Pandemic Coronavirus COVID-19: maps, statistics, analyzes and day-to-day information

[izentrop]

[gegyx]

keep statistics


https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/08/02/64 ... injection/


https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/07/29/87 ... ed-people/

[ABC2019]

keep statistics


https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/08/02/64 ... injection/


https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/07/29/87 ... ed-people/

Public Health Scotland have again been quite clever in how they've presented the above data because they've tried to reduce the severity of the numbers seen in the vaccinated by displaying the number against how many people have been vaccinated. The same as they have attempted to increase the severity of the numbers seen in the unvaccinated by displaying the number against how many people have not been vaccinated. But those numbers are irrelevant.

in short, they reproach them for having reported the number of hospitalizations and deaths to the total number of vaccinated or unvaccinated people, saying that it is "irrelevant", when that is precisely what must be done if we want to have correct figures !! (see Christophe's curves ...)

still some who did not understand the stats, quoted by others who also did not understand the stats ...

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

Bozo or manipulation on the move! Here is part of the translated article:

The above shows a slightly different story than what we've seen in terms of confirmed cases. This is because the majority of hospital admissions have been to people who have been vaccinated, accounting for 50,8% of all admissions. What's interesting about this is the number of admissions versus the number of presumptive positive cases.

From June 26 to July 23, 2021, PHS claims that 38 positive cases of Covid-067 have been confirmed in the unvaccinated population. However, in the same time frame, only 19 positive Covid-15 cases were confirmed in the fully vaccinated population.

However, among the unvaccinated population, 863 people were hospitalized during the same period. While out of the fully vaccinated population, 763 people were hospitalized within the same time frame.

This means that only 2,3% of confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the unvaccinated population resulted in hospitalization. While 5% of confirmed cases of Covid-19 in the fully vaccinated population have resulted in hospitalization. There is a slight flaw in this analysis regarding the lag between a confirmed case and hospitalization, but even so, it clearly shows that the jabs don't quite do what they claim to do "on the box. ".

Public Health Scotland has once again been pretty smart in the way they presented the above data as they tried to reduce the severity of the numbers seen among vaccinated by displaying the number versus the number of people vaccinated. In the same way they tried to increase the severity of the number of unvaccinated people by displaying the number versus the number of people who were not vaccinated. But these numbers are irrelevant.

This is because the Covid-19 vaccines do not stop you from catching the virus or prevent you from spreading the virus, and it is a fact. Here is a snapshot of Public Health England's latest Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report confirming this fact -

Covid-19 vaccines would only have been proven to reduce the risk of hospitalization and death, but the methods used to prove this are highly questionable. Therefore, to measure the effectiveness of vaccines in the real world, we should not compare the number of people hospitalized or died from Covid-19 versus the number of people vaccinated or unvaccinated. We should compare the number of people hospitalized or deceased due to Covid-19 versus the number of people allegedly infected with Covid-19 according to their vaccination status.

Using this metric against the data above, we can clearly see that those who are fully vaccinated have a problem, as it appears that if they are infected with Covid-19, they are much more likely to be hospitalized than if they are. they were not vaccinated.

But we fear the data shows hospitalization to be the least of their concerns, even though Public Health Scotland has done their best to hide it.

people vaccinated against Covid-19 account for 87% of deaths in Scotland's third wave of deaths which has just started. The fully vaccinated represent 74% of the deaths that have just started again, those who received only one dose represent 13% of the deaths and the unvaccinated only 13% of the deaths.

[izentrop]

And Guy gobbles it all raw

According to anti-vaccine activists, the first official data from the British health authorities would show that people vaccinated against Covid-19 would not be protected against the Delta variant. Worse: people who have been vaccinated are even more likely to die from it, some believe they know, misinterpreting an official report from Public Health England published on June 25 and covering cases identified in England (the data does not cover all from the United Kingdom)....

... Looking at figures from Public Health England, an unvaccinated 50-year-old is actually almost twenty times more likely to die from the Delta variant than a person who is protected by a Covid-19 vaccine. These figures are consistent with other data in the report (often overlooked by anti-vaccine campaigners): they establish (page 39) that vaccination can reduce by 80% (for one dose) and 96% (for two doses) the risk of being hospitalized for a severe form of the disease. In addition, among those under the age of 50, eight died. Two had received a first dose, six were not vaccinated. https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/ar ... 55770.html

Hence the image on the scientific method above, do not ask for the category where GUy is placed

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

And Guy gobbles it all raw

Do not get carried away dad, I gobble nothing at all, I post an article translated from a link posted by another. Do not throw, the goby ...

Ps: You are a little swollen to deposit your dung of the World which dates from a month ... it is dry and moldy ... like you.

[ABC2019]

And Guy gobbles it all raw

Do not get carried away dad, I gobble nothing at all, I post an article translated from a link posted by another. Do not throw, the goby ... .

nah yes you post an article which tells anything, and it is not by putting in big and in bold that it becomes true. Once again looking only at the proportion of vaccinated and unvaccinated among the deaths, without relating them to the population (and even more finely to the population category) vaccinated or unvaccinated, that does not mean anything.

I gave an example of a situation where we could have 100% deaths of people vaccinated, with a vaccination rate of 50%, and yet vaccination could reduce the risk of hospitalization and death by 90%.

So incompetent people who discuss stats they don't know, it quickly leads to nonsense.

[Obamot]

I do not understand your message, you said lately that 99% of people were not affected by vax ...

Should know? Why don't you give precise numbers

Again look only at the proportion of vaccinated and unvaccinated among deaths, without reporting them to the population (and even more finely for the population category) vaccinated or unvaccinated, that means absolutely nothing.

Where is the limit?
What would be the absolute death threshold not to be exceeded, in order to consider that the vaccinations would be a failure - an intolerable risk in relation to the benefit (considering all those expected from a vaccination, of course) - limit beyond which it should everything stop?

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

(And Bozo once again refuses to see the reality of the facts in order to continue to delirium in the conditional and the theoretical ... it is pitiful. That he rather go to shampoo, take a shower instead of stagnating in his stirring and maceration, unkempt in his moth-ridden bathrobe, until more time ...)

[ABC2019]

I do not understand your message, you said lately that 99% of people were not affected by vax ...

Should know? Why don't you give precise numbers

the problem is, you can't identify the remaining 1%. What proportion of unvaccinated hospitalized people thought they might not need a vaccine in your opinion?

If we knew how to identify the 1% who are really at risk of dying, and if only those were vaccinated with 90% efficiency, the situation would be even worse: 100% of deaths would be vaccinated (the 10% of the 1% who were unprotected by vaccination), while only 1% of people would be vaccinated. A cursory analysis would conclude that being vaccinated multiplies the risk of death by 100, when in reality it divides it by 10.

Again look only at the proportion of vaccinated and unvaccinated among deaths, without reporting them to the population (and even more finely for the population category) vaccinated or unvaccinated, that means absolutely nothing.

Where is the limit?
What would be the absolute death threshold not to be exceeded, in order to consider that the vaccinations would be a failure - an intolerable risk in relation to the benefit (considering all those expected from a vaccination, of course) - limit beyond which it should everything stop?

everything should be stopped if vaccination kills more than it prevents, but that is not the case at all.