NSW Health Damned by Their Own Data
Excerpts from the notes, that refer directly to NSW Health data:
“So in the last 3 weeks, we’ve seen 353 fatalities from Covid, and one… ONE… ONE SINGLE SOLITARY PERSON was unjabbed or single jabbed. 352 of them were double or triple.
By now on population alone, we should have seen ~17 unjabbed deaths… MORE if the vaccine actually works …
Notice again in this week’s data, 67% triple jabbed, basically exactly what you’d expect if the third Jab did absolutely NOTHING…
we’re staring a bloody big elephant right in the eye, and it’s time to start talking about it!
NSW [Covid] Deaths in 8 weeks: 798
Triple jabbed: 530 (66.4%, general population ~69%)
Double jabbed: 266
Single / Unjabbed: 2 (0.25%, general population ~4.7%)
Single / Unjabbed deaths are under-represented by a factor of 20 …
the data shows us clearly that the cohort that is LEAST likely to die of covid… is the unvaxxed. The triple vaxxed are WAY more vulnerable than the unvaxxed …”
NSW Health is damned by their own data.
EDIT: I’ll be making a correction to this blog post in another day or so when I can. I relied on information released onto Social Media by NSW Health. It turns out that these releases were written ambiguously and the actual source reports say something quite different to what their social media posts implied.
So the picture is quite different to what I thought, because I trusted the data provided on their social media posts rather than going back to the actual reports myself… lesson learned.
It’s still not a pretty picture for the vaccine at all, and certainly ugly for those insisting a 3rd dose is the answer, but at the same time it’s certainly not as clear cut as I believed based on their public posts.
As always I don’t delete my mistakes, I acknowledge them and learn from them and leave them for all to see. I’m making this quick edit while I have a moment, and will find time to correct the Blog Post and re-analyse the source data hopefully tomorrow.
I apologise for the error, but standby for the update tomorrow because the actual source data still tells an ugly story, just not quite the same story that NSW Health’s social media posts told.
*******************************************
Original post follows (note, what follows is not correct, it was based on the data provided in social media posts by NSW Health which is NOT consistent with the data provided by NSW Health in their reports. You’d think they’d be able to get that right, but sadly they didn’t. A full re-analysis will follow in coming days.)
The Elephant in the room is just getting bigger and I’d say we’ve reached the point where it’s impossible to hide anymore.
As proof, please see the evidence from NSW Health themselves!
Every week NSW Health release an update on respiratory illness, with a breakdown of the number of Covid deaths and (helpfully) their vaccination status. The data is damning.
Have a look at last weeks report, screen captured by me just now from their FB page. The critical paragraph is in the middle:
142 deaths, ‘only’ 96 of those had been triple jabbed, ALL the others were ‘eligible for a third dose’.
Eligible for a third? Well if words actually mean anything then that must mean they’ve already had their first AND second… correct? There’s really no other way of interpreting that, and that interpretation is confirmed in earlier weekly updates, as we’ll see soon.
Let’s pause to ensure we understand what’s just been admitted here… every single Covid death in NSW that week was someone who had had at LEAST two Covid vaccinations… and not a single unvaccinated person was among them.
Let’s now consider what the actual vaccination rate is in NSW, again according to NSW Health:
Look at the top-middle and top-right panes… 95% 2 dose rate, 69% 3 dose rate. That leaves 5% of the adult population ‘unprotected’ and surely we’d see them showing up disproportionately in the fatalities… right?
If 142 people died of Covid, we’d expect 7 of them to be unvaxxed just on the basic statistics, and if being jabbed actually offered any protection you’d expect the unvaxxed to make up a FAR HIGHER proportion of the fatalities…
Instead they represent a big, fat, zero. Nada. Nyet. Zero. Zilch.
(There is an attempt among the jab lovers to claim that the unvaxxed few are more likely to be younger, leading to them not showing up in the data as often, hence ‘nothing to see here’. I’ll squash that stupid argument at the end of this blog post after all the data)
Oh, and while we’re here, can I just point out that the triple vaxxed are dying almost exactly in proportion to their existence… ie there is no statistical evidence that the 3rd jab has reduced their chances of dying below being double jabbed…
And this is no isolated, cherry picked bit of data. Let’s look at the week before:
95 deaths, all at least double jabbed, 65% triple jabbed (in a population with a ~68% triple jabbed rate)… VERY close to exactly what you’d expect if the vaccine did literally NOTHING…
Except that once again we SHOULD see at least 4-5 unvaxxed deaths… just on population alone… but we see none.
The week before?
This one is interesting, because it confirms my suspicion that ‘eligible for a third dose’ means they HAVE had 2 doses… because we see that of the 116 deaths, one of them was NOT eligible for a third dose. They may have been unjabbed, they may have been single-dosed, but they were not ‘eligible for a third dose’.
So in the last 3 weeks we’ve seen 353 fatalities from Covid, and one… ONE… ONE SINGLE SOLITARY PERSON was unjabbed or single jabbed. 352 of them were double or triple.
By now on population alone we should have seen ~17 unjabbed deaths… MORE if the vaccine actually works. We’ve seen ONE.
Notice again in this week’s data, 67% triple jabbed, basically exactly what you’d expect if the third Jab did absolutely NOTHING…
And we’re not done. Let’s look at the weeks before that:
104 deaths, all double jabbed, 69% triple… again, where are the 5+ unjabbed deaths?
77 dead, all double, 73% triple, ABOVE the rate you would expect even if the third jab did nothing.
80 dead, all double, 61% triple.
86 dead, all double, 63% triple.
Getting the picture yet?
But wait, there’s more…
Finally 8 weeks ago NSW had only their 2nd death of someone who was NOT eligible for a 3rd dose… ie either unjabbed or single jabbed.
Let’s take stock, because I can’t help but feel that we’re staring a bloody big elephant right in the eye, and it’s time to start talking about it!
- NSW Deaths in 8 weeks: 798
- Triple jabbed: 530 (66.4%, general population ~69%)
- Double jabbed: 266
- Single / Unjabbed: 2 (0.25%, general population ~4.7%)
Single / Unjabbed deaths are under-represented by a factor of 20.
In this context, this post from NSW Health is borderline criminal negligence:
The saving grace here is that over 5,000 of the 11,000 reactions are ‘laugh’ emojis from people who aren’t buying what they’re selling.
Now let me deal with the most common retort that I hear from the jab lovers, that the triple jabbed are more likely to be the oldest and most vulnerable demographic, and the unjabbed likely to be the youngest / lowest risk, and therefore it’s entirely expected that the unjabbed would be under-represented, as they’re at the lowest natural risk in the first place.
It’s not an unreasonable argument, but even if we make the most charitable possible interpretations of the above data there is still a big-assed elephant that needs to be discussed.
Observe, in the data above you’ll see that 48 people under the age of 65 died in that dataset. If we assume that both of the unjabbed deaths were in this cohort, this means that barely 4% of the deaths in this cohort were unjabbed, when this cohort has ALL the unjabbed people in it… the unjabbed rate in this cohort must be well above the overall ~5% average because in the over 65 segment the rate is near 0%… if it isn’t then their argument doesn’t work…
So even trying to be charitable and giving their argument every possible advantage, the data shows us clearly that the cohort that is LEAST likely to die of covid… is the unvaxxed. The triple vaxxed are WAY more vulnerable than the unvaxxed, and ever so slightly less vulnerable than the double vaxxed.
The evidence is stacking up fast in the form of body bags. We’ve spend two and a half years being berated with the ‘if it saves just one life’ argument… now the shoe is on the other foot and the dramatic over-representation of the jabbed in the fatalities is a fact that demands an explanation.
This is a LONG way from being over. As I posted on my FB page the other day Covid Fatalities in our high-jab-rate country are easily outstripping the fatalities in other countries.
Now there’s two points that need to be made, firstly New Zealand and Australia are both in winter, but let’s get real here, summer in many places is no warmer than winter in most of Australia, so that’s only a partial explanation. Secondly the OVERALL Covid fatality rate for the last few years is still very low in Australia and New Zealand… but the longer this goes on the more that gap is going to narrow.
And with Covid deaths disproportionately happening among the double / triple jabbed, AND the all-cause mortality rate running ~20% above the 5 year 2014-2019 baseline, we’re a long LONG way from being out of the woods.
When we are finally able to tally up the death toll (and other costs) of our Covid over-reaction I don’t think we’re going to wind up looking as amazing as we think we are.
The final cost of our naive trust in politicians and pharmaceutical companies with perverse incentives and compromised ethics is still unknown. But it’s growing fast and we need to start talking about it.
Now.
After all, it might just save one life…
Resources: https://www.topherfield.net/nsw-health-damned-by-their-own-data/
