Coronavirus - potential Black Swan?

[Confusion of VIs]

3 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

Odd what is happening with these AZ temporary bans - is it because people trust Norway more than AZ?

Of course one notable point is the response that yes you may have had the vaccine and within hours or days you could also get a blood clot or die and it not be related - as people get blood clots all the time/die every day and millions are getting the vaccine.

On the same basis surely you could also die within 28 days of a positive COVID test and the cause of death not be due to COVID?

One rule for the vaccines - another for the virus?!

Hard to believe that after all this time you are still unable to understand that deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid is just a statistical proxy used in assessing the overall Covid death rate and says nothing about the cause of death in individual cases.       

[Ah-so]

9 hours ago, nightowl said:

At the moment there is a lockdown in place so its hard to be sure what is driving deaths downwards or if its both what the proportional affects are.

At some point lockdown has to end anyway, plus the only way to know if the vaccines actually work in the real world is to put them to the test which ultimately it will have to be the case anyway.

Of course both lockdown and vaccination have both had their role. We saw how effective lockdowns can be a year ago. 

We also now have a large body of data of those who have been vaccinated and those who have not, including those who were in the high risk categories during the first wave of vaccinations. The evidence shows clearly that vaccination is effective. 

"Hospitalisation rates are falling in all age groups. However, people aged 75 and over, who were among the first to be offered vaccination, are seeing the fastest decline.

Those over 80 who develop COVID-19 infection after vaccination are around 40% less likely to be hospitalised than someone with infection who has not been vaccinated.

However, people who are vaccinated are less likely to catch COVID-19 in the first place."

https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2021/02/23/covid-19-analysing-first-vaccine-effectiveness-in-the-uk/

 

[The Spaniard]

Could you live in one of these boxes?   (Sorry, bijou, deceptively spacious studio apartments.)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/YK2pXd6dib5p/

Edited March 16, 2021 by The Spaniard

[Arpeggio]

On 14/03/2021 at 12:07, The Spaniard said:

And your response to the content of the video?

This one is entirely clips from mainstream media. After being asked about injecting children, Fauci appears to be saying Swine flu was particularly bad for young people and pregnant women as an argument for them to be injected.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/0CXZPq4sxoDD/

It didn't go that far, children were not mass injected and they didn't die off or suffer as the warnings were made as to why they should be.

They also PCR tested the living cr*p out of Swine Flu back then too (it was sky high as you would expect > asymptomatic) but it was never brought out and used to scare and con the public, perhaps because other things were not in place first to be able to proceed as much as they wanted.

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

18 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Hard to believe that after all this time you are still unable to understand that deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid is just a statistical proxy used in assessing the overall Covid death rate and says nothing about the cause of death in individual cases.       

That said, a good chunk of Covid was caught in hospital, and I bet the proportion of people resident in hospital who die of other causes is higher than in the general population.

[Arpeggio]

19 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Hard to believe that after all this time you are still unable to understand that deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid is just a statistical proxy used in assessing the overall Covid death rate and says nothing about the cause of death in individual cases.       

Usually when you refer to something medical with the words "death rate" after It, it means causal. Here is an example with "Cancer death rate": https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/understanding-cancer-death-rates.html

Given that you say it says nothing aBout the cause of death, you could explain what you meaN by "Covid death rate".

 

23 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

Odd what is happening with these AZ temporary bans.

At 7:30 on this video he mentions a letter from doctors looking for answers.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/X9i0lHaDsNxB/

Maybe this?: https://www.thepharmaletter.com/article/doctors-call-for-clarity-amid-opposing-astrazeneca-vaccine-views

Also the vid mentions Martin Hagler boxing legend who died age 66 shortly after taking the injection.

At 16:38 the mRNA injection speaker says something very similar to what I did in Sept 2020 (bottom 3 paragraphs), except even more invasive due to it being mRNA accessing your cells.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Arpeggio

[Ah-so]

19 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

Usually when you refer to something medical with the words "death rate" after It, it means causal. Here is an example with "Cancer death rate": https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/understanding-cancer-death-rates.html

Given that you say it says nothing aBout the cause of death, you could explain what you meaN by "Covid death rate".

To summarise your narrative over a large number of posts, I think this sums it up best:

Die within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test - coincidence. 

Die within 28 days of a vaccination - the vaccination killed you. 

[Arpeggio]

53 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

To summarise your narrative over a large number of posts, I think this sums it up best:

So another one of those oversimplified and untruthful attempts to mislead with"This is what you said / This is what you think" posts.

One thing that is certain is that I have pointed out the government's (and apparently your) narrative, which is....

Die within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test - COVID.

Die within 28 days of a vaccination - the vaccination is safe.

....and as you would know from actually reading my posts instead of lying, I said that at least underlying health / other conditions are being acknowledged again by the government now that people are dying after their injection (as opposed to a positive PCR test).

53 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Die within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test - coincidence.

Even the government classes many as "death with COVID" as opposed to "death from COVID."  On average the majority of deaths had 2.6 underlying health problems. Here's that chart from June 2020 again. It shows a decrease in many causes of death that are not COVID from 5 year average, for which there has never been any kind of credible explanation.

For some reason the ONS stopped doing those as far as I can see, I wonder why?

53 minutes ago, Ah-so said:

Die within 28 days of a vaccination - the vaccination killed you. 

Vaccines are not specifically given to people who are ill and many who die after injection do not have underlying health issues.

Edited March 16, 2021 by Arpeggio

[Ah-so]

2 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

So another one of those oversimplified and untruthful attempts to mislead with"This is what you said / This is what you think" posts.

One thing that is certain is that I have pointed out the government's (and apparently your) narrative, which is....

Die within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test - COVID.

Die within 28 days of a vaccination - the vaccination is safe.

....and as you would know from actually reading my posts instead of lying, I said that at least underlying health / other conditions are being acknowledged again by the government now that people are dying after their injection (as opposed to a positive PCR test).

Even the government classes many as "death with COVID" as opposed to "death from COVID."  On average the majority of deaths had 2.6 underlying health problems. Here's that chart from June 2020 again. It shows a decrease in many causes of death that are not COVID from 5 year average, for which there has never been any kind of credible explanation.

For some reason the ONS stopped doing those as far as I can see, I wonder why?

Vaccines are not specifically given to people who are ill and many who die after injection do not have underlying health issues.

I don't deny that it was a simplification and a caricature of what you said because there has been a constant theme in your posts to undermine the mortality rates of COVID and exaggerate the dangers of the vaccine when all the evidence points the other way. It was not misleading or lying. 

Deaths attributed to COVID-19 match pretty closely to excess deaths in the UK. 

The evidence of harmful effects of the vaccine is pretty weak and it's efficacy in both preventing infection and reducing subsequent mortality is very strong. 

[pig]

3 hours ago, Ah-so said:

To summarise your narrative over a large number of posts, I think this sums it up best:

Die within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test - coincidence. 

Die within 28 days of a vaccination - the vaccination killed you. 

Lol.

Its just rubbish designed to waste your time and squirt a cloud over the truth.

[Megadebt]

4 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

 

. It shows a decrease in many causes of death that are not COVID from 5 year average, for which there has never been any kind of credible explanation.

For some reason the ONS stopped doing those as far as I can see, I wonder why?

Vaccines are not specifically given to people who are ill and many who die after injection do not have underlying health issues.

 

Could it be less deaths during the one month of June than the 5 yr/ 60 month average ?  big difference

 https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales/2019to2020provisionaland2018to2019final

look at part 2  

next release in Novemeber

[MARTINX9]

5 hours ago, Mikhail Liebenstein said:

That said, a good chunk of Covid was caught in hospital, and I bet the proportion of people resident in hospital who die of other causes is higher than in the general population.

And even more so when the average age of death from COVID in the UK has been 82 according to the ONS - higher than the average life expectancy.

My point of course being - perhaps I am just too subtle - is the tv and newspaper headlines refer to COVID deaths and its only when you see the small print is the 28 day positive test reference made.

Your average reader will take from these Sky and Evening Standard headlines yesterday for example that there were 110 deaths due to the Coronavirus or COVID-19 in the last 24 hours - and in the end most people take the headline at face value!  That is the message people will take - the within 28 days of a positive test proxy detail gets lost in the story.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-uk-records-another-110-coronavirus-deaths-and-5-294-new-cases-as-over-24-8-million-have-had-first-vaccine-dose-12247778

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/latest-uk-covid-deaths-b924487.html

Edited March 17, 2021 by MARTINX9

[captainb]

7 hours ago, Ah-so said:

I don't deny that it was a simplification and a caricature of what you said because there has been a constant theme in your posts to undermine the mortality rates of COVID and exaggerate the dangers of the vaccine when all the evidence points the other way. It was not misleading or lying. 

Deaths attributed to COVID-19 match pretty closely to excess deaths in the UK. 

The evidence of harmful effects of the vaccine is pretty weak and it's efficacy in both preventing infection and reducing subsequent mortality is very strong. 

Don't worry cuckoo will prob change tune now. Or maybe its all part of the conspiracy 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56424614

[Ah-so]

33 minutes ago, captainb said:

Don't worry cuckoo will prob change tune now. Or maybe its all part of the conspiracy 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56424614

A moment of existential crisis for the Q-tards. 

[Ah-so]

6 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

And even more so when the average age of death from COVID in the UK has been 82 according to the ONS - higher than the average life expectancy.

My point of course being - perhaps I am just too subtle - is the tv and newspaper headlines refer to COVID deaths and its only when you see the small print is the 28 day positive test reference made.

Your average reader will take from these Sky and Evening Standard headlines yesterday for example that there were 110 deaths due to the Coronavirus or COVID-19 in the last 24 hours - and in the end most people take the headline at face value!  That is the message people will take - the within 28 days of a positive test proxy detail gets lost in the story.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-uk-records-another-110-coronavirus-deaths-and-5-294-new-cases-as-over-24-8-million-have-had-first-vaccine-dose-12247778

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/latest-uk-covid-deaths-b924487.html

I think you'll need to state your case a bit more clearly, because otherwise people will think you are just pushing the absurd "death with COVID" line, which happily overlooks the high death rate among those with COVID in the population and the numbers of excess deaths in the country. 

The average age of death of those suffering from COVID is hardly surprising given that it is a disease that predominantly has its worst impact on the elderly. In the UK, if you make it to 65, your life expectancy will be above 82 anyway. Average age of death in the UK fell last year. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/10/covid-life-expectancy-england-wales

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Ah-so

[Ah-so]

10 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

Here's that chart from June 2020 again. It shows a decrease in many causes of death that are not COVID from 5 year average, for which there has never been any kind of credible explanation.

For some reason the ONS stopped doing those as far as I can see, I wonder why?

Vaccines are not specifically given to people who are ill and many who die after injection do not have underlying health issues.

I would be fascinated to see the numbers aggregated over the entire period and then to explain where the 100,000+ excess deaths have come from. Otherwise it might look like you are cherry picking data from your social media feed and not doing any real analysis. 

Of course, if we have a new disease to die from, and we know that people who die from it will eventually die from a pre-existing condition, many of which will eventually kill them, statistically often within twelve months. Often it would have been within 28 days. However, when we look at the data, and move away from individual cases, we can see the impact of COVID through excess deaths and lower life expectancy:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/10/covid-life-expectancy-england-wales

 

[nightowl]

7 hours ago, pig said:

Lol.

Its just rubbish designed to waste your time and squirt a cloud over the truth.

Haven't you notice the narrative in the media over the last year?

If someone dies with covid (with 28days) it's counted the cause - no questioning allowed.

If someone dies after a vaccine no way can it be the vaccine- no questioning allowed.

In reality many covid deaths would have happened anyway (especially as covid has replaced flu), plus many of the same people would die after a jab anyway but the way the story is spun is what people like arpeggio are picking up on.

[Ah-so]

24 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Haven't you notice the narrative in the media over the last year?

If someone dies with covid (with 28days) it's counted the cause - no questioning allowed.

If someone dies after a vaccine no way can it be the vaccine- no questioning allowed.

In reality many covid deaths would have happened anyway (especially as covid has replaced flu), plus many of the same people would die after a jab anyway but the way the story is spun is what people like arpeggio are picking up on.

"If someone dies with covid (with 28days) it's counted the cause - no questioning allowed." - Because it is the best proxy we have. Excess death data supports this approach.

"If someone dies after a vaccine no way can it be the vaccine- no questioning allowed." - Because the statistical data supports the claim that there has been no change in the frequency of these deaths.

"In reality many covid deaths would have happened anyway" - yes, and because statistically we can observe what this rate would have been, we have a good idea of the numbers that would have died anyway. And we have excellent data on the numbers of excess deaths.

"(especially as covid has replaced flu)" - On average fewer than 20,000 flu deaths a year in the UK, with 125,000 COVID deaths. That is not simply "replacing".

"plus many of the same people would die after a jab anyway" - we agree on this.

"But the way the story is spun..." - I can only see the story being "spun" in a way that aligns with the statistical evidence.

A good example is the reaction to the suggestion that Astra Zeneca leads to DVT, with the observation that 1 in a 1000 people develop DVT every year anyway, so statistically we would expect many of the millions who have had the vaccine to get DVT and that there is no suggestion that DVT rates are any higher among those vaccinated as opposed to those vaccinated. If this is the facts, then where is the spin?

[Ah-so]

With apologies to Gary Larson:

What we say: "there is no evidence that in the response to COVID-19, the programme of vaccination has led to any increase in death among recipients"

What they hear: "blah blah blah COVID-19 blah blah vaccination blah blah death blah blah..."

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, nightowl said:

Haven't you notice the narrative in the media over the last year?

If someone dies with covid (with 28days) it's counted the cause - no questioning allowed.

If someone dies after a vaccine no way can it be the vaccine- no questioning allowed.

In reality many covid deaths would have happened anyway (especially as covid has replaced flu), plus many of the same people would die after a jab anyway but the way the story is spun is what people like arpeggio are picking up on.

No, not really. That's because all the evidence points towards dying within 28 days of a positive test as being a very good way of estimating deaths from covid, whilst there's very little evidence towards similar with the vaccination. The number of people dying within 28 days of a positive covid test is very much higher than the population in general, the number dying within 28 days of being vaccinated is not. The odds are therefore that the covid deaths came from covid and the vaccination ones from something else.

And I do believe that they don't blindly use the 28 days thing - the old "if they were knocked down by a bus it would count" is, I believe, incorrect.

[Huggy]

1 hour ago, Ah-so said:

With apologies to Gary Larson:

What we say: "there is no evidence that in the response to COVID-19, the programme of vaccination has led to any increase in death among recipients"

What they hear: "blah blah blah COVID-19 blah blah vaccination blah blah death blah blah..."

I must dig out my collection of his books. Outstanding cartoonist.

"The Fake McCoys" 😂

[NoHPCinTheUK]

It looks Madrid, being the first major city opening with restaurants and clubs open, is not experiencing a new wave. Really good news, maybe some herd immunity effect in place? 

[nightowl]

29 minutes ago, NoHPCinTheUK said:

It looks Madrid, being the first major city opening with restaurants and clubs open, is not experiencing a new wave. Really good news, maybe some herd immunity effect in place? 

That will interesting...how long ago did they open these places? 

[Ah-so]

2 hours ago, Riedquat said:

No, not really. That's because all the evidence points towards dying within 28 days of a positive test as being a very good way of estimating deaths from covid, whilst there's very little evidence towards similar with the vaccination. The number of people dying within 28 days of a positive covid test is very much higher than the population in general, the number dying within 28 days of being vaccinated is not. The odds are therefore that the covid deaths came from covid and the vaccination ones from something else.

And I do believe that they don't blindly use the 28 days thing - the old "if they were knocked down by a bus it would count" is, I believe, incorrect.

I have realised that no matter how much this is explained, this very simple message doesn't get through. The dogma of "COVID good, vaccine baaad" is too deeply rooted. 

[Ah-so]

32 minutes ago, NoHPCinTheUK said:

It looks Madrid, being the first major city opening with restaurants and clubs open, is not experiencing a new wave. Really good news, maybe some herd immunity effect in place? 

Yet Italy has just entered its third lockdown, so guess they have materially less herd immunity than the Spaniards.