Last week we reported on CDC Director Walensky coming down with COVID, within a month of getting a 5th shot, the bivalent booster.
For some reason she took Paxlovid and has now tested positive a second time, in a so-called rebound case. I thought Paxlovid was now no longer recommended for people under a certain age not at risk of severe disease, as it had been found to have no useful effect.
Why she took Paxlovid is a mystery? Perhaps she didn’t, but had a rebound case anyway? Paxlovid is a good way to explain a rebound to the public. The rebound seems to happen to everyone we hear of in the media that takes Paxlovid, eg Fauci, President Biden and his wife Jill, Fauci and Bourla.
Experts chime in saying this is not a problem and the drug is working to keep people out of hospital. They have mild symptoms etc.
We have our own bureaucrats that take their n’th dose and a short time after have COVID. The South Australian Chief Public Health Officer had it within a week of a 4th dose.
The Professor getting the shot
The SA Chief Health Officer is famous for her warnings to the South Australian public not to touch the football if it gets kicked into the crowd. While many were locked down, football teams were allowed to cross borders (essential work) while families could not see loved ones in other states (non-essential). The farce is highlighted in the Sky News video embedded in this Adelaide Advertiser article. Unfortunately a link in the article to a mashup of MC Hammer’s U Can’t touch This has been removed due to copyright.
I came across an article where the SA Chief Health Officer reported that the unvaccinated had triple the risk of dying based on SA data. Table from this ABC article from April 2022:
South Australia Health does not make the underlying data this analysis is based on available to the public.
In NSW, where we have more visibility, we know that the unvaccinated people dying with COVID are people over age 65. Less than 1% of people over 65 are unvaccinated in Australia. Unlike other dose categories the unvaccinated do not appear in the hospital system prior to death from COVID. We can infer they must be people with medical conditions such that vaccination was not recommended. They have died in a nursing home or perhaps palliative care if they have cancer. Some have suggested that it is something more nefarious where medical help has been withheld.
Healthy, unvaccinated people are not dying of COVID.
During the pandemic we have learnt a lot of tricks than can be used to manipulate data.
When its infections being reported, include those not eligible in the aggregate numbers, ie children. In the unvaccinated population, that makes infections look worse, as done by NSW Health early in 2022.
Carefully select the time period over which deaths are counted. For unvaccinated count from as early as possible when shots were not available. This was a trick in a report promoted by Whitehouse COVID buffoon Jha (famous for telling us God gave us two arms for a reason, one for flu shot and one for COVID shot) which showed that unvaccinated were something like 10 times more likely to die compared to 4th Shot. 4th shot deaths were counted over the short period of months they had been available. I reported on this in one of my previous articles.
Don’t break the data down by age, otherwise you will see that the majority of deaths are in 80 and 90+ year olds. The following is the weekly death counts by older ages in NSW for the most recent BA.5 wave that peaked in early August.
Also, about 50% of deaths are in aged care facilities. So, its unvaccinated 90-year-olds in aged care that are the problem?
Even the legacy media, government funded, Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) questioned why in this SA data there were more deaths in two doses compared to one dose. There was no answer provided by SA Health. Also no follow-up by ABC.
For 3 dose, the trick is to not count them as 3 dose for several weeks after the actual shot. This was the trick that made unvaccinated numbers look bad during the rollout of 1st and 2nd shots. You can show that by using this trick and giving a placebo to both groups a trial, that high effectiveness can be shown for the group that is supposed to be the vaccine.
So in this South Australian data, 2 dose is not much better than no dose and worse than one dose. Some of the two dose people are probably really 3 dose.
This data reporting is pure rubbish. It also shows that when you manipulate numbers sometimes some categories don’t go the way you want, eg the 1 dose people came up better off than 2 dose.
That gets me to the point of this article: more doses is leading to more infections. Even if it is true that for healthy people symptoms are mild etc, more infections ultimately leads to more deaths. Look at the graph above. Who are dying? The elderly. In the lower ages it’s people with significant underlying health conditions. It’s not healthy people under age 65.
Infections filter though the community. The vulnerable elderly have a higher risk, no matter how many shots are given to them. There are no trials that tell us the benefit of a 5th shot to people over 90. For all we know a 5th shot could be too much for their systems.
We know the highest rates of death in NSW are in people with 4 doses. But we know the distribution of people with the 4th shot is skewed to older people (or virtue signalling bureaucrats) so its not surprising.
So, while these bureaucrats boast that their repeated infections are mild, if we have fueled these infections, it is the vulnerable who will eventually suffer.
We know that unvaccinated people have lower rates of infection. That was clear in data around the world before it stopped being reported early this year. This could only be explained by authorities, before it was accepted that shots did not stop infection or transmission, that the unvaccinated were more likely to have been previously infected and therefore had natural immunity. Many research papers are now confirming the negative effectiveness to infection. Even a recent study by Moderna shows the negative effectiveness of vaccination with respect to infection.
Looking at one healthy person and saying: look I have mild symptoms, pays no regard to the complex system we live in and the dynamics of that system. Making people in the general population, who are at minimal risk of bad outcomes, more likely to be infected will fuel infections across the population. There is a vulnerable population, those with underlying health conditions and the elderly not in good health, and ultimately these most vulnerable will be infected as well.
Even if there is a benefit of more doses we know that it does not provide absolute protection (seen from NSW data in my previous article where 4 dose had the highest rate of death). If we create more infections that can outweigh any benefits to individuals in the vulnerable.
Survey – a striking result
A recent survey by news.com.au of 50,000 people found what they said was a “striking result”. People in Australia were asked their view on vaccination.
“Only 35 per cent out of more than 45,000 people said they were vaccinated and would make the same decision again.
Not a single person said they were unvaccinated and regret the decision. “
I do note that fact checkers had to ramp up to show that it was not a valid survey, “anti-vax activists” were at play, also Croatians.
It’s just a shame the fact checkers are not as vigorous showing how rubbish the data that counts is, like that I referenced above from SA Health. In this case they could have done their own survey. What would they have found?
Not a single person said they were unvaccinated and regret the decision
It seems pretty clear that will be true.
What if they asked the approximately 1% of people in the Australian population who are at 1 dose. It’s clear that the 1 dose group are people who have had a severe adverse reaction after injection. In Australia with the risk of losing one’s job, livelihood, ability to visit family, it wasn’t laziness that made people stop at one jab. ABC fact checkers should survey them.
It seems the harder the fact checkers work the more we have to be suspicious.
Variant Soup
We’ve just got through a BA.5 wave of infection, but I see in the last few days Australian bureaucrats and experts are ramping up again. A “Variant Soup” has arrived. We can add that to “Word Salad”.
It seems it’s driven by people who have had multiple infections. Unfortunately, we will never get the data on vaccination status versus number of infections. In Africa do they have variant soup as well?
One wonders how long this circus will go on?
Anti-vaxx Croatian’s 😂. I resent that description. Sorry, I meant I resemble that description.