The UnVaccinated are in for a big surprise.....

Ah, so you shot yourself in the foot on purpose, now thats a twist in the right direction.

 

I'm not certain your data here is real, but I think it falls under what I explained in another thread. Partially vaccinated often represents people who don't get vaccinated until they end up in the hospital. Them having a terminal event and going to the hospital leads to both higher mortality and only partially vaccinated status. The vaccine had nothing to do with their deaths.

If you want to say something is causative, you want to see dose response. It makes no sense to assert the vaccine is causing death when it's the partially vaccinated that had the highest death rates. The opposite trend is seen until we get to unvaccinated, suggesting that partially vaccinated does indeed reflect people who started out sicker, and this same phenomenon could explain small differences between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated, assuming the difference there is even real. The confounding factor of age is accounted for, but there are others.

Suffice it to say: There's a reason researchers need statisticians, and there's a reason people in public health learn statistics.

 

Neither is he, which is why after about a dozen requests, the source for that graphic remains unanswered!

Notice the one from Statista, using the actual UK source data is nothing like the one from his questionable and probably fake/batshit "unknown" source!

 

Yeh you shot yourself in the foot with that one.

I did notice it, you still dont see how you shot yourself in the foot? do you want to come clean now?

 

In the case of the US you are right in the case of the UK you are wrong.

 

Why not? The 10% who go unvaccinated in the UK are also people who are willing and able to avoid medical care. A vaccine skeptic has an easier time saying no, or not even thinking about it, while being healthy at home than near death in the hospital.

 

Nope. I don't see how this graph, sourced from the actual UK data in the same time frame as your unsourced one is "shooting" anything, apart from your stupid claim down in flames.
Reputable source, same time frame, same country:
COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status in England 2022 | Statista


It's quite bad just looking at it, but it's way worse than it appears because that section of unvaccinated makes up around 10% of the UK population!
Covid vaccine: How many people are vaccinated in the UK? - BBC News

The unvaccinated ARE in for a big surprise!

 

First off part 1 of 2 you claimed that I could not use that very same data here, so you need to explain why you think its valid for you and not for me so lets start there.

 

I agree him not citing the source is a problem, but your graph from statista is not measuring the same thing. His talks about mortality rates in general (or even non-covid mortality rates). The statista one is specifically about covid mortality.

Here I found an official source that, on a few spot checks, correlates with his graphs: Deaths by vaccination status, England - Office for National Statistics

It gives excel files, so just open it and compare it to his graphs. I think my explanation for his findings is correct. We are talking about sick people in the partially vaccinated status, and that's why their mortality is higher.

 

A lie. No I didn't.

• You didn't understand the report, the many times it was highlighted or what it referred to!
• Your data is NOT the same as used by Statista from the UK - yours is just England!
• Yours is up to Oct 21, the UK data is May 2022!
• Only the top line on the graphs is to be carefully considered, due to the way the ASMR groups were evaluated!
• You invented some crappy images with "busted" across them to evade this failure to comprehend such a simple thing.
• This is cross thread spamming yet again!

 

I said who did it and beta googd it.

 

Not correct. The one used by him you quoted in post #27 is Mortality rate in the UK by vaccination status May 2022. My one:
Reputable source, same time frame, same country:
COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status in England 2022 | Statista

WTH! I googled the phrase you suggested and posted what came up! Your lying-ass image uncited graph didn't come up at all

 

I never found the graph itself, but I did find the official data the graph was based upon. Some graphs from you spell out they're from ONS, but that's not the same as providing a reputable link. Moving on from that, you should probably think about what I said about dose response and how the observed data fits more with my hypothesis (sicker people getting partially vaccinated) than your hypothesis (vaccine bad).

 

Odd the title for your source says:
Number of deaths involving COVID-19 in England as of May 31, 2022, by vaccination status and age

 

Notice yours says "covid 19 deaths" and his says "mortality rate"... His earlier post said all-cause mortality. His more recent graph, which he used in another thread, says "non-covid mortality."

So no, statista is not measuring the same thing.

It doesn't change the fact that his interpretation of the data is spurious.

 

Yeah, I "noticed" that. I'm not seeing what difference you think that makes? Why don't you ask him directly where the source data came from.

p.s. look at the left hand index on his bullshit uncited graph. Deaths. It's just their wording.

 

The way the US did it was cheating.
You cant throw the partially vaxd in with the unvaxd and call them all unvaxd.

I did say where my source was

Of course that was responded to by just someone elses useless opinion.

 

My mistake, YOURS says UK, mine is England!

 

OH so its a different database then?

 

It makes all the difference! People die of things besides covid. Statista ONLY looks at covid deaths. His more recent graph looks at all deaths that aren't covid. His initial graph looked at all deaths in general, including but not limited to covid.

I didn't find who generated the graph, but I did find official data that correlates with his graph. The trends he describes are there, but he is not interpreting their meaning correctly because he is not accounting for important confounding factors like why they are partially vaccinated. It's likely often because they just got hospitalized and never survived the hospitalization but did get vaccinated while hospitalized. Their death had nothing to do with vaccination. It had to do with the reason they were hospitalized (cancer, heart attack, whatever). Because they were hospitalized, they were more likely to be partially vaccinated than people who were previously unvaccinated and never hospitalized.

 

MEH! Go find it via google search was your "source"? And then, where is their data from? You spent pages questioning where the Statista data came from, then got it completely screwed up withy ASMR data and then spammed your blundering "busted" crap over two threads.

WHERE IS THE GRAPH FROM, WHERE DOES THE DATA COME FROM!?

 

Same data source for England deaths as UK!

Did you miss my p.s.?

p.s. look at the left hand index on his bullshit uncited graph. Deaths. It's just their wording.

 

So then you are saying that statistica graph is 'covid only' no comorbs?

 

That and he posted an article which quoted sterlings data completely out of context!

 

No no I was assuming we all know mortality=deaths. The difference is that statista only looks at covid deaths. None of his graphs look at covid deaths. All-cause at least includes covid deaths, but most deaths are not covid deaths, so his data is looking at something completely different than statista.