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

[Christophe]

The Sun, tweezers...although...

sun_covid.jpg (51.58 KiB) Viewed 620 times

[Christophe]

That is well said :

Visibly in England, for the year 2022, 91.9% of Covid deaths were able to avoid a serious form by dying

[izentrop]

As usual... "with the booster no deaths recorded."

[Christophe]

I don't quite understand this table: what is the Person-years column?

And the count of death is for which country or group of countries? If it's for the UK it's way too big for numbers!

OR is it a combination? Impossible because the numbers drop between April and May...

In the kind of shitty statistical table, it's hard to do worse!

Then, if you want to prove vaccine efficacy by showing tables where the vaccinated deaths are much more numerous (10 times...while the population is not vaccinated at 90% on average), it's that you're even more stupid and deceitful than I thought...

And don't forget your 3 "Heil siegvax!" daily!

Crooks!

If we enlarge we understand, a little, better:

FqsW-twXoAEGf9x.jpg (106.12 KiB) Viewed 555 times

[Christophe]

Aye I got it!!!

We can read in this table that the Booster makes IMMORTAL!!

Whore !!! Couldn't you have said that before?

[Macro]

Yet .... There were deaths with this filth

publicite-mbk-booster-spirit-50-1990.jpg (392.22 KiB) Viewed 538 times

[Christophe]

It's true Macro!

But don't complicate things, some have trouble following here...

[Robob]

We can comment on the UK figures quoted by taking the right parts of the table:

First the deaths "with covid": these are those registered with the codes Covid, virus identified, and Covid, virus not identified.
I copied the part of the last recorded data December 2022 but the rest is here: https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/people ... eb213.xlsx

mortality with covid.jpg (205.86 KiB) Viewed 524 times

In orange, the column by standardized age per 100: this takes into account the age and for a comparable population.
On this table we see that the boosts are at 34.3/100 while the novaxes are at 000/63.5k. This gives us a risk reduction of just under 100. Same ratio with all the + or - vaccinated: 2/33.6k.
Good: according to these 2 lines, the vaccine reduces the risk by 2 whatever the number of doses.

However, if we isolate the 2 doses, there we have 68.9/100K. A little more DC than the novax.
But how do you butt?

There are a whole host of possible explanations: the first and most important is that the groups are not homogeneous in size, so the slightest bias completely distorts the calculations.
For example, without standardized age, the non-vaccinated have 71 dc out of 595 or 507 / 12k while the boosted have 100 dc for 1302 or 2596443 / 50k: 100 times more deaths. But that's normal: the unvaccinated are not at risk.

So how do you know?

Especially since I suppose it's like in France, the 600 non vax are deducted by a "scholarly" calculation of the difference between the very hypothetical number of vaccinated and the even more hypothetical number of UK residents.

For example, in France, the CNAM estimates the populations over 75 vaccinated at more than 100% and on the other hand the INSEE estimated until 2022 the population at 67.7 million but has just reassessed it at 68 million. Needless to say that with this kind of soup you can make the vaccine both dangerous (Villain conspi d'extreme drouate) and super-effective (DREES) depending on the numbers chosen.

What do the UK figures say about all-cause mortality?

all cause mortality UK.jpg (194.32 KiB) Viewed 524 times

There we realize that the boosted die as much or almost as the unvaccinated. On the other hand, the 2 doses have an excess mortality of 50%.
What do epidemiomios say?

[Obamot]

As usual... "with the booster no deaths recorded."

Aye I got it!!!

We can read in this table that the Booster makes IMMORTAL!!

Whore !!! Couldn't you have said that before?

his painting is imposture and brainwashing itself (like all paintings that want to demonstrate the pseudo effectiveness of experimental injections)
They never show those who have been in contact with the virus without developing symptoms, or with mild symptoms, but without developing the disease...
No details on the methodology used, the state of co-morbidities in people injected or not, at least those > 65 years old should be classified separately(*), the PCR tests used and their CT factor...?

Of the sea² in plate made in Izy-ment

(*)"age standardized mortality rate" LoooooooooL

[Robob]

And we note that there is practically no excess mortality between 2020 and 2015, a year of severe influenza.


Source: the barkers of the DREES. https://drees.solidarites-sante.gouv.fr ... 1250_0.pdf
At some point, someone will have to foot the bill.