CV and mad panic behaviour

[DJC]

Just to be perfectly clear, the following is copied from the TGA website:

The TGA uses its adverse event reporting system to closely monitor reports of death following COVID-19 vaccination. During the early stages of the vaccine rollout in Australia and many other countries, deaths were reported following vaccination in older people living in aged care as this is where the vaccine rollout started. Many of these deaths were in frail elderly people and were coincidental with vaccination. This was confirmed following review by the TGA and medicine regulators in the UK, Europe and the US which found no specific safety concerns from use of the vaccines in older people.

However, it is possible in frail older people that even relatively mild and expected adverse reactions following the vaccination may contribute to deterioration of an underlying illness. For this reason, the Product Information documents for both the Pfizer and the AstraZeneca vaccines provide advice about vaccinating frail elderly people (over 85 years old) and warn that the potential benefits of vaccination must be weighed against the potential risks for each individual person.

To 23 May 2021, 3.6 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been given in Australia. In this period, the TGA has received 210 reports of deaths following immunisation – 109 have been reported for the Pfizer vaccine, 94 for the AstraZeneca vaccine and seven where the vaccine was not specified. Most of these reports (93%) were for people 65 years of age and over, and over three quarters were 75 years of age and over. Many of the deaths relate to elderly aged-care residents.

The TGA reviews all deaths reported after vaccination and monitors for safety signals. Part of our analysis includes comparing expected natural death rates to observed death rates following immunisation. To date, the observed number of deaths reported after vaccination is actually less than the expected number of deaths.

Each year in Australia, there are about 160,000 deaths, equating to 13,300 a month or 3050 each week. In the most recent reporting year (2018)(link is external) two-thirds of these deaths were in people aged 75 years and over.

Additionally, deaths from COVID-19 disease overwhelmingly occur in the elderly. While the 20-29 age group has had the highest number of cases of COVID-19 in Australia (followed by the 30-39 age group), 94 % (852 of 910) of COVID-19 deaths in Australia(link is external) have been in those aged 70 or over.

Apart from the single Australian case in which death was linked to TTS, COVID-19 vaccines have not been found to cause death. Given the benefits of vaccination with regard to preventing severe disease, hospitalisation and death from COVID-19, particularly in older age groups, immunisation is strongly encouraged as we head into the winter months.

So, it's true that 210 people died after immunisation but 209 of those would have died anyway.  In fact, the number of people who died following immunisation is lower than would be expected from that cohort in the normal course of events.

Another story that caught my eye was Peru revising its COVID death toll from 69,000 to over 180,000 "on the advice of Peruvian and international experts."  The revised COVID death toll now correlates with Peru's excess death figures.

[LP]

So, it's true that 210 people died after immunisation but 209 of those would have died anyway.  In fact, the number of people who died following immunisation is lower than would be expected from that cohort in the normal course of events.

Exactly, ironically it looks like being COVID-19 vaccinated decreases the general death rate.

The reality is that it probably has no effect on the general death rate over the long term, it may change short term behaviour reducing the short term death rate.

My friend who is a retired actuary tells me it's impossible to decode the cause and effect around the general death rate. For example, he said less people driving or travelling to work means less traffic deaths, but more people stay at home and climb ladders!

[Thryleon]

There are no "vaccine deaths", there is one single vaccine death, your premise is based on a lie or misdirection about a statistic!

Also, partial inversion of the logic leaves the argument non-sensical.

The fact that 210 people died is real, that they were part of 3.6 million that had been vaccinated is real, the assertion that they died as a result of vaccination is false and does not exist in the reports. In formal logic it's called a false premise, and Trump and his followers have made it an artform.

exactly my point

If you can massage the numbers to prove a point, you can do it on either side of the fence.

Each COVID death that had co morbidity, means that COVID can be interpreted as cause of death, but they would have died anyway (assumption).

Each case would be different, ergo, the same applies to those vaccinated but dead.  Why count that number if its irrelevant?

DJC states the following:

So, it's true that 210 people died after immunisation but 209 of those would have died anyway.

If that is also true of each COVID death, is COVID the killer virus its made out to be?

Before you answer that question, ask yourself whether or not that question resonates with you in any way shape or form, and also, whether or not that is a healthy question to ask.  You will find, that its actually the most appropriate question to ask, and the answer is hidden in statistics, massaged numbers, vaccinations, and foreign counts of people.  Yet here we are in Australia, with rising case numbers, a new lockdown, and no one going to hospital with COVID.


Why??

[LP]

exactly my point

If you can massage the numbers to prove a point, you can do it on either side of the fence.

Only one side of the debate is massaging numbers, the fake news vendors. That is where you go wrong trying to paint it as a level playing field of information. It isn't a level playing field, all the information is not the same quality, in just the same way all opinions are not equal.

The stats and numbers do not lie, they are not subject to human interpretation, influence or obfuscation, they are not like opinions that can be spun bent or twisted to an individuals will!

The emphasis on wanting COVID-19 deaths proven to support or refute the COVID-19 restrictions and other actions is also flawed, it's built on the premise that COVID-19 infections that aren't deadly are somehow OK! The evidence suggests the long term effects of long COVID-19 will potentially be far far costlier than the initial deaths. As abhorrent as it may read, a funeral is far far cheaper than a treatment or long term critical care!

[LP]

The hospitals are encouraged to not report vaccine problems and find other conditions
to use as the cause of death.
Underlying causes are being used to mask the truth with emphasis on the lying. If you want the true stats speak to the staff not the tga website or the hospital administrators.

The problem statistic for that argument is as [member=324]DJC[/member] points out, total deaths have dropped. That statistic tears the concept you are asserting a new one!

[ElwoodBlues1]

The problem statistic for that argument is as [member=324]DJC[/member] points out, total deaths have dropped. That statistic tears the concept you are asserting a new one!

Do you think every death is reported...?

[LP]

Do you think every death is reported...?

If we are talking about here in Australia, yes every death is reported and accounted for.

It regards to the global statistics, it doesn't matter as long as the method of collecting them is consistent then the count remains valid.

You are an engineer, I don't expect we have to debate Regression to the Mean or Standard Deviations, or what they mean to the general trend, or what averages mean to an assertion that some numbers might be missing or that the count was somehow imperfect.

[Thryleon]

Only one side of the debate is massaging numbers, the fake news vendors. That is where you go wrong trying to paint it as a level playing field of information. It isn't a level playing field, all the information is not the same quality, in just the same way all opinions are not equal.

The stats and numbers do not lie, they are not subject to human interpretation, influence or obfuscation, they are not like opinions that can be spun bent or twisted to an individuals will!

The emphasis on wanting COVID-19 deaths proven to support or refute the COVID-19 restrictions and other actions is also flawed, it's built on the premise that COVID-19 infections that aren't deadly are somehow OK! The evidence suggests the long term effects of long COVID-19 will potentially be far far costlier than the initial deaths. As abhorrent as it may read, a funeral is far far cheaper than a treatment or long term critical care!

You are asserting something yourself here.

That the statistics gathered are reliable accurate, and not embelished in any way shape or form.  That any potential deaths attributed to vaccinations are not attributed to vaccinations but other causes, and that any one who is listed as a covid death, died because they got covid.

Deliberately muddying long covid into there is a bit false.  The current batch are as asymptomatic as it gets unless they are reporting something I am missing.

You are confusing the data with the interpretation here.  You state the data doesnt lie, but those giving us the statistics are interpreting the data themselves, ergo, they create the ability to hide things they dont want to display and vice versa, to pick up things they do.  That vaccine deaths are correlation, and that covid deaths are causation is itself, an interpretation.  Hence why Peru's numbers are changing based on advise from people internationally.

[LP]

You are asserting something yourself here.

That the statistics gathered are reliable accurate, and not embelished in any way shape or form.  That any potential deaths attributed to vaccinations are not attributed to vaccinations but other causes, and that any one who is listed as a covid death, died because they got covid.

Deliberately muddying long covid into there is a bit false.  The current batch are as asymptomatic as it gets unless they are reporting something I am missing.

You are confusing the data with the interpretation here.  You state the data doesnt lie, but those giving us the statistics are interpreting the data themselves, ergo, they create the ability to hide things they dont want to display and vice versa, to pick up things they do.  That vaccine deaths are correlation, and that covid deaths are causation is itself, an interpretation.  Hence why Peru's numbers are changing based on advise from people internationally.

It's not a conspiracy, there are not hundreds of thousands of health workers collaborating to paint a false picture, it's completely untenable for you to make that assertion, and you work in the health industry! Aren't you indirectly arguing that we can't trust you?

The hundreds of thousands collaborating to paint a false picture are the anti-vaxxers, cynics and radicals on FB and Instagram, and the media panders to them for profit.

The reported numbers are not interpreted, they are just reported as is. It's the sceptics and cynics doing the interpretations and distortions.

Long COVID, short COVID, weak COVID, strong COVID, deadly COVID and asymptomatic COVID are all COVID.

The infected here can thank their good fortune, and to date their better outcomes, that they are here in Australia and not India. You can thank your lucky stars you work in the Australian Health System and not Brazil, Peru, India, Turkey, etc., etc., etc..!

[ElwoodBlues1]

[quote author=LP link=msg=336225 date=1622611135]
If we are talking about here in Australia, yes every death is reported and accounted for.

It regards to the global statistics, it doesn't matter as long as the method of collecting them is consistent then the count remains valid.


Writing a death certificate and reporting a death are two different things..
It is a cause of death certificate not a comorbidity certificate.
Incidental diseases or medical conditions that the patient had but did not cause or contribute to the death
should not be included on a ‘death certificate but often they are when the cause of death is not verifiable without an autopsy and not every death that appears on a coroners inbox will get that far especially with the clogged waiting lists.