022”
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland
Starting to see the effects of retaining an intact innate immune system (undiminished by 'vaccines'), whilst attaining a Covid19 trained adaptive immune system (exposure to virus). Natural immunity is optimised, with a consequent minimising of ongoing risk from Covid19.
Who would have thought this could be possible?
Well, about 95% of our medical practitioners didn't.
Now, there's an indictment of the woeful state of our health systems.
If our MDs had supported their patients right to informed consent and the effectiveness of current treatments this pandemic would’ve been stopped in its tracks.
On Twitter he assumes a 3% rate of being unvaccinated...
I looked up the official stats provided by Google and it's more like 12%.
So there are just 7 times more vaccinated people than unvaccinated people. Yet 16x more deaths. So the vax overall more than doubles the death rate given the average number of jabs and it's surely higher if you take just the ones with higher jab numbers. They don't show stats on Google for how many got a booster anymore.
I was surprised to read 3%. 12% is more reasonable. Also, there are workarounds. A young relative went to a party in a restaurant, unvaxed, but he has a vax pass. All young business people. This is when no one except the vaxed were allowed into restaurants. There were about 20 young business men. A friend sidled up to him and said 'I am surprised to see you here. i wouldn't have thought you were vaxed.' My relative said 'Well, I must be right? I have a vax pass. It isn't like there are any workarounds.' The other fellow laughed, catching his drift, and said 'ha, me too. Where'd you get yours?' They exchanged info. My relative knew six young men of the 20. He sidled up to each of them and asked if they actually were vaxed, or just had figured out a way around it. EVERY ONE of the people he knew weren't vaxed, but were registered as vaxed. Another acquaintance is very good friends with an assistant in Doug Ford's office. He is the Premier of Ontario Canada. Ontario was reporting 70% fully vaxed, this was pre boosters. The friend of my acquaintance said Doug Ford wasn't vaxed. Nobody in the Premier's office was vaxed, and their internal numbers were 48% were vaxed, not 70%. They lie, over and over. I would assume if 12% is the official unvaxed number, it is higher than that.
Additionally, the frailest should have already died with alpha and delta.
What is the time frame for these numbers?
Your dismissal of age as a factor is weak. If you look elsewhere in the report, you will see that 28 of the 35 deaths were in people aged 80 or above. Your statement "the jab does not appear to be working at improving their outcomes either, does it" is utterly unsubstantiated by evidence here, since you lack data which is stratified both by age and vaccination status.
On the other hand, it's worth pointing out that unvaccinated people make up 3.07% of the over 16 population in NSW (and 2.25% of over 30s in which all the deaths here occured), and yet they made up 5.7% of the deaths.
Oh Mick, the voice of reason, Crisp is back. I thought you'd maybe died, TBH.
Pithy. Perhaps read your old work? You are currently at the bottom of the Hierarchy of Disagreement.
https://metatron.substack.com/p/why-is-it-so-difficult-to-get-the
I'll bite. It is inconceivable that the actual percentage of unvaccinated is just 3.07. The authorities wish it was that low, but I know scads of people who "got vaccinated" who did not get vaccinated, and that is all you're going to hear from me on *that* subject.
If your response is "I don't believe the data", then frankly we can't have a meaningful discussion.
It is, however, quite strange that you are jumping to the defence of a data analyst who is analysing NSW govt data, by completely denying the accurancy of a different piece of data from exactly the same source. If you don't believe the data in my comment, surely Joel's analysis is equally meaningless because it's based on the same, apparently worthless, source?
FWIW here is my source. https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/covid-19-vaccine-rollout-update-13-october-2022
Edit: spelling
My response is certainly that I do not believe the data as published by those with the agenda of 100% double-jabbed plus two boosters. Why should I?
I take Joel's analysis with a grain of salt, but the fact is that those of us who are *definitely, vociferously* unvaccinated are not dying in droves or overwhelming the health care system.
As others have pointed out here, the manner in which stratification of data has been quietly eliminated or massaged to support the narrative makes it very hard to accept the argument that these products have a risk:reward profile that a healthy, rational person would see as favourable to the jab.
>the manner in which stratification of data has been quietly eliminated or massaged to support the narrative
Well that's precisely the point in my original comment! Joel is making a claim which is not substantiated by the stratification of data provided. In this case, Joel is making this mistake, not NSW.
Again, if you choose not to believe data which doesn't support your claim, and make unsubstantiated claims yourself ("I still believe many who have been vaccinated end up miscategorized on death reports, though I cannot prove it."), we can't have a constructive discussion.
You're welcome to believe what you believe; my criticism is of Joel's conclusions, not yours.
I don't take issue with questioning Joel's conclusion in this particular matter, with this particular data. What I do mean to point out is that data on the percentage who remain unvaccinated is highly questionable, unless you disbelieve a) reports from various nations about fake vaccine passports and b) that health authorities have a motive to claim success based on a high percentage vaccinated. A reasonable person has to accept that there is almost definitely a skew in the direction of too high a percentage double- (or more) jabbed.
As for my claim of a skew toward too high a number of deaths among those listed as "unvaccinated", it depends on jurisdiction, but in Canada those who died within two weeks of the jab were considered "unvaccinated", as were many who did not have "Vaccinated? Yes" manually entered in their charts.
It is important to know that such shenanigans have been skewing the percentages for many months, as we all have to make a personal risk:reward assessment.
Fair enough. I guess we can continue this if you're able to supply any evidence of your claim that NSW are skewing vaccination data. If not, I'm inclined to stick to my claim, and I'm not likely to change your mind, so we're at an impasse.
However, on the subject of "unvaccinated" deaths, I still believe many who have been vaccinated end up miscategorized on death reports, though I cannot prove it. There is certainly motive, however.
For months now in the state of NSW the number of unvaccinated deaths has been greater than the number or unvaccinated cases in ICU. Does this mean that unvaccinated people are dying before they realise they should be in hospital? Or does this mean that of the unvaccinated, only people who are already in some form of palliative care are dying? Or is there another possible explanation?
We’re not dying quick enough because we’re too hard to kill.
Hence the, surprisingly convenient, gain of function development of the lethality of an early covid variant combined with the transmissibility of Omicron.
And when us unvaxxed do die, we are begging for the vaccine, but it's too late. 😂😂😂
Said no one ever.
https://mobile.twitter.com/bilalternative/status/1584004197611057152