Vaccinating the Elderly Saved Lives
The Daily Scepticās purpose is to question the conventional wisdom ā something thatās more important than ever in the era of NPC-slogans like āFollow the Scienceā. But in this article, Iād like to uphold one piece of conventional wisdom: that vaccinating the elderly saved lives.
Now, this is far from a full-throated endorsement of the conventional wisdom on Covid vaccines. For instance, the conventional wisdom has it (or at least had it) that everyone needs to get vaccinated ā regardless of age, physical health or prior Covid status. Yet thereās a decent case to be made against vaccination for young healthy people and/or those whoāve already had the virus.
Likewise, the conventional wisdom insists not only that everyone should get vaccinated, but that everyone must get vaccinated. Which is why until quite recently, you couldnāt get on an airplane without being vaccinated. I was strongly against the vaccine mandates, and my stance certainly hasnāt changed.
For those keeping score, Iāve always said the vaccines were a way of achieving focussed protection against Covid. And I continue to believe that vaccination was the right choice for most elderly people and others in high-risk groups.
At this point, a purveyor of the conventional wisdom might claim: thereās already overwhelming evidence of vaccine effectiveness against death, so what more needs to be said?
Yet as sceptics are well aware, there are problems with the evidence for vaccine effectiveness against death. Simply comparing Covid death rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated people, as purveyor of the conventional wisdom are fond of doing, isnāt satisfactory. (Note that the original RCTs were ānot designed or powered to assess whether the vaccines prevented deathsā.)
First, thereās immortal time bias: because vaccinated people are often classified as āunvaccinatedā until two weeks after vaccination, deaths that occur during this window are not counted or wrongly assigned to the unvaccinated group, artificially inflating vaccine effectiveness.
Relatedly, thereās the āhealthy vaccineeā effect. Unvaccinated people are more likely to die of causes other than Covid, implying that they tend to be less healthy and/or less risk-averse than vaccinated people. Failing to account for this again leads to overestimation of vaccine effectiveness.
Thereās also the phenomenon of waning. Some studies suggest that vaccine effectiveness against death wanes over time, just like vaccine effectiveness against infection. So even if the vaccines do protect against death, such protection may be relatively short-lived.
Finally, thereās the fact that some āZero Covidā countries like South Korea saw large spikes in excess mortality even after the vast majority of elderly people had been vaccinated. These data are hard to reconcile with commonly heard claims of 90% vaccine effectiveness against death.
One way to get round these problems is by using aggregate-level data: compare places where more elderly people got vaccinated to those where fewer did, and see whether excess mortality was lower. Any resulting correlation canāt be explained by immortal time bias or the āhealthy vaccineeā effect since those donāt apply at the aggregate-level.
And the use of excess mortality, rather than the official Covid death rate, obviates the problem of correctly classifying Covid deaths.
To see whether excess mortality was indeed lower in places where more elderly people got vaccinated, I obtained data on countries in the European Economic Area ā the 27 EU member states, plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. These countries are culturally and economically similar, so the sample is appropriate for testing claims about vaccine effectiveness.
Data on the percentage of over 60s double-vaccinated by July of 2021 (the halfway point of that year) were taken from the European CDC. Data on life expectancy were taken from Our World in Data.
To calculate change in life expectancy, I subtracted average life expectancy in 2020 and 2021 from the average in 2015-2019. This indicates how much lower life expectancy was in the first two years of the pandemic than in the previous five.
You might say that 2020 should be excluded from the analysis as the vaccines only became available at the end of that year. However, the level of mortality in 2021 will be lower, all else being equal, for countries that had greater mortality in 2020. So it makes sense to take both yearsā data into account. In any case, results are basically the same if 2020 is excluded.
The chart below plots change in life expectancy against elderly vaccination. The relationship is very strong and positive: in the most-vaccinated countries life expectancy stayed the same or even increased, whereas in the least-vaccinated countries (notably Bulgaria) it fell by 1ā2 years.
Of course, correlation doesnāt equal causation. Just because elderly vaccination is correlated with change in life expectancy, doesnāt mean the former caused the latter. So what other factors might explain the association?
Two obvious possibilities are: obesity and healthcare spending. Maybe it proved more deadly in places where more people were obese? Or maybe Covid proved more deadly in places where the healthcare system was worse at treating people?
When I tried controlling for these factors in a simple multivariate model, healthcare spending was more strongly associated with change in life expectancy than was elderly vaccination. On the other hand, obesity was not associated with change in life expectancy.
One could interpret these findings as showing that healthcare spending is the true causal variable, and elderly vaccination barely matters. However, I suspect that because the sample comprises only 30 countries, it is not possible to disentangle the effects of elderly vaccination and healthcare spending. (Perhaps some third factor causes both low elderly vaccination and less healthcare spending.)
To get a slightly larger sample, I turned to U.S. states ā which provide another useful setting for testing claims about vaccine effectiveness.
Data on % of over 65s double-vaccinated by July 2021 were taken from the CDC, as were data on all-cause deaths among over 65s. To calculate excess mortality, I subtracted average deaths in 2020ā21 from the average in 2015ā2019, and then divided the answer by the average in 2015ā2019 (and multiplied by 100).
The chart below plots excess mortality against elderly vaccination. As before, the relationship is very strong: in the most-vaccinated states excess mortality was less than 15%, whereas in the least-vaccinated states it was more than 20%.
When I tried controlling for healthcare spending and obesity in a multivariate model, neither factor was strongly associated with excess mortality. By contrast, elderly vaccination was a consistently strong predictor.
In other words: in the larger US sample, the correlation between elderly vaccination and excess mortality canāt be explained by either obesity or healthcare spending. Perhaps thereās another variable that can explain the association, but itās hard to imagine what it might be. (Neither age or racial demographics is going to work.)
As mentioned above, none of the results change substantially when excluding the 2020 mortality data. In fact, elderly vaccination is a more robust predictor in the European sample.
To sum up, elderly vaccination is strongly correlated with excess mortality in both Europe and America. The association is robust to controlling for obesity and healthcare spending in the American sample, though it diminishes substantially in the European sample. The latter result may be due to the small sample size, making it hard to disentangle the effects of correlated predictors.
One issue my analysis doesnāt really address is waning. Perhaps the vaccines donāt protect against death after the first year, so if Iād included the 2022 mortality data, I would have found no correlation or a much-reduced one? While life expectancy data isnāt yet available, thereās little evidence that the most-vaccinated European countries saw outsize excess mortality last year.
Iceland is the only one that saw a major spike in excess mortality (though in recent weeks excess mortality has been negative). So while comparisons based on only 2020ā21 data may somewhat overstate the association between elderly vaccination and excess mortality, itās unlikely to be dramatically different when including the 2022 data.
As another check, I obtained the ONSās latest estimates of age-adjusted excess mortality, which encompass the period from January 2020 to July 2022. The chart below plots these estimates against elderly vaccination for 27 European countries. (They were not available for Germany, Ireland or Liechtenstein.)
The relationship is just as strong as before, indicating that any effect of waning during the first half of 2022 was minimal.
In any case, even if vaccine effectiveness against death wanes all the way to zero after several years, getting vaccinated would still have been the right choice for most elderly people, since two or more years represents a non-trivial increase in oneās lifespan.
The evidence suggests that vaccinating the elderly saved lives. Unlike lockdowns and mask mandates ā which had little discernible impact while imposing huge costs on society ā elderly vaccination appears to have made a tangible difference. (There is no correlation between lockdowns and excess mortality across European countries or U.S. states.)
Focussed protection culminating in voluntary vaccination of high-risk groups was the right strategy all along ā just as the Great Barrington authors argued.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Honestly, one does get tired of the sophists. Junk. We were told 1 and done for the wrinklies. Now they are on #5 – is this guy seriously saying that 5 stabs saved lives? Ridiculous. IFR was less than 1% for the wrinklies. vs What has been the excess deaths, post stabs, for the >80s? 3 million wrinklies >80 = potential dead without doing anything of 30.000 max. Did the stabbinations save 30 K? How would anyone know that unless you tracked what happened against other alternatives like ivermectin, proper respiratory care, the unstabbinated and how they fared etc ? Notice that the $cience did not bother with tracking or using control groups. Because they are ‘the science’ as we all know. Did more than 30 K >80s die post stabbinations? The excess dead totals say yes. We have 100 K dead in the UK after the stabs in just 3 years. 1/3 of those will be old. The stabs did not save anyone. If you were lucky your body, blood system, heart and brain were miraculously left unaltered. Millions were not so lucky. He says it himself To sum up, elderly vaccination is strongly correlated with excess mortality in… Read more Ā»
To be fair the analysis only considers the impact of two doses.
I could well imagine that if there was a benefit it would be seen after one dose.
My sense of this article is one of clutching at straws.
The data maybe, if you look at it in this way, suggest a possible correlation between higher life expectancy among the elderly and covid jabs, perhaps….
Overall life expectancy across the globe has crashed. Infertility is also rising, so they are getting us at both ends.
People are dying younger.
Cancers are raging through the 30-60 age groups.
There is a detailed set of studies proving the stabs are causing various cancers.
Dr Dalgliesh- once a former Stab lover — after his son contracted heart disease turned against the Jagging. Wrote a letter in the BMJ on cancer spreading in his patients. Tis always so. He promoted the Stabs until affected personally.
The Wrinklies were just as affected as anyone else. This article is Junk. And show me a control group comparison – The Stabbed vs the UnStabbed and show me what happened within both over time.
Socrates would have a field day with these sophists!
Cue the vitriol from some of our more excitable commentatorsā¦.
Well, riddle me this:
What does “elderly” mean?
Good question.
Cheers TSOAP
I was going to ask Noah if he is elderly, but thought that might be abitclosetothebone
Thanks
This is where it gets confusing because other experts are saying based on the data that the jabs haven’t saved anyone. Not data savvy myself so can’t comment but Prof Fenton is one such person;
https://wherearethenumbers.substack.com/p/kirsch-challenge
It’s not clear from this if Noah has checked Norman Fenton’s analysis. He seems to be missing some of the important factors Fenton has raised. Fenton has been analysing this data in depth and for a long time and has an excellent grasp of statistics (his specialism is bayesian analysis), so I would tend to go with what Fenton is saying rather than what Noah is saying (though I haven’t spent any time comparing the two). One of the most important factors is that the vaccinated figures are likely to be accurate, whereas the unvaccinated figures are not so. And this is because the vaccinated figures come from a positive event (getting vaccinated), whereas the unvaccinated figures come from subtracting the vaccinated from the total population size, and even within government departments, there are different figures for total population size. This then means the denominator in all the unvaccinated per capita calculations needs to be treated with extreme caution. It is mostly likely wrong. And moreover because different population sizes are a larger proportion of the unvaccinated population (because more are vaccinated than unvaccinated), the differences can have a very significant effect. Fenton has given very compelling reasons to doubt… Read more Ā»
Also on unvaccinated vs. vaccinated, is it true that people weren’t considered vaccinated until 2 weeks after the injection? And that in previous trials, one was considered vaccinated/medicated immediately after injection for purposes evaluating for safety? If a person’s vaccination status was unknown at death, wasn’t he classified as unvaccinated? If the above statements are all true, then Noah would certainly have to reconsider his analysis.
2 weeks after the second jab. So 6 weeks of āunvaxedā status deaths I believe.
Sure, and add in more weeks of “unvaxed” status if you weren’t able to get that second jab on schedule–it was like watching parents scrambling to find Tickle Me Elmo at Christmastime. All that energy trying to find those doses and driving for hours to make those appointments, only to find out that they were poisoning themselves. No wonder there’s denial.
A āfriendā was furious a mutual acquaintance had skipped the line by waiting at a vax centre to get left over jabs. These people couldnāt wait to get injected and were angry if they had to wait.
Im trying to be sympathetic to these morons but itās really hard.
I remember young people even put on disguises to look older in order to jump the queue to get jabbed, when seniors had priority over younger folks. Then, as the jabs became less popular, and supply outstripped demand, they started bribing people to get them, and anecdotally some people would keep getting jabbed as much as 20 times (!) to keep getting the free cash (usually $100) and other prizes such as free Krispy Kreme donuts, free beer, and even free weed in the states where cannabis is legal. Truly stranger than fiction, lol.
Then of course things took a much darker turn when they started forcing and coercing people to get jabbed. When carrots no longer worked, they turned to sticks. Until We the People said ENOUGH and rebelled and protested, of course.
Now that is some truly certifiable people right there who sound desperately in need of a psychiatric assessment! š® The world has experienced true insanity alright.
Indeed. Mass formation psychosis, as Mattias Desmey would say. People go mad in crowds, but only recover one by one.
Indeed I remember those days in spring 2021. It was like a feeding frenzy, and here in the USA they were and still are given in not only doctor’s offices and such, but also in pharmacies and even supermarket pharmacies, the same as they do with seasonal flu jabs (some people even receive both simultaneously). Back then, I got my first and only two doses of Moderna grudgingly in April/May 2021 at the local Stop&Shop pharmacy. Fortunately, no ill effects for me other than a brief sore arm, not even after dose 2. But never got any further doses, which is good because the third one seems to be the Rubicon dose from what I gather.
The ever-insightful Steve Kirsch really puts the cherry on top. (Pun intended, as Kirsch means cherry in German)
It’s completely illogical to use change in life expectancy as a measure of success as far as I can see.
Why? What would you use instead?
(Genuine question – I have no idea).
Number of hospitalisations and death per 100k of population, vaccinated vs unvaccinated, age-stratified. And the official life expectancy numbers do not yet reflect the impact on LE from damage to peopleās immune systems, heart damage and micro-clotting (to name but three) following the injections. Which is a pretty fundamental flaw, IMHO.
“Number of hospitalisations and death per 100k of population, vaccinated vs unvaccinated, age-stratified. “
That would certainly make sense to me. Probably these data are deliberately not collected/not made available.
The our world life expectancy data is I believe based on period life expectancy. That essentially assumes that the age specific mortality rates that apply in say 2020 are replicated in every single year of a person’s lifetime to get the 2020 life expectancy figure.
So for example with the 2020 figure you are assuming somebody faces a pandemic every single year of their life to come up with the life expectancy figure. So you are basing the life expectancy calculation on them facing a pandemic in their first year of life, their second year of life, their third year of life and so on. In practice they face perhaps a single pandemic in their lifetime at whatever age they happen to be then.
At a very crude level you can say if period life expectancy goes down in a year then people have died at a younger age than the previous year. But it isn’t really a meaningful measure as an overall metric. And people in Bulgaria haven’t lost 1-2 years of life.
Thanks. Interested to see what Mr Carl makes of this.
Lets sense check the statement In any case, even if vaccine effectiveness against death wanes all the way to zero after several years, getting vaccinated would still have been the right choice for most elderly people, since two or more years represents a non-trivial increase in oneās lifespan. For a 65 year old annual mortality is about 1.3%. If a theoretical effective vaccine (i.e not the experimental vaccines we have) were able to reduce that all cause mortality by say a whopping 10% for a year then that 65 year old would reduce their chances of dying at age 65 by 0.13% (1.3% x 1/10). And in so doing they might increase their life expectancy by say 0.0013 * 20 years = 0.026 of a year = 9 days So Noah Carl is out by at least a factor of 40 to 80 even assuming the vaccines work. Even if you assume some sort of unreasonable effectiveness of 10% say for 3 years or 10% reducing to 0% over 6 years you are still in the territory of one month or so increase in life expectancy. In the context of an experimental vaccine with significant harms and no obvious benefit… Read more Ā»
And of course, the analysis presented says nothing about the damages caused by the Emergency Use Authorization product. What is the justification for causing injury to some? The benefit of another group?
Indeed. Perhaps the “two years” example was the one person the “vaccine” “saved” from death from covid, and all the others succumbed straight away?
What would I use instead
You do a comparison of all cause mortality for vaccinated and unvaccinated banded by age taking into account health differences between the two groups.
I think that is the key point. Partly because the official life expectancy numbers do not yet reflect the impact on LE from damage to people’s immune systems, heart damage and micro-clotting (to name but three) following the injections.
Oh please.
This is a poison for any age group. Your own chart shows the spike in deaths just after the roll outs. Those were the old folks. Then it rolls out towards the younger age group.
Heres Ed Dowd on his book āCause Unknownā
https://youtu.be/u4Pi7DCSn2c
The decline in excess death is the pull forward effect. Add to this that older folks are less active and metabolise very slowly. Hence the damage to their T cell immunity caused by the jabs mean cancers only come more slowly While the young get āTurbo Cancerā
If they donāt die they get sick more frequently with other things, strokes etc.
Not sure what the point of this post was.
Yes it’s my firm belief that had elderly folk been left alone they’d have fared much better. That’s before we mention the obvious fact that they should have had early treatment options given to them, including antibiotics for bacterial pneumonia if applicable. But they got precisely bugger all apart from stuck on a death protocol. Much like the useless flu vaccines, I’m still at a loss to understand how they can be expected to mount an immune response to a jab if they can’t mount an adequate one to a virus. Also, the virus enters via the upper resp tract, how effective are antibodies in the blood stream exactly? Its just nonsense. You cannot expect much in the way of protection from a resp virus which mutates too fast for the jabs to keep up and not quickly become obsolete. There’s a reason we get colds repeatedly.
Stop making sense please.
14 people in a single home near us died of COVID in the week or so following their first vaccination. There was a six-month police investigation of the poor care home staff before it was dropped, but no investigation of the vaccine.
On the basis of the normal “not vaccinated if within 14 days” those deaths would all have been on the “COVID” side of the equation, rather than the “vaccine” side, though we now know of the increased susceptibility immediately post-jab.
There were a number of such cases reported from round the world, but I don’t think any of them figure in the vaccine cost-benefit analysis. That alone makes “vaccines saved elderly lives” a dodgy calculus to make.
Mogwai, re flu and Covid jabs, consider this statement from Robert Clancy, in his article Pandemics Bookended Our Careers:
What do you think about this…particularly as most people weren’t at risk of severe disease, hospitalisation or death…
How on earth did they end up with a plan to jab the entire global population? Against a disease it was known from the beginning wasn’t serious threat to most people?
What are your theories on why they ( after sounding legit at the start and announcing they’d only offer the vax to ‘high risk’ people ) ended up proceeding all down the age groups, right to infants? I don’t buy that it was purely about profit because they could easily have jabbed everyone with saline and nobody would know and there’d be no vax-related deaths and disease. It’s obvious to me this was nefarious from the start, the intention was always to get a jab into every human possible ( and mRNA into babies in utero ) and all of a sudden we had to pretend we all didn’t have a perfectly capable immune system and that natural immunity was inferior to vax-generated immunity. Also the suppression of known safe and effective treatments was a sign this was never going to be aimed at just the frail and elderly, and as we know, the whole plandemic had to be engineered as an ”emergency” so that these injectables could be brought in and given EUA. It has now been proven ( Watt and Latypova’s research ) that this is a literal military operation, the jabs are ‘medical countermeasures’ and it’s my… Read more Ā»
Mogwai ā that is a great post. The one point I canāt quite get my mind around is the point about depopulation being fully intended by TPTB. You argue that this is evident because the injections havenāt been withdrawn from the market. My view, for what itās worth, is that TPTB wanted to use the plandemic to roll out the mRNA injections and that they wanted to be able to demonstrate them as the way forward for vaccine technology. They would then subsequently be able to use mRNA vaccines in the future, as they wished, to effect their depopulation and transhumanist agendas. But they messed up ā the combination of choosing the spike protein to target the virus and the lipid nanoparticles as the delivery mechanism meant that the injections caused significant injury and death. I think they are now simply doubling down, because the alternative of coming clean is just too personally costly to all of those involved (the accountability is not just for rolling out dangerous injections, but also for lockdowns and the non-use of repurposed drugs to treat Covid) ā and control of the mainstream media and social media enables them to propagandise and distract (Ukraine etc).… Read more Ā»
Thank you š Yes I think that if we get to, say, the 3rd quarter of this year and the stats on excess deaths and decreased births do not return to normal parameters then it doesn’t look good and would give more weight to the whole depopulation being intentional hypothesis. I think, re your last point, what seems inevitable to me is that uptake of *all* vaccines will decrease going forward as public confidence in Big Pharma and all in authority will predictably plummet due to this Covid jab experience, so in that way they’ve shot themselves in the foot, which makes no sense. The reason I don’t buy into your ”doubling down” theory is because it sounds too much like sunk cost fallacy, which doesn’t chime with me. For instance, we know that these gene therapies have been worked on for years and that previous attempts to get them to the mass market failed due to safety signals in the animal trials, so why would they be deemed safer now? We’ve all seen the slide by now in the FDA presentation from Oct 2020, which showed all of the safety issues they foreseen with these products, all of which… Read more Ā»
Class Mogs. No need for my tuppenth worth.
Well-said. It’s beginning to look a lot like genocide, everywhere you go…
Do they know it’s genocide at all?
Thanks, Mogwai. I think you make some very persuasive points and I find myself genuinely torn on this one.
Well no surprise if I state I am 100% in agreement Mogs. Excellent post.
Thanks hux. š
Or instead of jabbing everyone with saline placebo, they could have jabbed everyone with high-dose Vitamin D (at least 100,000 units) and call it a “vaccine”, and they would even be able to claim success since that would have actually worked well beyond any placebo effect. Death rates would have actually gone down rather than up. Win-win-win situation.
But of course, death is actually a feature, not a bug, of the Machiavellian machinations of the moneyed elites. So that would have been a nonstarter.
Mogwai, re why they ended up proceeding all down the age groups, right to infants… Seems like they thought they had the opportunity to go for it this time, go for what they’ve been planning for years with the vaccination passports/digital ID, they wanted the excuse to put everyone on this control system – and they used a deadly virus ‘no-one is immune!’. Except this is a lie… If we take ‘COVID-19’ literally, it makes no sense to jab the majority of people who it was acknowledged from the beginning weren’t at risk of disease…but they did it anyway. So I’m sticking with challenging this obvious wrongdoing…obvious to some of us anyway. It’s not justifiable to press unnecessary medical interventions upon mass populations of people. Billions of people around the world have been exploited with these medical interventions, and told a tissue of lies about the situation. Needles have been inserted without valid informed consent. According to the Australian Department of Health and Aged Care: “Informed consent should be obtained for every COVID-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations.” That’s quite a loaded sentence Mogwai…and it’s not just about Covid-19 jabs… Also, thank you for the link… Read more Ā»
Apparently they have been working on a nasal Covid vaccine, like they already have had for flu for 20 years now. One of which was simply AstraZeneca/Oxford (aka Covishield in India) sprayed up the nose instead of injected. So far no (published) successes yet though. Another one allegedly worked well in mice but failed in humans. Who knows?
Until then, regular use of Xlear nasal spray or Betadine carageenan nasal spray or povidone-iodine or hydrogen peroxide nasal spray, especially when mouthwash is also used regularly, will provide much better protection than any “vaccine”, nasal or otherwise.
BINGO. Thanks for mentioning the antibiotics that for decades were a major part of the pre-2020 standard of care for post-viral pneumonia, especially for elderly patients, which doctors from 2020 onwards were then told NOT to give for Covid pneumonia. How many hospitalizations and especially deaths were really a result of denying antibiotics to patients? Note also that azithromycin or doxycycline WERE part of the Zelenko protocol, the Swiss Doctor protocol, the Ziverdo kit, and other alternative protocols that were censored. And like was noted in the famous Spartacus Letter, many of the other components of these alternative protocols (especially MATH+ protocol, but also HCQ and IVM too) also function as antioxidants, and a big part of the pathophysiology of severe Covid is oxidative stress. Hence intravenous Vitamin C as well.
When you get to my age you see “elderly” and assume it means about 85. Not over 60!!!
Elderly is used in medical terms as 75 & over, which seems reasonable.
Elderly in pharma terms means 55 & over! So on the one had you’re still a spring chicken, on the other you’ve been insulted š
Early treatment with Ivermectin & Hydroxychloroquine would have saved more lives, many more lives. Those drugs were banned. Not to forget, those elderly that seeked medical help in NHS hspitals were then given a conconction of deathrow drugs, Midazolam & Morphine, it’s clear there was never any real Govt intention or desire to save the elderly. Perhaps more the opposite, democide in fact. Giving credence to the jabs 1st, 2nd or 5th is meaningless. The intention was clear from the start. Jabbing the elderly was just the first step in many to enable jabbing 6 month olds….any to further whatever evil endgame plan there is. Ridiculous to give ‘credit’ to jabbing the elderly…honestly..
Hydroxychloroquine is unbelievably effective. I now take 100mg whenever I get the slightest sniffle along with Vit C and zinc and I still havenāt had a single virus breakthrough since I had Covid 2 years ago. Not even a cold, and thatās unusual for me.
I think if people knew this we would rarely see any illnesses get out of hand.
My thoughts exactly as I was reading the article.
With so much obfuscation regarding what constitutes a “vaccinated” vs “unvaccinated” death, and the definition of a “Covid death”, analysis of specifics becomes close to meaningless.
If the above drugs, Zn, Vit D, Betadine nasal washes, etc were all actively prescribed, we wouldn’t need to have this discussion, though as we know, Big Pharma rules.
Amen
The gamechanger for the elderly would have been azithromycin or doxycycline as it was most likely pneumonia which helped to shuffle them off this mortal coil. All 3 components of Dr Zelenko’s protocol cost pennies: zinc, HCQ & azithromycin but this was never about saving money, all about raping the taxpayer via money laundering to pharma & the shareholders.
Amen to that!
Vaccinating the elderly saved lives, therefore, Romania, with about 30% of the 60+ age group vaccinated saw them same change in life expectancy (-1 year) as Hungary with >75% vaccinated. Holy non sequitur, Batman!
[But – as we all know – Hungary is not a proper democracy and the vaccines just hate Hungarians because of that!]
And Bulgaria was an outlier.
No way.
These injections are pure poison. They are not vaccines by any realistic definition of that word. They were not designed as vaccines and vaccination was not the design intention. As I have repeatedly stated on here these injections were simply intended to maim and kill as a minimum and there might also be DNA altering aspects that we are not yet aware of.
I very much doubt Dr Mike Yeadon would support this proposition.
I know Mike would vehemently oppose this proposition, he’s against all vaccines now having availed himself of the long term data.
My main problem with this article is the conclusion that it ‘probably made sense for the elderly to get vaccinated’. Whilst that may or may not be the case, if you just turned 60 you should absolutely be concerned about long term effects of the jab. If you are unlucky, the decision to get vaccinated might have turned 25 years of decent life quality into 15 years of hell. It also doesn’t make much sense to have the cut off period of the analysis at 60 years.
If you are over 85 maybe you could get vaccinated – or maybe just enjoy the last few years on a diet of cigars and brandy.
Although at first glance I can’t find much to fault the analysis with, a big problem over the last 2-3 years is that charts of the ‘look, see!!!’ gotcha variety have been presented in the press and elsewhere without any contexts or caveat.
In a dash so haven’t got time to analyse this critically now. But I do recall a while ago (29 August 2022) Mr Carl positing that there were no excess deaths in England.
https://staging.dailysceptic.org/2022/08/29/is-there-an-excess-deaths-crisis-in-england%EF%BF%BC/
Yes, he is self-important (hence the conspicuously frequent use of the first person), likes to be contrarian and has no particular expertise in these matters. Expertise really is needed in this complex field. But DS seems to publish everything it is offered by him.
What does “elderly” mean, Noah?
It’s a peiorative term used to suggest that people who are 25 or even older are not real people anymore.
The huge problem is that no country did a proper prospective matched cohort study as they rolled out the vaccines. We’d have all sorts of data by now, including whether the vaccines actually offered any benefit.
The lack of these studies is extraordinary — I suspect there was a clause in the contracts with the pharma companies that forbade such studies. I’d like there to be an analysis of the contracts by some independent persons (judges, MPs perhaps), specifically to identify if the pharma companies restricted independent study.
Yes, isn’t that the reason given why the Indian authorities rejected the Pfizer injections?
I don’t share Noah’s optimism that the inclusion of 2022 will not dramatically change his analysis. I have taken the following quote from the link to a page by Norman Fenton posted by Mogwai:-
‘When adjusted for these biases, the data show that since the start of 2022, all-cause mortality in the ever-vaccinated is higher than the never vaccinated in all-age groups [11]’
I note also that the latest EuroMOMO data is showing moderate to very high excess deaths in highly vaccinated European countries. In particular Germany and Denmark have recently experienced the highest level of excess deaths by this measure since before 2019. This is at the end of 2022, so who is to say that this will not continue on into 2023 and beyond.
They finally just posted the death figures for week 51 2022 in the Netherlands – the excess is 700. I suspect that is the highest for the year, even higher than week 50, which was shockingly high. The estimate for week 52 is also high excess deaths. Undoubtedly this will be blamed on the flu epidemic doing the rounds here.
I appreciate it is difficult to really determine whether or not the vaxx saved 300 gazillions lives on the planet or beyond as has been claimed. I tend to take a common sense, what do I see in front of me type of approach. I just had a quick look at the annual death figures for NL – approx. 90% of the population over 12 got 3 jabs, standard of living is high, health care is good. The average annual total number of deaths per year between 2015 and 2019 was approx. 150,000 (trending higher toward the end of the period, with an aging population – 2018 was the highest with 153,000). The Year of Corona, 2020, saw a significant increase from 151,885 deaths in 2019 to 168,678 deaths in 2020. All prior to any vaccination, which did not start until January 2021. 2021, a year which saw over 90% of the population 2x vaxxed by end of summer and a good number 3x vaxxed by the end of December, had total annual deaths of 170,976. 2022 (not definite yet) is currently fixed at 169,502 deaths – in a year in which people over 60 were offered jab 4 in… Read more Ā»
Great post
Thanks. It just strikes me as so obvious – we were told the proof that there was a pandemic was the huge increase in total deaths in 2020. If the number is in fact even higher in the 2 years after a vaxx was introduced, it seems logical to deduce that either the vaxx does SFA or is killing people before corona can (which, I suppose, does favour that argument that it’s protecting people from dying of corona).
They are the modern day mafia.
David Knight does a podcast on the Pfizer rap sheet of crime.
How these evil companies became darlings and saviours is an amazing psyop.
https://www.deezer.com/en/show/541132
I enjoy listening to David Knight.
Meant to post that under the thread below regarding Pharma.
Great post.
Why would they – big pharma and government – produce and distribute a treatment that slightly benefits those old, ill folk who didn’t die during the months when they weren’t remotely interested in protecting them but which is much, much more dangerous to the vast majority of the population than is the disease?
In all fairness, I can think of quite a few reasons why they would do that. Take your pick:
USD
GBP
EUR
JPY
CAD
NZD
Or they want to bump off a lot of people. Or both. Kerching is still numero uno for me. Big pharma’s motto: “Your poor health is our bottom line! If you’re not sick yet, don’t worry, we’ll make sure you will be soon, so we can make you all better.”
Re Big Pharma wanting to expand markets, consider Henry Gadsden, who was CEO of Merck and Co between 1965 and 1975:
And here we are, with so many people jabbed and drugged up to the eyeballs…
Source: Who was Henry Gadsden? Merck & Company chief from BBC Two documentary series Billion Dollar Deals, The Sun, 27 September 2017.
I’ll openly admit I’m still highly sceptical of this latest (schedule) of jabs, but even from an unbiased perspective in all honesty it’s hard to prove this either way – have they definitively save lives or caused more harm than good, even for our more senior citizens? We don’t know because no one is collecting the relevant data in good faith. Everyone is either lacklustre in their research or purposefully manipulating it, why outside of proper control groups it’s impossible to be sure. One signal that is obvious this time around, even within the culture of subversion, blatant manipulation of the statistics in real time, there’s been countless warnings concerning these vaccines’ safety and efficacy and yet that abundance of caution we became so used to for the disease has been mysteriously side-lined as an afterthought for monitoring the safety of the “cure”, withdrawing if it became dangerous. I respect anyone for trying to make sense of it but I doubt it’s even possible to form any learned conclusions from this crapshow. Perhaps there’s irrefutable proof somewhere, maybe something was achieved from distributing these gene-jabs widely, something we’re not privy to, but on the face of it the system as… Read more Ā»
Speaking of ‘control groups’, are there any left for the Covid jab trials?
Yeah, why I prefixed control group with ‘proper’. As soon as those on the placebos were offered the covid shot (out of fear or an attempt by pharma to manipulate the study’s findings) before the trial’s end there’s little to then take from it conclusively, essentially making it null and void, indeed. Some might call that corruption, it certainly corrupted the results, but it would seem “vaccine” makers (as soon as it’s categorised as such) are accountable to no one.
None. They were all unblinded shortly after commencement.
If the vaccines have saved lives in the UK, then the same vaccines should have saved lives in other countries too. But itās difficult to see how the vaccines have saved lives in many highly vaccinated countries such as: Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines Australia, New Zealand, where there have been huge increases in Covid deaths after mass vaccination compared with before in all of these highly vaccinated countries. And there have also been increases in Covid deaths in several European countries, after mass vaccination compared with before, including: Germany, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Greece, Cyprus, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Turkey. Famously vaccinated Israel had no reduction in Covid deaths after mass vaccination compared with before, and had more Covid deaths in February 2022 than in any other month. Some defenders of the vaccines argue that the massive increases in Covid deaths after mass vaccination in these highly vaccinated countries is because of the Omicron variant, failing to see that thatās not an argument for the effectiveness of the vaccines, itās an explanation as to why the vaccines have been ineffective. Here, for example, are the statistics for Japan: According to The New… Read more Ā»
Well I think your good too.
All the more surprising seeing that the virus itself has become much less malignant.
You will never learn.
What is it if you include 2022 in the USA data? For example, I believe New Mexico largely caught up to Arizona (the state with the dubious honor of most excess deaths) in terms of cumulative excess deaths by the first quarter of 2022. Also, while adjusting for age won’t really change most states, I think it would make California and Nevada look that much worse, and Florida look that much better.
And let’s not forget China’s OTHER weapon of mass destruction too: FENTANYL. That caused a lot of excess deaths especially in states near the Mexican border, including California.
Caveat Lector: This analysis only considers the first two doses. There may be (or rather, there were) diminishing returns to subsequent doses.
Why was there a ‘vaccine’ response to ‘Covid-19’? How was this evaluated and approved? Consider this BBC article: Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine: Bogus reports, accidental finds – the story of the jab, 14 December 2020. This article reports that a template for a new experimental coronavirus vaccine was underway in early January 2020. But why? Why was there an automatic response to develop a vaccine? Particularly as it was known from the beginning that the virus wasn’t a threat to most people… Also consider that it was admitted by academics reporting to a Lords Committee in June 2020 that “vaccines do not work very well in older people” – this was said by Arne Akbar, Professor of Immunology, University College London. During this Lords Committee meeting, Peter Openshaw, Professor of Experimental Medicine, Imperial College London, said: “Sometimes it is possible to protect a vulnerable group by targeting another group. This is being done with influenza, for example. Over the past few years, the UK has been at the forefront of rolling out the live attenuated vaccine for children, because children amplify the distribution of the virus in the community. It is possible to see that grandparents are being protected by the vaccination… Read more Ā»
‘focused’, not “focussed”. Everything else in spot-on.
Clive, I suggest you re-read your post.š
I havenāt the brain or head for statistics to get to grips with this article. All I can do is say that I am extremely glad that my husband and I decided (for various reasons varying from the safety angle to the theological aspect of using aborted foetal tissue in their development) against being jabbed! We are 72 and 73 and my husband has multiple myeloma (diagnosed and treated from March/April 2019 to July-ish 2021 and ongoing), so supposed to be shielded! He also has a slight heart condition and pre-cancerous cells in his oesophagus (all discovered because he was on a chemo trial and they tested for everything). We are convinced that if heād had the jabs heād probably be dead by now (vis the huge increase in heart-related deaths since the rollout of the jabs). We know one fit and healthy 95-year-old who had a stroke after having the first booster. I wouldnāt want to risk it! I donāt believe in the jabs protecting anyone! Why werenāt people treated with the various alternatives (intravenous vitamin C, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc) immediately upon development of Covid symptoms? That wouid have been safer and more effective.
These are NOT vaccines they had to change the definition of āvaccinesā in order to accommodate them. They are Experimental gene therapy treatments period.
Apparently, the gold standard in testing medicines is the double-blind, randomised, placebo trial. Placebo – the active medicine is compared to an inactive substance. Randomised – which person gets the active medicine and which gets the placebo is determined randomly. Double-blind – neither patient nor doctor knows whether they’ve got the active medicine or placebo. Despite being the gold standard such trials are rarely carried out correctly, especially on vaccines. I wonder why?
If such a trial were to show the covid gloop actually saved the elderly then that would be fine with me. Your statistical gymnastics are very skilful Noah, but I would prefer to see evidence that is more direct.
Not only that, but the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is the get out from the established protocol. It probably saves money for the developers, and/or makes it a profitable scheme.
No lives were “saved” due to these gene therapies, not even in the elderly/frail and those whose health was very poor due to compromised immune systems or lifestyle.
At best, some deaths have been delayed: often for very short periods since many of these “vulnerable people” already had an imminent appointment with the Grim Reaper due to their co-morbidies and/or age.
One thing youāll never find out is what the long term effects are on the elderly. Alas some of the long term effects on those a lot younger may curtail them from becoming elderly.
And maybe that is the reason why they want to dish them out to the young as a trial, a cynic might say.
Exactly.
ā¦the question I have is thisā¦..surely, even if we believed the vaccine helped some of the elderly to avoid dying of Covidā¦and as a reasonably healthy over 70 year old you still had a good chance of survivingā¦..(over 90%)ā¦. Just like millions of elderly survive flu every yearā¦.
So what if, down the line, the untested vaccine makes you more susceptible to other diseases? Ones that without vaccination, you wouldnāt have been susceptible to?
As we are still in the very early stages of the mass-experiment, with studies showing massive increases in all sorts of diseases, it seems a bit premature to say it was a success, isnāt it?
ā¦and we will never know if very safe and very effective, HCQ, Ivermectin, steroids and antibiotics would have done a better jobā¦.? I suspect they wouldā¦
The vaccines were never needed ā¦(except for more theft of money from the poor to the rich)ā¦..isnāt that the main point?
Not using ventilators might also have saved a lot of lives