Latest UK stats on Covid : 75% of deaths with covid Dec 6 to Jan 2 were jabbed

Covid Jabs don’t prevent infection, don’t prevent transmission, don’t prevent hospitalisation and don’t prevent death with covid:

"With the vaccinated population accounting for 7 in every 10 Covid-19 cases, 6 in every 10 Covid-19 hospitalisations, and 8 in every 10 Covid-19 deaths:

full complex report here ( interesting that the UKHSA report states in bold that no-one should use their raw data to judge vaccine effectiveness - well there’s a Fxxxing surprise! )

cheers

2 Likes

It’s a pandemic of the vaccinated! Lock them up, I say. In fact, locking up’s too good for them - let them starve! Serves them right. It’s their own choice, those filthy selfish beasts. Tough but fair.

3 Likes

Hi CJ it’s good that the Expose keep on this real data.
The jabs don’t prevent anything, true. Except the unvaccinated - for a few months!

“( interesting that the UKHSA report states in bold that no-one should use their raw data to judge vaccine effectiveness - well there’s a Fxxxing surprise! )”

Lol. Best to go by knowledgeable pronouncements endorsed by Pfizer and Moderna.

3 Likes

Hi CJ. Here’s two bits you might like. The first is a doctor pointing out to Jabby Javid, that the boosters are needed every month. Just watch the clip from Sky news. The second is some simple stuff that I’m sure many here will already know about modelling or should that be doodling?

3 Likes

Hi CJ. A bit more on this…I feel these regular data splurges are important feeders of the vaccine PR machinery.

Their Table 12 does refute these anecdotes of people who know somebody who tells them the covid cases in hospitals/ICUs are almost all unvaccinated. They are not, according to this data which we have seen appearing on and off for the last few months.

It’s good that it’s broken down by age, removing a key ‘confounder’ (which due do its significance can invert reality).

However Table 12 is still flawed. It is misleading because although there are far more vaccinated in the older age range, that population is much bigger than its unvaccinated equivalent.

It’s only pro-rata, per population data that equates in some way to the actual risk of being in these categories.

Table 13 (see on link, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1045329/Vaccine_surveillance_report_week_1_2022.pdf) takes a step in this direction; it finally relates the numbers to the relevant population size, arguably the only table that’s of genuine use.

This does actually indicate that the vaccinated are getting more covid (EDIT: per head of population) (first 2 cols) than the unvaccinated, and in quite significant numbers, too. This echoes reports that in many countries, vaccination rollouts were followed by increases in covid cases.

This is a key fact regarding transmission, and has crucial implications for the policy of containing covid by restricting the unvaccinated while the vaccinated transmit the disease to at least a similar degree.

From what I can gather, it also needs to be taken into account that I think it’s primarily people with symptoms who are transmitting the disease. This has been given repeatedly to the govt by SAGE but has been ignored by the government, giving preference to whole population measures; these are less effective as they don’t address the real problem of clearly infected people giving passing on covid, or rather, Sars-Cov2.

But what about the risk of serious outcomes?

On the other hand, the columns to the right of Table 13, showing deaths, suggest that pro-rata, more unvaccinated are dying of covid, ie (EDIT: a higher percentage of them are dying of covid).

However two things of note:

  1. Only vaccinations after 2 jabs (does that include those after another 2 weeks!?) are counted in this last table; people having had just one jab are excluded. This may be a serious omission, because in the reports of deaths following the vaccine, half occurred within the first two or three days.

  2. These are only covid deaths - deaths from other causes greatly outnumber them, and this and the whole area of vaccine adverse reactions is still being mostly ignored. Even saving covid deaths is not of overall value if these are outweighed by higher numbers of deaths from the various types of vaccine reactions.

So this data does not in any way answer the concerns about vaccine safety .

It comes back to all-cause mortality being the only reliable guide to efficacy. We’d looked at that with the posts on Norman Fenton’s insightful analyses.

Fenton’s work on all-cause mortality is a major a step forward for the debate. It also appeared to reveal fraudulent or deceptive nature of official data even on all-cause mortality.

The trouble is, there is a monthly cycle for the more PR or propagandistic data to reappear to distract everyone from the important fundamentals, and this seems to propel a new wave of deceptive or misleading claims about the unvaccinated being where the covid is - claims I heard in more than one place yesterday, backed up of course with mentions of superficial data that are misleading or that essentially don’t exist.

Cheers

2 Likes

Hi @Evvy_dense , clearly still a long way to go before we see anything honest from the data holders. I’m still wondering whether this outlier is valuable or just another twist in the tale:

if correct it is almost certainly due to covid policies if not jabs by themselves.

cheers

Hi @CJ1
It looks way too big an effect to be random, but could be knock-on effects of lockdown or covid policies as you say, as well as direct vaccine effects. Yes insurance data would be revealing though I wonder if the causes of deaths are accurate enough in the absence of savvy post-mortems to draw defnitive conclusions - also dependent on who is looking at them, of course.
But it sounds like the insurance companies have the vaccination status so if that’s a main cause it will out even if it doesn’t quickly emerge in the west. Sudden deaths might also be a revealing indicator.
Cheers

Hi @Evvy_dense , these are clearly stated to be non- covid premature deaths in the 18 to 64 yr bracket so they appear to have details , do Insurance companies have an interest in keeping this stuff secret - no doubt someone will be paid to make it worth their while but let’s hope the truth escapes soon.

cheers

Yeah I wondered though if it was the vaccine playing out via other illnesses like cardio and thrombotic diseases, manifesting in different ways, whether it would be possible to conceal it.
The crunch might be the insurance company’s extra costs - if they knew it was vaccination casuing the extra deaths, the information might be concealed in higher insurance premiums across the board, as in the west at least, most people are ‘vaccinated’. It’s hard to see such information not getting out at least in places, but not a given that it will change the political dynamic of the vaccines. Another brick not in the wall though…cheers

1 Like