Carantoc said..

So, your anti-vax mates who got sick from the vax...... is that like a vegetarian who eats bacon ?

You might recall that newspaper survey that found 43 percent of the respondents said they had not been vaccinated against COVID whereas actual data shows its about 5 percent.

psychojoe said..

CH3MTR4IL5 said..
Your theory is that the rest of us have got these 'injuries' but didn't notice? Or because we didn't test for them, we didn't know we had them?

It sounds like you're describing a condition called 'hypochondria'.

Or maybe it's called obesity or something else that's common. Most people are overweight and most of the overweight people I know are already suffering in some way, so to add a case of costochondritis to prediabetes or whatever else is wrong with them could easily go unnoticed.
Gotta figure the smokers and drinkers could easily dismiss symptoms as being a result of their lifestyle.

So you are saying that the fatties, smokers, and drinkers are healthier than the anti-vaxxers?

The number of people in society that is obese is huge, so are all anti-vaxxers not obese?

I remember trying to wind people up on here by describing my symptoms for a tetanus injection, pretending it was a Covid vaccination, and I think a few jumped onto it thinking it was about Covid vaccines. It makes me think that if you got minor symptoms from a vaccine, any vaccine, and you already had the mindset that they were bad for you, you would feel as if the symptoms were more serious than they might otherwise feel.

twitter.com/thechiefnerd/status/1646118900621344768

Harrow said..

remery said..
Prior to COVID vaccination Myocarditis was reported in up to 12% of the autopsies performed for unexplained sudden death in Australia (Catalina Sanchez Alvarez, Leslie T. Cooper, in Cardiology Secrets (Fifth Edition), 2018). With 95 percent of Australia's population vaccinated there is sure to be some overlap.

Not sure why thought you needed to quote a reference to say that there'd be some overlap. If 95% of the population is vaccinated, there's guaranteed to be some overlap with almost every health condition, except for those extremely rare conditions that occur in, say, 1 out of 10 or 20 million people.

I wonder then, why did the Australian government choose to include Myocarditis in the COVID compensation scheme? Just a random choice, or would they have required compelling evidence before making such a decision?

I am sure that Myocarditis is an issue with the Covid vaccines, but it was interesting to see that it appears in sudden death reports before Covid was a thing.

I suspect that we will see someone figuring out the cause for these conditions due to the vaccines in the next few years. I don't even think people are arguing that it wasn't problem.

These vaccines were a way to try and halt a pandemic and it makes me wonder what the alternative would have been. Maybe that's a thing to consider. Where do you think we would be as a population if there were no Covid vaccines anywhere?

Now that we have strains that are relatively 'light' it is not a problem, but when the original strains were spreading, what were the mortality rates like and would we have just accepted that some in the community would have been killed by this thing while others might have had just 'a bad case of the flu'?

FormulaNova said..
I suspect that we will see someone figuring out the cause for these conditions due to the vaccines in the next few years. I don't even think people are arguing that it wasn't problem.

These vaccines were a way to try and halt a pandemic and it makes me wonder what the alternative would have been. Maybe that's a thing to consider. Where do you think we would be as a population if there were no Covid vaccines anywhere?

Now that we have strains that are relatively 'light' it is not a problem, but when the original strains were spreading, what were the mortality rates like and would we have just accepted that some in the community would have been killed by this thing while others might have had just 'a bad case of the flu'?

I've never said there shouldn't have been a vaccine.

But if the vaccine you have doesn't stop the spread, and there hasn't been enough time to test it properly for adverse effects (given it usually takes much, much longer to properly test and get a new drug approved), and the disease mainly effects older or frail people, then why do you force most people to get the jab? (All 5 members of my family would have lost their jobs if they weren't vaccinated, so we weren't given much choice). Why would you so strongly encourage younger people to get vaccinated when there simply hasn't been time to fully evaluate the risks and it's not going to stop them passing it onto other people?

Wouldn't it have been enough to have the population isolate until all those that wanted to get vaccinated had the chance to do so?

Do you think those that had concerns about receiving a vaccine that had only been tested for a year or so didn't have a fair reason for holding that opinion?

Flying Dutchman said..

As for where would be be without these so called vaccines I'd hazard a guess pretty much at the same place we are now minus vaccine injuries. Lockdowns slowed the initial spread, the 'vaccine' didn't.

Your bitterness to this issue aside, more people were saved by a covid vaccine then were hurt by one. We would not be in the same place, there would be a lot more dead people.

ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination

CH3MTR4IL5 said..
Your bitterness to this issue aside, more people were saved by a covid vaccine then were hurt by one. We would not be in the same place, there would be a lot more dead people.

ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination

Looking at that age grouped data in that graph, it looks like a good idea for someone above 65 to be vaccinated, and probably for those above 50 as well. For those below 30, or even 30 to 50 depending on your health and fitness, you might want some good evidence of the risks posed by the vaccine to make the right call. For those aged 12-18, why would you take the risk if you knew it wasn't going to stop you from passing it on to older family members and friends? Keep in mind that the definition of a COVID death has been pretty darn broad, so those very low death rates for younger people would be even lower.

Harrow said..

FormulaNova said..
I suspect that we will see someone figuring out the cause for these conditions due to the vaccines in the next few years. I don't even think people are arguing that it wasn't problem.

These vaccines were a way to try and halt a pandemic and it makes me wonder what the alternative would have been. Maybe that's a thing to consider. Where do you think we would be as a population if there were no Covid vaccines anywhere?

Now that we have strains that are relatively 'light' it is not a problem, but when the original strains were spreading, what were the mortality rates like and would we have just accepted that some in the community would have been killed by this thing while others might have had just 'a bad case of the flu'?

I've never said there shouldn't have been a vaccine.

But if the vaccine you have doesn't stop the spread, and there hasn't been enough time to test it properly for adverse effects (given it usually takes much, much longer to properly test and get a new drug approved), and the disease mainly effects older or frail people, then why do you force most people to get the jab? (All 5 members of my family would have lost their jobs if they weren't vaccinated, so we weren't given much choice). Why would you so strongly encourage younger people to get vaccinated when there simply hasn't been time to fully evaluate the risks and it's not going to stop them passing it onto other people?

Wouldn't it have been enough to have the population isolate until all those that wanted to get vaccinated had the chance to do so?

Do you think those that had concerns about receiving a vaccine that had only been tested for a year or so didn't have a fair reason for holding that opinion?

Yeah, this is where my belief is different. I think it does stop or reduce the spread, purely by limiting the symptoms of someone that has it. If there is less sneezing and coughing, doesn't that potentially limit the spread?

When we were seeing the media being bombarded with images from China in early 2020, there were no stories about it only affecting the older or frail people. It seemed pretty indiscriminate then. Sure now that might be the case now, but what about before there were these more benign variants? These variants are themselves the result of people in the community catching the virus.

People were complaining about isolation as it was. People were crying about this and vaccination seemed to be the only way out.

I think people did have a valid reason for concern, but its not like there were that many choices.

FormulaNova said..
If there is less sneezing and coughing, doesn't that potentially limit the spread?

No because they are asymptomatic carriers. I'd rather see someone who has a virus showing a sniffy nose so I can avoid them.

FormulaNova said..

Harrow said..

FormulaNova said..
I suspect that we will see someone figuring out the cause for these conditions due to the vaccines in the next few years. I don't even think people are arguing that it wasn't problem.

These vaccines were a way to try and halt a pandemic and it makes me wonder what the alternative would have been. Maybe that's a thing to consider. Where do you think we would be as a population if there were no Covid vaccines anywhere?

Now that we have strains that are relatively 'light' it is not a problem, but when the original strains were spreading, what were the mortality rates like and would we have just accepted that some in the community would have been killed by this thing while others might have had just 'a bad case of the flu'?

I've never said there shouldn't have been a vaccine.

But if the vaccine you have doesn't stop the spread, and there hasn't been enough time to test it properly for adverse effects (given it usually takes much, much longer to properly test and get a new drug approved), and the disease mainly effects older or frail people, then why do you force most people to get the jab? (All 5 members of my family would have lost their jobs if they weren't vaccinated, so we weren't given much choice). Why would you so strongly encourage younger people to get vaccinated when there simply hasn't been time to fully evaluate the risks and it's not going to stop them passing it onto other people?

Wouldn't it have been enough to have the population isolate until all those that wanted to get vaccinated had the chance to do so?

Do you think those that had concerns about receiving a vaccine that had only been tested for a year or so didn't have a fair reason for holding that opinion?

Yeah, this is where my belief is different. I think it does stop or reduce the spread, purely by limiting the symptoms of someone that has it. If there is less sneezing and coughing, doesn't that potentially limit the spread?

When we were seeing the media being bombarded with images from China in early 2020, there were no stories about it only affecting the older or frail people. It seemed pretty indiscriminate then. Sure now that might be the case now, but what about before there were these more benign variants? These variants are themselves the result of people in the community catching the virus.

People were complaining about isolation as it was. People were crying about this and vaccination seemed to be the only way out.

I think people did have a valid reason for concern, but it'snot like there were that many choices.

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. He has apologised and told me it's unfortunate that my life has been ruined and that we have been lied to so badly. Vaccination wasn't the answer. It's only the answer as there was billions of dollars in record profits to be made. Not once did the government subsidise healthy food and promote exercise as the lefty wankers would be calling it out as fat shaming and discrimination. If you can't see this by now it's very sad.
Also those reporting on cases of myocarditis pre COVID obviously don't understand what it is. Myocarditis is inflammation of a part of your heart. It's like saying cases of sprained ankles pre covid were high because everyone was out playing sports and now everyone's ankles are swollen just because of the fluoride in the water. These jabs are ****en with peoples immune systems and your just unlucky if it starts to attack your heart.


The increase in heart issues and heart attacks of 17% since these experimental drugs were rolled out is alarming. (All age groups)
There's a 30% increase in heart disease in previously fit healthy young people 18-35 year olds.
If we are 96% vaccinated surely we would have a decrease if they worked so well?

snoidberg 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.

Flying Dutchman said..

D3 said..
So, wouldn't there be some sort of correlation between increases in doses with increases in observed deaths?

Maybe there are bad batches?

"According to this study just published out of Denmark, 4.2 percent of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine batches accounted for 71 percent of suspected adverse events. The blue trend line in the chart shows that of the 71 percent of adverse events reported from only 4.2 percent of all vaccine doses, 27 percent were considered serious, and 47 percent resulted in death."

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13998

Interesting that the smaller batches were associated with more reports of Suspected Adverse Events.

Also interesting that each person reporting a Suspected Adverse Event, reported on average 3.19 Suspected Adverse Events each.

Is that last sentence you quoted saying "47% of the reported Suspected Adverse Events resulting in death were associated with the small batch number blue line"?

I wonder how 13,000 people reporting Suspect Adverse Events for almost 8 million doses compares to what is seen in Australia? (Obviously understood that different countries have different reporting systems and thresholds)

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.

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.