QF mandates Vaccine
It's a silly comparison but if you discovered you were being lied to by the aircraft manufacturers, regulators, instructors, etc about how safe your aircraft is to fly, would that change your mind about it?
I'm not accusing anyone of lying but it now looks like McAnulty is effectively admitting NSW Health reporting has been misleading us all about deaths with versus from Covid, but we've known that for a while. This means people who worry about dying from Covid think the situation is worse than it really is when in fact not all the deaths can be attributed to Covid. The media support it. These frightened people then make their decisions accordingly. Health decisions based on faulty data... not good.
Here's the 20-Aug-21 release of VAERS data uploaded to the MedAlerts page of the National Vaccine Information Centre. You can read about about each case of the 18 post-vaccination deaths (12-17 only) in the latest report. It looks like these vaccines might not be the best things to inject into a kid.
There are over 13,600 deaths reported in total going back to December in the NVIC.
If you hunt around you'll also see in this release the 12-17yo group has in the same period also experienced thousands of reports of anaphylaxis, myocarditis and blood-clotting cases. Then there's the rest of the population >17yo.
Maybe VAERS and NVIC people are lying to us and implying vaccines are worse than we think but in the absence of an admission to that effect it might all be worth a re-think. Alternatively, you can just believe everything you read in the Sydney Morning Herald and be happy with your choice.
I'm not accusing anyone of lying but it now looks like McAnulty is effectively admitting NSW Health reporting has been misleading us all about deaths with versus from Covid, but we've known that for a while. This means people who worry about dying from Covid think the situation is worse than it really is when in fact not all the deaths can be attributed to Covid. The media support it. These frightened people then make their decisions accordingly. Health decisions based on faulty data... not good.
Here's the 20-Aug-21 release of VAERS data uploaded to the MedAlerts page of the National Vaccine Information Centre. You can read about about each case of the 18 post-vaccination deaths (12-17 only) in the latest report. It looks like these vaccines might not be the best things to inject into a kid.
There are over 13,600 deaths reported in total going back to December in the NVIC.
If you hunt around you'll also see in this release the 12-17yo group has in the same period also experienced thousands of reports of anaphylaxis, myocarditis and blood-clotting cases. Then there's the rest of the population >17yo.
Maybe VAERS and NVIC people are lying to us and implying vaccines are worse than we think but in the absence of an admission to that effect it might all be worth a re-think. Alternatively, you can just believe everything you read in the Sydney Morning Herald and be happy with your choice.
But as has been pointed out elsewhere, VAERS has it's own issues, with self-reporting and selection among other things, and people thinking that because something occurred post-vaccination means it was caused by vaccination. Searching more broadly through that VAERS dataset, there are people that are reporting pregnancy following various vaccines - while there may have been some form of injection involved, I doubt it was caused by the vaccination!
I fully vaccinated person died of covid 1 week after their second shot in NSW last week, their death would show up in the Australian version of VAERS because they died within a period after their vaccine, although clearly, it had nothing to do with the vaccine. Also among other things on VAERS that is brought up is 'complications' which are what normal people call side effects, I felt a bit S&^T the day after my first Pfizer dose last week and when I got requested to do the survey i noted as such. It doesn't mean there was anything wrong with the vaccine.
Muttley please go back to your Russian bot school for some more advanced training because your arguments are childish.
Also on another note does anyone know how long it takes for your 5g to active, my 5g phone is still only getting a 4g signal?
Muttley please go back to your Russian bot school for some more advanced training because your arguments are childish.
Also on another note does anyone know how long it takes for your 5g to active, my 5g phone is still only getting a 4g signal?
The argument is about how you came to be in possession of the parcel, not your support for what you understand to be in the parcel.
Last edited by Xeptu; 31st Aug 2021 at 23:12.
short flights long nights
I fully vaccinated person died of covid 1 week after their second shot in NSW last week, their death would show up in the Australian version of VAERS because they died within a period after their vaccine, although clearly, it had nothing to do with the vaccine. Also among other things on VAERS that is brought up is 'complications' which are what normal people call side effects, I felt a bit S&^T the day after my first Pfizer dose last week and when I got requested to do the survey i noted as such. It doesn't mean there was anything wrong with the vaccine.
Muttley please go back to your Russian bot school for some more advanced training because your arguments are childish.
Also on another note does anyone know how long it takes for your 5g to active, my 5g phone is still only getting a 4g signal?
Muttley please go back to your Russian bot school for some more advanced training because your arguments are childish.
Also on another note does anyone know how long it takes for your 5g to active, my 5g phone is still only getting a 4g signal?
Hi Xeptu, I like you. You're fun.
I'm just an engineer, but a pilot once told me that to be a pilot you don't have to be that good at math, just be able to add and subtract from 360. So armed with these skills I've deduced that the jab might kill me, but covid is more likely. Why choose the greater evil?
I'm just an engineer, but a pilot once told me that to be a pilot you don't have to be that good at math, just be able to add and subtract from 360. So armed with these skills I've deduced that the jab might kill me, but covid is more likely. Why choose the greater evil?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Joobs
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To those who contrast skepticism toward the management of this health affair with the placing of blind faith in aircraft manufacturers, have a think about the Max developments and ask yourself if you'll ever trust that manufacturer again to not lie to you about your safety.
Peruse the last line of Table 5 (at the top of page 19) of this report. More than half the Delta deaths in England this year were double-injected and another 10% were single-injected. Only 34% were "Unvaccinated." How'd that happen? Good luck with your experimental substances. I wish I had your blind faith in the system.
I'll endeavour not to upset you all with any more links to sites which might make you at least think with your brains for a moment about what you're told. Of course this forum is replete with promises of departure not made good on so I don't guarantee anything.
The irony and sheer moronicism of such a risible, witless comment as yours aside, I do apologise sincerely for posting the previous link. By including a couple of suicides or people dying of fat and as it requires a modicum of intelligence to glean the information correctly, a capability which appears beyond the reach of the good posters here, that site might induce the unthinking dullard to imagine the situation is worse than it seems, and that's something the fear-stricken, sky-is-falling chicken-littles in here reserve for the 'Death By Covid' tallies.
To those who contrast skepticism toward the management of this health affair with the placing of blind faith in aircraft manufacturers, have a think about the Max developments and ask yourself if you'll ever trust that manufacturer again to not lie to you about your safety.
Peruse the last line of Table 5 (at the top of page 19) of this report. More than half the Delta deaths in England this year were double-injected and another 10% were single-injected. Only 34% were "Unvaccinated." How'd that happen? Good luck with your experimental substances. I wish I had your blind faith in the system.
I'll endeavour not to upset you all with any more links to sites which might make you at least think with your brains for a moment about what you're told. Of course this forum is replete with promises of departure not made good on so I don't guarantee anything.
Peruse the last line of Table 5 (at the top of page 19) of this report. More than half the Delta deaths in England this year were double-injected and another 10% were single-injected. Only 34% were "Unvaccinated." How'd that happen? Good luck with your experimental substances. I wish I had your blind faith in the system.
I'll endeavour not to upset you all with any more links to sites which might make you at least think with your brains for a moment about what you're told. Of course this forum is replete with promises of departure not made good on so I don't guarantee anything.
From that table, in the under 50 age bracket, there were 71 covid deaths listed in your table, 13 of which had received their second vaccination. So the group that hasn't had their second shot, that makes up ~29% of that population, makes up 81% of the deaths.
In the over 50 age bracket, which has a much higher vaccination rate in the UK due to how their vaccine rollout went, at that report date approximately 95% of the over 50s population had received their second shot. So the 5% of the population that hadn't had 2 shots, made up 41% of the deaths in that table. So don't just look at one line in a table out of context, because it isn't showing what you think. To return to the aviation analogies, if you look at the one line in the Flight Manual that says "undercarriage must be retracted as soon as possible", and ignore the next line that says "after takeoff", quoting that line won't be a defence if you retract the undercarriage on the parking bay - the text needs to be read in context, without cherrypicking isolated figures and ignoring everything else about the broader dataset.
Last edited by De_flieger; 2nd Sep 2021 at 16:59.
For Mutley and some others.It’s OK not to understand, very, very few will.
You won’t have the full set of data available to you nor the specialist statistical analysis programs to organize and interrogate the data. You also won’t have the statistical, analytical capability to interpret the data. Then there are the medical and scientific experts who compile and asses the data at post-Doctoral level. They have access to a huge wealth of published and unpublished scientific papers and reports as well as direct connections to their peers are around the world so they have access to the very latest, yet to be published, data. Finally you won’t have the capability to interpret this knowledge at Professorial level and provide expert assessment and advice.
Taking discreet tiny sets of information you have discovered on social media, the internet or from friends and family doesn’t equate to the above.
All you have to do it accept that our medical experts are acting in our best interests and to follow their advice. It’s hard for some, scary for others, but have faith in these experts who have dedicated their careers to the benefit of us all.
You won’t have the full set of data available to you nor the specialist statistical analysis programs to organize and interrogate the data. You also won’t have the statistical, analytical capability to interpret the data. Then there are the medical and scientific experts who compile and asses the data at post-Doctoral level. They have access to a huge wealth of published and unpublished scientific papers and reports as well as direct connections to their peers are around the world so they have access to the very latest, yet to be published, data. Finally you won’t have the capability to interpret this knowledge at Professorial level and provide expert assessment and advice.
Taking discreet tiny sets of information you have discovered on social media, the internet or from friends and family doesn’t equate to the above.
All you have to do it accept that our medical experts are acting in our best interests and to follow their advice. It’s hard for some, scary for others, but have faith in these experts who have dedicated their careers to the benefit of us all.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't apologise for posting it, it's let us demonstrate quite well a few of the logical inconsistencies with the anti-vaxxer arguments, so in that regard it's a positive thing. However, as those inconsistencies are pointed out to you, you could well learn why the link you posted doesn't show what you say it does, rather than claiming that everyone is all just too stupid to understand you. Which takes us neatly to the next part of your posts....
Looking at your table that you cite as an argument against vaccination, as at the date of your report, (2nd August) 71% of the overall UK population had received their second shot, although a certain proportion of them would not have reached full protection until a week or two later.
From that table, in the under 50 age bracket, there were 71 covid deaths listed in your table, 13 of which had received their second vaccination. So the group that hasn't had their second shot, that makes up ~29% of that population, makes up 81% of the deaths.
In the over 50 age bracket, which has a much higher vaccination rate in the UK due to how their vaccine rollout went, at that report date approximately 95% of the over 50s population had received their second shot. So the 5% of the population that hadn't had 2 shots, made up 41% of the deaths in that table. So don't just look at one line in a table out of context, because it isn't showing what you think. To return to the aviation analogies, if you look at the one line in the Flight Manual that says "undercarriage must be retracted as soon as possible", and ignore the next line that says "after takeoff", quoting that line won't be a defence if you retract the undercarriage on the parking bay - the text needs to be read in context, without cherrypicking isolated figures and ignoring everything else about the broader dataset.
Looking at your table that you cite as an argument against vaccination, as at the date of your report, (2nd August) 71% of the overall UK population had received their second shot, although a certain proportion of them would not have reached full protection until a week or two later.
From that table, in the under 50 age bracket, there were 71 covid deaths listed in your table, 13 of which had received their second vaccination. So the group that hasn't had their second shot, that makes up ~29% of that population, makes up 81% of the deaths.
In the over 50 age bracket, which has a much higher vaccination rate in the UK due to how their vaccine rollout went, at that report date approximately 95% of the over 50s population had received their second shot. So the 5% of the population that hadn't had 2 shots, made up 41% of the deaths in that table. So don't just look at one line in a table out of context, because it isn't showing what you think. To return to the aviation analogies, if you look at the one line in the Flight Manual that says "undercarriage must be retracted as soon as possible", and ignore the next line that says "after takeoff", quoting that line won't be a defence if you retract the undercarriage on the parking bay - the text needs to be read in context, without cherrypicking isolated figures and ignoring everything else about the broader dataset.
Then you have unvaccinated deaths out of those cases 0.167%, and in the double jabbed 0.855% so about 80% increase of death if you get the delta virus as double jabbed...or am I wrong?
You might be tempted to say that if you don't get delta you won't die and that double jabbed have about 35% points less chance of getting the virus, well if you then calculate the overall death statistic (rate of death and rate of infection) you will find that that number gives 8.4 for unvaccinated and 13.4 for double jabbed approximately. That is still a 37% increase chance of dying from the double jab than to be unvaccinated overall, at least in this study...
Secondly what is of quite a big interest is that the viral load is basically with no difference over 7 days...that was one of the arguments for the vaccine which has been debunked (true a very slight reduction still negligible according to the authors)
Last edited by SoundLesS; 3rd Sep 2021 at 00:02.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...riefing_20.pdf
Please don't quote this report again unless you know how to read statistics. You can only compare the related statistics, that is compare directly <50s or >50s rates, if you combine them or use the totals you get skewed data.
So in table 5;
>50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 21,472 cases, 389 (1.8%) died, 1735 (8%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 3440 cases, 205 (6%) died, 965 (29%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
<50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 25,536 cases, 13 (0.055%) Deaths, 224 (0.088%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 147,612 cases, 48 (0.039%) deaths, 3733 (2.6%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
It's quite clear that you are 3 x more likely to die or have serious symptoms from Covid if you are unvaccinated >50 than vaccinated.
In the under <50s the death rate is similar, although statistically lacks numbers to be difinitive as the only 13 deaths could have been 49 years old etc, you'd need 10 times the deaths in each section to get a better idea.
The hospitalisation rate follows the same trend of being about 3 x the un-vaccinated rate, so the vaccination gives you about 70% protection if you contract the virus. However, this does not include those that have complete immunity or got such mild cases they did not bother to get tested so you could easily increase that number 10-20%.
I added inlcusive and excluded hospitalisations together as I find the reasoning behind that division a little shaky, but it is like for like data so can be compared as i'm not differentiating that between vaxxed or not.
Please don't quote this report again unless you know how to read statistics. You can only compare the related statistics, that is compare directly <50s or >50s rates, if you combine them or use the totals you get skewed data.
So in table 5;
>50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 21,472 cases, 389 (1.8%) died, 1735 (8%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 3440 cases, 205 (6%) died, 965 (29%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
<50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 25,536 cases, 13 (0.055%) Deaths, 224 (0.088%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 147,612 cases, 48 (0.039%) deaths, 3733 (2.6%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
It's quite clear that you are 3 x more likely to die or have serious symptoms from Covid if you are unvaccinated >50 than vaccinated.
In the under <50s the death rate is similar, although statistically lacks numbers to be difinitive as the only 13 deaths could have been 49 years old etc, you'd need 10 times the deaths in each section to get a better idea.
The hospitalisation rate follows the same trend of being about 3 x the un-vaccinated rate, so the vaccination gives you about 70% protection if you contract the virus. However, this does not include those that have complete immunity or got such mild cases they did not bother to get tested so you could easily increase that number 10-20%.
I added inlcusive and excluded hospitalisations together as I find the reasoning behind that division a little shaky, but it is like for like data so can be compared as i'm not differentiating that between vaxxed or not.
Last edited by 43Inches; 3rd Sep 2021 at 00:30.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://assets.publishing.service.go...riefing_20.pdf
Please don't quote this report again unless you know how to read statistics. You can only compare the related statistics, that is compare directly <50s or >50s rates, if you combine them or use the totals you get skewed data.
So in table 5;
>50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 21,472 cases, 389 (1.8%) died, 1735 (8%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 3440 cases, 205 (6%) died, 965 (29%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
<50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 25,536 cases, 13 (0.055%) Deaths, 224 (0.088%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 147,612 cases, 48 (0.039%) deaths, 3733 (2.6%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
It's quite clear that you are 3 x more likely to die or have serious symptoms from Covid if you are unvaccinated >50 than vaccinated.
In the under <50s the death rate is similar, although statistically lacks numbers to be difinitive as the only 13 deaths could have been 49 years old etc, you'd need 10 times the deaths in each section to get a better idea.
The hospitalisation rate follows the same trend of being about 3 x the un-vaccinated rate, so the vaccination gives you about 70% protection if you contract the virus. However, this does not include those that have complete immunity or got such mild cases they did not bother to get tested so you could easily increase that number 10-20%.
I added inlcusive and excluded hospitalisations together as I find the reasoning behind that division a little shaky, but it is like for like data so can be compared as i'm not differentiating that between vaxxed or not.
Please don't quote this report again unless you know how to read statistics. You can only compare the related statistics, that is compare directly <50s or >50s rates, if you combine them or use the totals you get skewed data.
So in table 5;
>50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 21,472 cases, 389 (1.8%) died, 1735 (8%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 3440 cases, 205 (6%) died, 965 (29%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
<50s
Vaxxed 2 doses and 2 weeks = 25,536 cases, 13 (0.055%) Deaths, 224 (0.088%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
UnVaxxed = 147,612 cases, 48 (0.039%) deaths, 3733 (2.6%) were admitted to hospital for emergency treatment.
It's quite clear that you are 3 x more likely to die or have serious symptoms from Covid if you are unvaccinated >50 than vaccinated.
In the under <50s the death rate is similar, although statistically lacks numbers to be difinitive as the only 13 deaths could have been 49 years old etc, you'd need 10 times the deaths in each section to get a better idea.
The hospitalisation rate follows the same trend of being about 3 x the un-vaccinated rate, so the vaccination gives you about 70% protection if you contract the virus. However, this does not include those that have complete immunity or got such mild cases they did not bother to get tested so you could easily increase that number 10-20%.
I added inlcusive and excluded hospitalisations together as I find the reasoning behind that division a little shaky, but it is like for like data so can be compared as i'm not differentiating that between vaxxed or not.
It's true that over 50 has an increased risk of death of 333% if you are unvaccinated, which we all know since they are in a higher risk group, but for the majority of us below 50, it's 0.0325. 0.0509 is 156% higher... 70% of the world population is below 50 approximately so why should we take the vax? Besides of course the bed occupations...
It's true that over 50 has an increased risk of death of 333% if you are unvaccinated, which we all know since they are in a higher risk group, but for the majority of us below 50, it's 0.0325. 0.0509 is 156% higher... 70% of the world population is below 50 approximately so why should we take the vax? Besides of course the bed occupations...
It also does not account for how many vaxxed that simply bounced the virus off, which I don't have the stats for so no idea. Although that being said, considering over 50% of the population are double dose vaccinated and the difference between vaxxed and unvaxxed getting the virus the vaxxed represented around 6 times less likely to contract or have symptomatic CV in the first place. SO the death rate among actual vaccinated population is much lower than the figure indicated, that is just the death rate among those that have tested positive, due to having some symptoms that led them to getting tested.
To put that in perspective, on the 2nd of August 2021, when that table was finalised 57% of the UK was fully vaccinated and 70% were 1 dose, that leaves only 30% were in that unvaccinated pool.
So 19,000,000 (30%) of population was responsible for 151,000 (0.7%) cases and 38,000,000 (57%) of the population accounted for 47,000 (0.12%) cases. According to that you are 6 times less likely to contract symptomatic covid if vaccinated. So the vaccinated death rate has to be divided by 6 to be anywhere near meaningful.
Hmm lets do that, 0.055/6 = 0.009 or approximately 1/4 of the unvaxxed death rate.
PS, I will add that the table does include data over a few months prior so adjusting for Delta prevalence and lower vaccination rates prior, you will still arrive at a figure of around 3 times better off as vaccinated than not.
Last edited by 43Inches; 3rd Sep 2021 at 02:48.
The irony and sheer moronicism of such a risible, witless comment as yours aside, I do apologise sincerely for posting the previous link. By including a couple of suicides or people dying of fat and as it requires a modicum of intelligence to glean the information correctly, a capability which appears beyond the reach of the good posters here, that site might induce the unthinking dullard to imagine the situation is worse than it seems, and that's something the fear-stricken, sky-is-falling chicken-littles in here reserve for the 'Death By Covid' tallies.
To those who contrast skepticism toward the management of this health affair with the placing of blind faith in aircraft manufacturers, have a think about the Max developments and ask yourself if you'll ever trust that manufacturer again to not lie to you about your safety.
Peruse the last line of Table 5 (at the top of page 19) of this report. More than half the Delta deaths in England this year were double-injected and another 10% were single-injected. Only 34% were "Unvaccinated." How'd that happen? Good luck with your experimental substances. I wish I had your blind faith in the system.
I'll endeavour not to upset you all with any more links to sites which might make you at least think with your brains for a moment about what you're told. Of course this forum is replete with promises of departure not made good on so I don't guarantee anything.
To those who contrast skepticism toward the management of this health affair with the placing of blind faith in aircraft manufacturers, have a think about the Max developments and ask yourself if you'll ever trust that manufacturer again to not lie to you about your safety.
Peruse the last line of Table 5 (at the top of page 19) of this report. More than half the Delta deaths in England this year were double-injected and another 10% were single-injected. Only 34% were "Unvaccinated." How'd that happen? Good luck with your experimental substances. I wish I had your blind faith in the system.
I'll endeavour not to upset you all with any more links to sites which might make you at least think with your brains for a moment about what you're told. Of course this forum is replete with promises of departure not made good on so I don't guarantee anything.
Please tell us more about how much you have 'thought with your brain' about this issue, whilst posting links whose substance you clearly don't comprehend.
Love the use of F7 though. That'll show em.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I already covered that, the death numbers are so low for the vaxxed that its uncomparable, you need to get 10 times the sample for it to be worth anything. So like I said earlier don't refer to statistical data if you don't know how to interpret it properly and come to rational outcomes. If you were able to do that you would dismiss those figures as being too low to have any reasonable assumption made.
It also does not account for how many vaxxed that simply bounced the virus off, which I don't have the stats for so no idea. Although that being said, considering over 50% of the population are double dose vaccinated and the difference between vaxxed and unvaxxed getting the virus the vaxxed represented around 6 times less likely to contract or have symptomatic CV in the first place. SO the death rate among actual vaccinated population is much lower than the figure indicated, that is just the death rate among those that have tested positive, due to having some symptoms that led them to getting tested.
To put that in perspective, on the 2nd of August 2021, when that table was finalised 57% of the UK was fully vaccinated and 70% were 1 dose, that leaves only 30% were in that unvaccinated pool.
So 19,000,000 (30%) of population was responsible for 151,000 (0.7%) cases and 38,000,000 (57%) of the population accounted for 47,000 (0.12%) cases. According to that you are 6 times less likely to contract symptomatic covid if vaccinated. So the vaccinated death rate has to be divided by 6 to be anywhere near meaningful.
Hmm lets do that, 0.055/6 = 0.009 or approximately 1/4 of the unvaxxed death rate.
PS, I will add that the table does include data over a few months prior so adjusting for Delta prevalence and lower vaccination rates prior, you will still arrive at a figure of around 3 times better off as vaccinated than not.
It also does not account for how many vaxxed that simply bounced the virus off, which I don't have the stats for so no idea. Although that being said, considering over 50% of the population are double dose vaccinated and the difference between vaxxed and unvaxxed getting the virus the vaxxed represented around 6 times less likely to contract or have symptomatic CV in the first place. SO the death rate among actual vaccinated population is much lower than the figure indicated, that is just the death rate among those that have tested positive, due to having some symptoms that led them to getting tested.
To put that in perspective, on the 2nd of August 2021, when that table was finalised 57% of the UK was fully vaccinated and 70% were 1 dose, that leaves only 30% were in that unvaccinated pool.
So 19,000,000 (30%) of population was responsible for 151,000 (0.7%) cases and 38,000,000 (57%) of the population accounted for 47,000 (0.12%) cases. According to that you are 6 times less likely to contract symptomatic covid if vaccinated. So the vaccinated death rate has to be divided by 6 to be anywhere near meaningful.
Hmm lets do that, 0.055/6 = 0.009 or approximately 1/4 of the unvaxxed death rate.
PS, I will add that the table does include data over a few months prior so adjusting for Delta prevalence and lower vaccination rates prior, you will still arrive at a figure of around 3 times better off as vaccinated than not.
Ohh FFS buddy, the bloody thing is not experimental nor is it “not officially approved” 
The technology behind the vaccines has been around for nearly 20 years plus, it’s just been tweaked to fight the current coronavirus.
If you want to be a conspiracist, suggest a new career.
The technology behind the vaccines has been around for nearly 20 years plus, it’s just been tweaked to fight the current coronavirus.
If you want to be a conspiracist, suggest a new career.
I also have had AZ x 2 & the discussion was with my gp.
When i have had surgery i discussed it with a surgeon & he explained the risks & i based my decision on an experts advice.
I wonder how many of these armchair experts who keep popping up ask for a scientific analysis of every medicine or pain killer they have ever taken.
Some people prefer to take the opinions of social media influencers who like to post just what will get them some more followers.
I also have had AZ x 2 & the discussion was with my gp.
When i have had surgery i discussed it with a surgeon & he explained the risks & i based my decision on an experts advice.
I wonder how many of these armchair experts who keep popping up ask for a scientific analysis of every medicine or pain killer they have ever taken.
I also have had AZ x 2 & the discussion was with my gp.
When i have had surgery i discussed it with a surgeon & he explained the risks & i based my decision on an experts advice.
I wonder how many of these armchair experts who keep popping up ask for a scientific analysis of every medicine or pain killer they have ever taken.
Incorrect. Almost all follow up is done within 12 months. It’s more about seeing if any short term side effects occur within a few weeks of the jab as the jab is rolled out over the long term to a wide group of people.