5 ms·

Australia's excess death rate is still higher than pre-covid: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-20/mortality-rates-australia-covid-excess/103241640 https://ww

Australia's excess death rate is still higher than pre-covid: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-20/mortality-rates-australia-covid-excess/103241640 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-20/mortality-rates-austr... . If the Australian government released the data it'd be trivial to identify whether these deaths were concentrated in the vaccinated or the unvaccinated, but so far it hasn't released such data (if it even possesses such data in aggregate format).

kadkadels 3y ago
Well, in that case, good that Australia isn't the only country in the world: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde... which clearly shows that all-cause deaths in England were higher among the unvaccinated. Here is a Reuters fact check: https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-link-uk-excess-deaths-covid-19-vaccines-2024-02-06 https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-link-uk-exces...
- armchairdweller 3y ago
  The UK ONS data used to have the obvious flaw that people dropping dead 3 days after their first dose were defined as „unvaccinated“. In this regard, the significant uptick in deaths in summer 2021 in „unvaccinated“ looked interesting to say the least. How are they doing their definitions now? Could not find it. Meanwhile this new Dutch data looks quite interesting, maybe someone here would like to give it a shot: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-en-oversterfte-in-2020-en-2021/samenvatting https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-e... https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/ https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/ By now there is a hell lot of data pointing at issues with the novel pharmaceutical product. Meanwhile governments all over the world continue to be reluctant to issue data on e.g. „long covid“ or immune system problems in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, although this data would settle the debate once and for all if its outcome is in favor of getting the shots. „Fact checkers“ have been shown again and again to be politically biased up to active manipulation. Only people who always agree with the politics they want to push have not noticed at this point.
  - kadkadels 3y ago
    Rule number 1: don't argue with conspiracy theorists, they will come up with all sorts of nonsense. >„Fact checkers“ have been shown again and again to be politically biased up to active manipulation. Only people who always agree with the politics they want to push have not noticed at this point. Have they? Show me some of those manipulated fact checkers, please. With reputable sources, I'm not inclined to read bullshit. >By now there is a hell lot of data pointing at issues with the novel pharmaceutical product. Not really, no. Or show us some data. >Meanwhile this new Dutch data looks quite interesting, maybe someone here would like to give it a shot: conveniently only available in dutch, but online translators to the rescue: >https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-en-oversterfte-in-2020-en-2021/6-risico-op-overlijden-kort-na-vaccinatie https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-e... where the first paragraph in 6.4 translates as follows: >The analyses show a lower or comparable likelihood of dying from causes other than COVID-19 in the first weeks after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to the vaccination status before receiving the respective dose. This holds true for all age groups and also for long-term care users. Based on these results, there is no population-level evidence that COVID-19 vaccination increases the risk of death due to an adverse reaction. Oops. Well, you tried.
    - armchairdweller 3y ago
      You seem to be really emotional about this. Need to say, the psychogram of those who defend pharma relentlessly to this day is very interesting. I see anger, insults, trampling onto what an obviously fascist authority teached them at the end of 2021 is „below them“ to elevate oneself. Ignorance of obvious data, sidelining. By now I have seen enough actual data - and on top of that a lot of sad „anecdata“ in my direct surroundings - to pay attention at least. Given its prevalence I am sure you have seen the anecdata as well. Have you called someone who claimed to have a vax damage or who told you a relative died from the vax a „conspiracy theorist“ yet? One good alternative point to start your journey in 2024 could be the US civilian labor force disability data. And no, I won’t waste time to search for that for you, given that you began your „response“ by attaching a label because it soothes you mentally. It has all been out there for long time and has been linked countless times. The little section you got from google translating is a government-approved interpretation of this data. I have seen several others. You can download the data and fact-check for yourself.
- t0bia_s 3y ago
  Im not sure how anyone could still belive in factcheckers that claims previously that vaccination gives immunity to virus or that there are no side effects from vaccination even though we have plenty studies that monitor it quite precisely. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772059 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772059
  - kadkadels 3y ago
    And I'm not sure how anyone can be a conspiracy theorist and honestly believe that all governments and regulatory agencies all over the world try to hide some grand conspiracy about vaccine efficacy and safety, but here we are. >vaccination gives immunity to virus or that there are no side effects from vaccination Who claims that? Nobody does or did. This is a familiar tactic: shifting the goalposts from vaccinations have very rare side effects and do not guarantee one hundred percent immunity to complete immunity and no side effects at all. Rarely does a vaccine provide complete 100% immunity from a disease, in rare cases it does, e.g. Polio. Also nobody ever claimed that vaccines have no side effects, they are just very, very rare. So rare that the expected benefits far outweigh any risk of side effects.
    - t0bia_s 3y ago
      Most factchecker refers to CDC, that claimed: Fully vaccinated people can: -Visit with other fully vaccinated people indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing -Visit with unvaccinated people from a single household who are at low risk for severe COVID-19 disease indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing -Refrain from quarantine and testing following a known exposure if asymptomatic Today, text is deleted and exists only in archive. https://web.archive.org/web/20210310000819/https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210310000819/https://www.cdc.g... Calling someone, who have different experience and opinions, supported by studies as conspiracy theorist shows, how ignorant about this topic you are.
- mike_hearn 3y ago
  The ONS data cannot be used that way unfortunately, and the ONS themselves have admitted to that fact. If you take the ONS data literally then COVID vaccines are a magical elixir of luck that protect against every cause of death including car crashes. There are at least two problems: 1. The statistically invalid time-windowing games the public health agencies all played in which people who had taken vaccines were classed as unvaccinated. The sibling comment talks about that. Prof Norman Fenton has shown how this yields incorrectly high calculations of effectiveness. 2. Healthy vaccinee bias, in which people who are about to die aren't vaccinated at all because there's no point, and the sort of people who take lots of vaccines tend to be obsessive about health and risk in other ways. Problems like these with observational data are why drugs are put through trials before being launched to market. If we check the data for say the Pfizer trial, what we see is no effect on mortality and serious problems with statistical power also, simply because so few people were dying of COVID it was basically impossible to run a trial large enough to prove it had any effect.
  - kadkadels 3y ago
    We are not talking about vaccine efficiency or efficacy here though but adverse events specifically. >If we check the data for say the Pfizer trial, what we see is no effect on mortality The point is that there are almost no serious adverse events occuring post-vaccination. There is no pharmacovigilance safety signal or concerning pattern wrt MRNA-vaccines. As we have seen in 2021 with the astra zeneca vaccine, post market surveillance worked and it was promptly investigated as soon as a safety signal emerged. EMA (and other regulatory agencies) communicated transparently about their findings and decisions. Thank you for reminding me of this fine example of post-market surveillance, I almost forgot :)
  - pw201 3y ago
    > The statistically invalid time-windowing games the public health agencies all played in which people who had taken vaccines were classed as unvaccinated As I have just replied to the other commenter, the ONS data he appears to object to categorises various "vaccinated" categories starting immediately after vaccination. The regulator's reply to Fenton makes this clear: https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-humpherson-to-norman-fenton-martin-neil-clare-craig-and-scott-mclachlan-ons-deaths-by-vaccination-status-statistics/ https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-hum... I assume this reply is what you refer to when you say that the ONS admit the data cannot be used that way. However, since that reply, the ASMR calculation now uses data linked to the 2021 census which covers around 91% of the population. Paul Mainwood graphed the ASMRs here: https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1627979309812965381 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1627979309812965381 I see no evidence here that being vaccinated makes you more likely to die, which is what the original thread was about.
baseline-shift 3y ago
Good that Australia is not the only country in the world, indeed. In the US, there was a measurable change in death rates once Blue states (Democrats) got vaccinated by May of 2021. Red states, led by Trumpism, where right wing media trumpeted vaccine conspiracy theories, which lowered their vaccination rate, had higher death rates. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828...
defrost 3y ago
> If the Australian government released the data it'd be trivial to identify whether these deaths were concentrated in the vaccinated or the unvaccinated, but so far it hasn't released such data (if it even possesses such data in aggregate format). The ABS releases all manner of aggregate anon data, eg: https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/measuring-australias-excess-mortality-during-covid-19-pandemic-until-august-2023 https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/measuring-australias-excess-... The Australian states all have comprehensive medical records that have allowed people such as Prof. Fiona Stanley, an Australian epidemiologist to gain international recognition for their work teasing out relationships in many different medical disorders. Access to fine grained records is limited to researchers for privacy reasons but the pool of researchers across the country is large enoug to rule out any conspiracy to keep secrets (unless someone is deep down a truther well). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Stanley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Stanley
sampo 3y ago
> whether these deaths were concentrated in the vaccinated or the unvaccinated Sweden let Covid go through their population in 2020. New Zealand allowed Covid to spread only in 2022. Both countries vaccinated their population during 2021. Sweden had a wave of excess deaths in 2020. In New Zealand, excess mortality started to increase in 2022. Excess deaths are correlated with the times of Covid waves, not with vaccinations. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?tab=chart&country=SWE~NZL https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-mortali...

kadkadels 3y ago

Well, in that case, good that Australia isn't the only country in the world: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde... which clearly shows that all-cause deaths in England were higher among the unvaccinated. Here is a Reuters fact check: https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-link-uk-excess-deaths-covid-19-vaccines-2024-02-06 https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-link-uk-exces...

armchairdweller 3y ago
The UK ONS data used to have the obvious flaw that people dropping dead 3 days after their first dose were defined as „unvaccinated“. In this regard, the significant uptick in deaths in summer 2021 in „unvaccinated“ looked interesting to say the least. How are they doing their definitions now? Could not find it. Meanwhile this new Dutch data looks quite interesting, maybe someone here would like to give it a shot: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-en-oversterfte-in-2020-en-2021/samenvatting https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-e... https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/ https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/ By now there is a hell lot of data pointing at issues with the novel pharmaceutical product. Meanwhile governments all over the world continue to be reluctant to issue data on e.g. „long covid“ or immune system problems in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, although this data would settle the debate once and for all if its outcome is in favor of getting the shots. „Fact checkers“ have been shown again and again to be politically biased up to active manipulation. Only people who always agree with the politics they want to push have not noticed at this point.
- kadkadels 3y ago
  Rule number 1: don't argue with conspiracy theorists, they will come up with all sorts of nonsense. >„Fact checkers“ have been shown again and again to be politically biased up to active manipulation. Only people who always agree with the politics they want to push have not noticed at this point. Have they? Show me some of those manipulated fact checkers, please. With reputable sources, I'm not inclined to read bullshit. >By now there is a hell lot of data pointing at issues with the novel pharmaceutical product. Not really, no. Or show us some data. >Meanwhile this new Dutch data looks quite interesting, maybe someone here would like to give it a shot: conveniently only available in dutch, but online translators to the rescue: >https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-en-oversterfte-in-2020-en-2021/6-risico-op-overlijden-kort-na-vaccinatie https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/longread/rapportages/2022/sterfte-e... where the first paragraph in 6.4 translates as follows: >The analyses show a lower or comparable likelihood of dying from causes other than COVID-19 in the first weeks after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, compared to the vaccination status before receiving the respective dose. This holds true for all age groups and also for long-term care users. Based on these results, there is no population-level evidence that COVID-19 vaccination increases the risk of death due to an adverse reaction. Oops. Well, you tried.
  - armchairdweller 3y ago
    You seem to be really emotional about this. Need to say, the psychogram of those who defend pharma relentlessly to this day is very interesting. I see anger, insults, trampling onto what an obviously fascist authority teached them at the end of 2021 is „below them“ to elevate oneself. Ignorance of obvious data, sidelining. By now I have seen enough actual data - and on top of that a lot of sad „anecdata“ in my direct surroundings - to pay attention at least. Given its prevalence I am sure you have seen the anecdata as well. Have you called someone who claimed to have a vax damage or who told you a relative died from the vax a „conspiracy theorist“ yet? One good alternative point to start your journey in 2024 could be the US civilian labor force disability data. And no, I won’t waste time to search for that for you, given that you began your „response“ by attaching a label because it soothes you mentally. It has all been out there for long time and has been linked countless times. The little section you got from google translating is a government-approved interpretation of this data. I have seen several others. You can download the data and fact-check for yourself.
t0bia_s 3y ago
Im not sure how anyone could still belive in factcheckers that claims previously that vaccination gives immunity to virus or that there are no side effects from vaccination even though we have plenty studies that monitor it quite precisely. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772059 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39772059
- kadkadels 3y ago
  And I'm not sure how anyone can be a conspiracy theorist and honestly believe that all governments and regulatory agencies all over the world try to hide some grand conspiracy about vaccine efficacy and safety, but here we are. >vaccination gives immunity to virus or that there are no side effects from vaccination Who claims that? Nobody does or did. This is a familiar tactic: shifting the goalposts from vaccinations have very rare side effects and do not guarantee one hundred percent immunity to complete immunity and no side effects at all. Rarely does a vaccine provide complete 100% immunity from a disease, in rare cases it does, e.g. Polio. Also nobody ever claimed that vaccines have no side effects, they are just very, very rare. So rare that the expected benefits far outweigh any risk of side effects.
  - t0bia_s 3y ago
    Most factchecker refers to CDC, that claimed: Fully vaccinated people can: -Visit with other fully vaccinated people indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing -Visit with unvaccinated people from a single household who are at low risk for severe COVID-19 disease indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing -Refrain from quarantine and testing following a known exposure if asymptomatic Today, text is deleted and exists only in archive. https://web.archive.org/web/20210310000819/https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated-guidance.html https://web.archive.org/web/20210310000819/https://www.cdc.g... Calling someone, who have different experience and opinions, supported by studies as conspiracy theorist shows, how ignorant about this topic you are.
mike_hearn 3y ago
The ONS data cannot be used that way unfortunately, and the ONS themselves have admitted to that fact. If you take the ONS data literally then COVID vaccines are a magical elixir of luck that protect against every cause of death including car crashes. There are at least two problems: 1. The statistically invalid time-windowing games the public health agencies all played in which people who had taken vaccines were classed as unvaccinated. The sibling comment talks about that. Prof Norman Fenton has shown how this yields incorrectly high calculations of effectiveness. 2. Healthy vaccinee bias, in which people who are about to die aren't vaccinated at all because there's no point, and the sort of people who take lots of vaccines tend to be obsessive about health and risk in other ways. Problems like these with observational data are why drugs are put through trials before being launched to market. If we check the data for say the Pfizer trial, what we see is no effect on mortality and serious problems with statistical power also, simply because so few people were dying of COVID it was basically impossible to run a trial large enough to prove it had any effect.
- kadkadels 3y ago
  We are not talking about vaccine efficiency or efficacy here though but adverse events specifically. >If we check the data for say the Pfizer trial, what we see is no effect on mortality The point is that there are almost no serious adverse events occuring post-vaccination. There is no pharmacovigilance safety signal or concerning pattern wrt MRNA-vaccines. As we have seen in 2021 with the astra zeneca vaccine, post market surveillance worked and it was promptly investigated as soon as a safety signal emerged. EMA (and other regulatory agencies) communicated transparently about their findings and decisions. Thank you for reminding me of this fine example of post-market surveillance, I almost forgot :)
- pw201 3y ago
  > The statistically invalid time-windowing games the public health agencies all played in which people who had taken vaccines were classed as unvaccinated As I have just replied to the other commenter, the ONS data he appears to object to categorises various "vaccinated" categories starting immediately after vaccination. The regulator's reply to Fenton makes this clear: https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-humpherson-to-norman-fenton-martin-neil-clare-craig-and-scott-mclachlan-ons-deaths-by-vaccination-status-statistics/ https://osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/correspondence/ed-hum... I assume this reply is what you refer to when you say that the ONS admit the data cannot be used that way. However, since that reply, the ASMR calculation now uses data linked to the 2021 census which covers around 91% of the population. Paul Mainwood graphed the ASMRs here: https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1627979309812965381 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1627979309812965381 I see no evidence here that being vaccinated makes you more likely to die, which is what the original thread was about.

baseline-shift 3y ago

Good that Australia is not the only country in the world, indeed. In the US, there was a measurable change in death rates once Blue states (Democrats) got vaccinated by May of 2021. Red states, led by Trumpism, where right wing media trumpeted vaccine conspiracy theories, which lowered their vaccination rate, had higher death rates. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828...

defrost 3y ago

> If the Australian government released the data it'd be trivial to identify whether these deaths were concentrated in the vaccinated or the unvaccinated, but so far it hasn't released such data (if it even possesses such data in aggregate format). The ABS releases all manner of aggregate anon data, eg: https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/measuring-australias-excess-mortality-during-covid-19-pandemic-until-august-2023 https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/measuring-australias-excess-... The Australian states all have comprehensive medical records that have allowed people such as Prof. Fiona Stanley, an Australian epidemiologist to gain international recognition for their work teasing out relationships in many different medical disorders. Access to fine grained records is limited to researchers for privacy reasons but the pool of researchers across the country is large enoug to rule out any conspiracy to keep secrets (unless someone is deep down a truther well). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Stanley https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Stanley

sampo 3y ago

> whether these deaths were concentrated in the vaccinated or the unvaccinated Sweden let Covid go through their population in 2020. New Zealand allowed Covid to spread only in 2022. Both countries vaccinated their population during 2021. Sweden had a wave of excess deaths in 2020. In New Zealand, excess mortality started to increase in 2022. Excess deaths are correlated with the times of Covid waves, not with vaccinations. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?tab=chart&country=SWE~NZL https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-mortali...