Sviesta Ciba |

antiprojekcija (

antiprojekcija) rakstīja,
@ 2023-05-06 08:17:00

Anglijas jaunākā mirstības statistika pēc vakcinācijas statusa
Šis ieraksts gavlenokārt

brookings.

Tātad, nolēmu pārbaudīt, un ONS ir publicējuši mirstības datus par 2022. gada otru pusi: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland

Īsumā:
1) joprojām ir spēkā trends, ka lielāka mirstība ir grupām, kam ir daļēja vakcinācija
2) joprojām pilnībā vakcinēto grupā mirstība ir viszemākā
3) notiek regression to the mean - visās grupās statistika kļūst līdzīgāka

Mani takeaway:
- nekāda datu slēpšana nenotika - solīja publicēt datus, kad būs gatavi, kad bija gatavi, tad arī publicēja
- nekādu mirstības palielināšanās trendu starp vakcinētajiem nav

(Lasīt komentārus) - (Ierakstīt jaunu komentāru)

brookings
2023-05-14 10:18 (saite)

From GOV.UK

(https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations?areaType=nation&areaName=England)

Vaccinations in England.

For English areas, the denominator is the number of people aged 12 and over on the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) database.

Vaccination uptake, by vaccination date age demographics:
Feb 2022 - First Dose:

18-24 = 68.1%
25-29 = 65%
30-34 = 66.9%
35-39 = 70.2%

This matches, pretty much perfectly with the data I presented in my previous post, which was based on

The total number of person-years (based on the population size of the 2021 census)

Minus

The number of vaccinated person-years (all cohorts).

The ONS data that purports to show non-vaccinated people dying at higher rates of non-Covid causes is short by 2,457,293 (of 18-39 year-olds in England), and shows an unvaccinated rate of 18.3% when according to GOV.UK, the unvaccinated rate is between 30 - 35%.

Once again, please check my workings.

And please give more information about 'excluded regions ... with no good population estimate'. I appreciate it might be impossible to achieve 100% confidence in stats related to population sizes, but - for all its failings - we are talking about a highly-developed first world country - not a hard-to-track Amazon tribe.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

antiprojekcija
2023-05-14 14:41 (saite)

The "excluded regions" was just my guess - I don't have any idea why the data looks like it does. Do you have any other idea why additional population and additional deaths suddenly show up in the latest data?

The previous iteration of data was short ~5 mil people, but still the death rates were in the same ballpark. Had they counted all deaths but only some of the population, the death rate would have been elevated as well. In fact we see the opposite - for feb. 2022 the death rate has gone up in the new document.

All in all I agree - the data looks highly suspect for a first world country.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

brookings
2023-05-15 20:42 (saite)

Whatever they are doing with the data, they are not counting the unvaccinated correctly. It is absolutely clear that they are underestimating by a significant amount. The evidence is compelling - both by comparing to the actual 2021 census numbers for the various age ranges and the official UK vaccination rates over time.

I have calculated the numbers for non-Covid deaths of the following age groups for 18-39 year-olds, 50-59 year-olds, and 80-89 year-olds for the following months:

August 2021, March 2022, and July 2022.

The results all show the same significant underestimating of the unvaccinated, and the extra non-Covid deaths in the vaccinated are - in my opinion - appalling - especially for the older cohort.

When you consider the manipulation and coercion the population was subjected to by the establishment to take the vaccination, it does not surprise me in the least that the ONS can't calculate the number of unvaccinated for this report.

I would like to challenge you - as you did me. I would like you to do show me where I have erred in my calculations (it is quite possible of course), or I would like you to openly consider the possibility that these vaccines are resulting in extra non-covid mortality - at least allow it as one possibility.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

antiprojekcija
2023-05-15 21:51 (saite)

I don't see any errors in your calculations. I also do not discount the possibility that the vaccination itself might lead to some increase in mortality. In fact, that is exactly what it looks like from the data on the face of it for the period shortly after vaccination - this looks like a very consistent trend too and showing up for a very long period now.

I just cannot believe that there would be such large unaccounted undercounting going on. Especially given that in the new file both death and total counts increased for both the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. That to me suggests that there is something else going on in the data.

It might be interesting to just try to contact the ONS and ask a direct question about the total population number vs the numbers in this data set - https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/contactus/generalandstatisticalenquiries

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

brookings
2023-05-15 22:02 (saite)

If "death and total counts increased for both the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups" are increasing as you say, it still fails to account for the difference in the ONS vaccination rate and the UKHSA vaccination rate - which is, on average half.

I might ask the ONS, of course. In the meantime, I am going to put my workings out to a wider audience. I hope you don't mind if I link to our discussion: it was quite fruitful, I think, and someone more expert might be able to shed some light.

(Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais) (Diskusija)

	antiprojekcija 2023-05-15 22:30 (saite)
	Of course, I don't mind at all! (Atbildēt uz šo) (Iepriekšējais)

(Lasīt komentārus) -

Navigate: