I just spent an hour on Steve's Telegram responding to OPENVEAT's position and as I was just about to hit the Send button, I was told I was prevented from doing so by Admin. WTF.
I showed that by using the shinyapp over at the HMD, you can see a weekly departure between expected and actual death rates in 2021 compared to 2020, coinciding …
I just spent an hour on Steve's Telegram responding to OPENVEAT's position and as I was just about to hit the Send button, I was told I was prevented from doing so by Admin. WTF.
I showed that by using the shinyapp over at the HMD, you can see a weekly departure between expected and actual death rates in 2021 compared to 2020, coinciding with the rollout of the vaccines to the elderly. I believe OPENVEAT is correct when he says there were no excess deaths in 2021, but only if you are comparing to times with open borders, growing population and exposure of the elderly to winter challenge. All this changed in April of 2020 and continued well into 2022. If you assume that 2020 is your base year, then excess deaths are enormous from week 17 of 2021 onward. By playing with the parameters in the App, which uses weekly mortality figures from Stats NZ, you can see connections between the jab and death, but you have to put it in the correct context.
It's certainly another way of doing it and that is something we might look at in the coming days. Bearing in mind that the overall increase in NZ mortality is about 12% up on 2020 this should put our curves roughly equal rather than showing a reduced mortality in the vaccine cohort. Again, if you add a factor for missing death data this would put the vaccine cohort at higher mortality than the expected mortality - but this would merely reflect the increased mortality that needs investigation (because the demographic explanation is flawed).
You are correct on both points. Death registrations lag behind actual week of death by about 5%. The weekly death figures that drive the data on the stats NZ Covid Data portal take a month, or more to settle.
Also, the excuse of demographics doesn't cut it. For example, the population of 95+ year Olds only goes up by about 200 a year For the 90-94, it's about 2000 per year, hardly a massive rise, yet the deaths among these rocketed between 20-21, then 21-22. Even 2023 is looking bad, which is amazing when you think of the cull that has occurred over the past 3-years. The harvest effect usually sees a big drop off in years following high death rates. We also need to be sure we are defining death rates correctly. Are we using the mean population for annual rates? When I spoke to Stats NZ, they were using the mean quarterly population in some of their reports I'll dig deeper on that one. I know the STMF meta data uses an annual mean population estimate.
I just spent an hour on Steve's Telegram responding to OPENVEAT's position and as I was just about to hit the Send button, I was told I was prevented from doing so by Admin. WTF.
I showed that by using the shinyapp over at the HMD, you can see a weekly departure between expected and actual death rates in 2021 compared to 2020, coinciding with the rollout of the vaccines to the elderly. I believe OPENVEAT is correct when he says there were no excess deaths in 2021, but only if you are comparing to times with open borders, growing population and exposure of the elderly to winter challenge. All this changed in April of 2020 and continued well into 2022. If you assume that 2020 is your base year, then excess deaths are enormous from week 17 of 2021 onward. By playing with the parameters in the App, which uses weekly mortality figures from Stats NZ, you can see connections between the jab and death, but you have to put it in the correct context.
https://mpidr.shinyapps.io/stmortality/
yes, there is no question there are excess deaths and anyone who claims otherwise should be treated with great caution.
I'll let them know. thanks for letting me know.
It's certainly another way of doing it and that is something we might look at in the coming days. Bearing in mind that the overall increase in NZ mortality is about 12% up on 2020 this should put our curves roughly equal rather than showing a reduced mortality in the vaccine cohort. Again, if you add a factor for missing death data this would put the vaccine cohort at higher mortality than the expected mortality - but this would merely reflect the increased mortality that needs investigation (because the demographic explanation is flawed).
You are correct on both points. Death registrations lag behind actual week of death by about 5%. The weekly death figures that drive the data on the stats NZ Covid Data portal take a month, or more to settle.
Also, the excuse of demographics doesn't cut it. For example, the population of 95+ year Olds only goes up by about 200 a year For the 90-94, it's about 2000 per year, hardly a massive rise, yet the deaths among these rocketed between 20-21, then 21-22. Even 2023 is looking bad, which is amazing when you think of the cull that has occurred over the past 3-years. The harvest effect usually sees a big drop off in years following high death rates. We also need to be sure we are defining death rates correctly. Are we using the mean population for annual rates? When I spoke to Stats NZ, they were using the mean quarterly population in some of their reports I'll dig deeper on that one. I know the STMF meta data uses an annual mean population estimate.