Your attempt to show that the fact that Moderna recipients had 2x the rate of chronic illness relative to Pfizer recipients was irrelevant to your observation that Moderna death rates are higher than Pfizer death rates failed miserably.
This thread plots the excess deaths and excess chronic illness of Moderna relative to Pfizer across the…
Your attempt to show that the fact that Moderna recipients had 2x the rate of chronic illness relative to Pfizer recipients was irrelevant to your observation that Moderna death rates are higher than Pfizer death rates failed miserably.
This thread plots the excess deaths and excess chronic illness of Moderna relative to Pfizer across the months of 2021 for various age groups:
1. The excess deaths track closely with the excess chronic illnesses for each age group.
2. For all age groups, they are concentrated in the first 6 months of 2021, which is when only those with chronic illness even had access to vaccines for the <55yr age groups.
It is VERY clear that chronic illness is a major confounder, and in fact along with age appears to explain a huge proportion of the Moderna "excess deaths" relative to Pfizer.
Of course there are likely even more confounders other than age/chronic illness here, but it is clear that your statement that it is "like a cluster randomized trial" between Moderna and Pfizer (implying no confounding and any difference is causal vaccine harm effect) is patently absurd and completely unsupported by these data.
Are you conceding to both Pfizer AND Moderna injections are still KILLING thousands of US citizens with their useless poisonous injections? Or are you just suggesting that Steve's methodology does not prove that Moderna's DEATH SHOT is more lethal than Pfizer's. Doi you agree that both are potentially killers? With NO LIABILITY for makers?
In the 1970's another 'EXPERIMENTAL' injection was found to be dangerous after around 50 (FIFTY) US Service Personnel died after taking a novel Swine Flu injection.
This time around the US VAX RELATED DEATHS are in the THOUSANDS (perhaps 10's of thousands) but somehow, to this day, the jabs are still killing people. How can this continue as they don't even stop Covid or the transmission of Covid?
Unlabbed mick (UK) I'll live longer without invasive and deadly medical interference.
the unvaccinated death rate was much higher than any of the vaccinated groups, MUCH higher than Pfizer which had the lowest death rate of any group, but even higher than Moderna which was as noted above much higher than Pfizer.
So if you want to spin a narrative these are "death shots", these data aren't going to help you one bit -- as they show that not only is there not massive excess deaths after vaccination or in the vaccinated group at any time, but the death rates are much lower in vaccinated than unvaccinated across the board.
BTW, this (vaccinated death rate < unvaccinated) has been seen in all data sets from around the world involving all cause deaths by vaccination status for various age groups and time periods (including UK of course), which is one of many reasons a valid assessment of existing data and studies does not provide any evidence the vaccines are "kill shots" as Steve (and you, apparently) believe.
And where do you get that "vax related deaths are in the 1000s or 10,000s"? I've yet to see any data suggesting that is the case.
The vaccinated are people who tend to go to doctors and live a healthy life apparently, or perhaps they have a regular job and were subject to a mandate; in any case, as Steve writes in his response to this exact argument above, your argument is void due to this demographic artefact. Tedious
The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups are not homogenous, the unvaccinated tend to be less healthy on average as a demographic group. The difference between the two groups diminishes over time, though, which means that the vaccinated are dying at higher rates post vaccination (unless the unvaccinated somehow got healthier).
Actually, the unvaccinated are younger and have less comorbidities on average, so it is not that simple.
But you are absolutely correct that you must account for these and any other confounders when comparing unvaccinated to vaccinated
Which is also true for comparing Moderna and Pfizer -- as shown above Moderna has 2x the comorbidity rate (even within age groups) and is older demographic -- the point Steve summarily ignores/rejects and relies on to make his "Moderna is a kill shot" claim
Naturally there are limitations to this method. But I haven't seen any data supporting this age distribution of moderna rollout idea you've got going there. In any case, this fiddling the figures here and FUDding them there will NEVER wash. Since, en contraire, there's plenty of other measures from other approaches supporting Steve's thesis here, some of which he cites also, cf VAERS figures, Kuhbandner (rollout/mortality correlation) or perhaps even Rancourt et al.'s most recent study of excess mortality. This is either the greatest catastrophe in the history of medicine, or the greatest crime in the known history of human civilization, depending on the degree of negligence.
What do you mean? The exact data base shared by the authors of the Czech paper modeled by Steve plainly show the shifted age distribution of Moderna recipients relative to Pfizer Recipients.
And as I've extensively documented in my previous work, Steve has no idea how to properly interpret VAERs data and his claims are completely erroreous as has been repeatedly demonstrated (and is contracted by other non-VAERs data including this Czech data set) and also for Rancourt -- his analyses use invalid analysis and interpretation and are fully dependent on his assumption that COVID-19 does not exist and did not kill anyone so he can reattribute all COVID-19 deaths to other sources, primarily vaccines, using post hoc ergo proptor hoc fallacious arguments.
It is not a catastrophe -- the vaccines helped tremendously in mitigating the impact COVID-19 would have had all over the world during the pandemic, sadly with minority harm in a very small proportion of individuals.
The problem is people like Steve who mislead others by misrepresenting data and making unsubstantiated claims that many believe, and those who believe his erroneous arguments are the only ones who claim it has been a catastrophe or crime.
false sport. we know moderna causes 3x the incidence of myocarditis as Pfizer. we also know moderna is 3x the dose of pfizer and shows a dose dependent cardiotoxicity. that moderna is more toxic and causes more death than pfizer is not a surprise... to anyone with 2 brain cells. try again.
Your attempt to show that the fact that Moderna recipients had 2x the rate of chronic illness relative to Pfizer recipients was irrelevant to your observation that Moderna death rates are higher than Pfizer death rates failed miserably.
This thread plots the excess deaths and excess chronic illness of Moderna relative to Pfizer across the months of 2021 for various age groups:
https://x.com/jsm2334/status/1815411926211383738
These clearly show that:
1. The excess deaths track closely with the excess chronic illnesses for each age group.
2. For all age groups, they are concentrated in the first 6 months of 2021, which is when only those with chronic illness even had access to vaccines for the <55yr age groups.
It is VERY clear that chronic illness is a major confounder, and in fact along with age appears to explain a huge proportion of the Moderna "excess deaths" relative to Pfizer.
Of course there are likely even more confounders other than age/chronic illness here, but it is clear that your statement that it is "like a cluster randomized trial" between Moderna and Pfizer (implying no confounding and any difference is causal vaccine harm effect) is patently absurd and completely unsupported by these data.
Morris or Jeffrey.
Are you conceding to both Pfizer AND Moderna injections are still KILLING thousands of US citizens with their useless poisonous injections? Or are you just suggesting that Steve's methodology does not prove that Moderna's DEATH SHOT is more lethal than Pfizer's. Doi you agree that both are potentially killers? With NO LIABILITY for makers?
In the 1970's another 'EXPERIMENTAL' injection was found to be dangerous after around 50 (FIFTY) US Service Personnel died after taking a novel Swine Flu injection.
This time around the US VAX RELATED DEATHS are in the THOUSANDS (perhaps 10's of thousands) but somehow, to this day, the jabs are still killing people. How can this continue as they don't even stop Covid or the transmission of Covid?
Unlabbed mick (UK) I'll live longer without invasive and deadly medical interference.
No.
As I showed in the first tweet of this thread (https://x.com/jsm2334/status/1813584535763763574),
the unvaccinated death rate was much higher than any of the vaccinated groups, MUCH higher than Pfizer which had the lowest death rate of any group, but even higher than Moderna which was as noted above much higher than Pfizer.
So if you want to spin a narrative these are "death shots", these data aren't going to help you one bit -- as they show that not only is there not massive excess deaths after vaccination or in the vaccinated group at any time, but the death rates are much lower in vaccinated than unvaccinated across the board.
BTW, this (vaccinated death rate < unvaccinated) has been seen in all data sets from around the world involving all cause deaths by vaccination status for various age groups and time periods (including UK of course), which is one of many reasons a valid assessment of existing data and studies does not provide any evidence the vaccines are "kill shots" as Steve (and you, apparently) believe.
And where do you get that "vax related deaths are in the 1000s or 10,000s"? I've yet to see any data suggesting that is the case.
The vaccinated are people who tend to go to doctors and live a healthy life apparently, or perhaps they have a regular job and were subject to a mandate; in any case, as Steve writes in his response to this exact argument above, your argument is void due to this demographic artefact. Tedious
Whatever it is, the vaccinated people die at far lower rate than unvaccinated across the board.
So how can the vaccines be "kill shots"?
The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups are not homogenous, the unvaccinated tend to be less healthy on average as a demographic group. The difference between the two groups diminishes over time, though, which means that the vaccinated are dying at higher rates post vaccination (unless the unvaccinated somehow got healthier).
Actually, the unvaccinated are younger and have less comorbidities on average, so it is not that simple.
But you are absolutely correct that you must account for these and any other confounders when comparing unvaccinated to vaccinated
Which is also true for comparing Moderna and Pfizer -- as shown above Moderna has 2x the comorbidity rate (even within age groups) and is older demographic -- the point Steve summarily ignores/rejects and relies on to make his "Moderna is a kill shot" claim
Naturally there are limitations to this method. But I haven't seen any data supporting this age distribution of moderna rollout idea you've got going there. In any case, this fiddling the figures here and FUDding them there will NEVER wash. Since, en contraire, there's plenty of other measures from other approaches supporting Steve's thesis here, some of which he cites also, cf VAERS figures, Kuhbandner (rollout/mortality correlation) or perhaps even Rancourt et al.'s most recent study of excess mortality. This is either the greatest catastrophe in the history of medicine, or the greatest crime in the known history of human civilization, depending on the degree of negligence.
What do you mean? The exact data base shared by the authors of the Czech paper modeled by Steve plainly show the shifted age distribution of Moderna recipients relative to Pfizer Recipients.
And as I've extensively documented in my previous work, Steve has no idea how to properly interpret VAERs data and his claims are completely erroreous as has been repeatedly demonstrated (and is contracted by other non-VAERs data including this Czech data set) and also for Rancourt -- his analyses use invalid analysis and interpretation and are fully dependent on his assumption that COVID-19 does not exist and did not kill anyone so he can reattribute all COVID-19 deaths to other sources, primarily vaccines, using post hoc ergo proptor hoc fallacious arguments.
It is not a catastrophe -- the vaccines helped tremendously in mitigating the impact COVID-19 would have had all over the world during the pandemic, sadly with minority harm in a very small proportion of individuals.
The problem is people like Steve who mislead others by misrepresenting data and making unsubstantiated claims that many believe, and those who believe his erroneous arguments are the only ones who claim it has been a catastrophe or crime.
false sport. we know moderna causes 3x the incidence of myocarditis as Pfizer. we also know moderna is 3x the dose of pfizer and shows a dose dependent cardiotoxicity. that moderna is more toxic and causes more death than pfizer is not a surprise... to anyone with 2 brain cells. try again.