In participants with four, three, one to two and no vaccinations, we recorded 1568, 1748, 607 and 566 all-cause deaths from 1 November to 31 December 2022, respectively. Compared to individuals with three vaccinations, the age and gender adjusted HR (with 95% CI) for all-cause mortality in those with four, one to two, and no vaccinations, was 0.79 (0.74–0.85), 1.17 (1.06–1.28) and 0.93 (0.85–1.02), respectively”
I’m new to adjusted HR measures but is the 0.93 for the unvaccinated considered statistically meaningful even though the CI crosses the 1 line?
Misunderstood your question. If interpreting correctly, it looks like being unvaccinated or 1-2 dose vaccinated doesn’t make much of a difference. But the 4 shot people, that is what sticks out, clearly and unambiguously negative. This aligns well with the many studies that not only show negative effectiveness, but dose-dependant negative effectiveness. Even when this isn’t seen, effectiveness is incredibly low. Makes me very suspicious when we see how the data has been manipulated in many different ways.
By the way, has anyone thought of the likely reason behind the use of RED, ORANGE,YELLOW and GREY in the image.... After all we all know that the images presumably caught of this virus can only be in BLACK & WHITE because the Electron Microscope does not display colour...just shades of black and white, ONLY. Our designated responsible health professionals have apparently undertaken an advanced course in the use ( ie, misuse) of Photoshop software; clearly as part of their continuing education encompassing an advanced course in committed Newspeak.
“3.4 All-cause mortality
In participants with four, three, one to two and no vaccinations, we recorded 1568, 1748, 607 and 566 all-cause deaths from 1 November to 31 December 2022, respectively. Compared to individuals with three vaccinations, the age and gender adjusted HR (with 95% CI) for all-cause mortality in those with four, one to two, and no vaccinations, was 0.79 (0.74–0.85), 1.17 (1.06–1.28) and 0.93 (0.85–1.02), respectively”
I’m new to adjusted HR measures but is the 0.93 for the unvaccinated considered statistically meaningful even though the CI crosses the 1 line?
Misunderstood your question. If interpreting correctly, it looks like being unvaccinated or 1-2 dose vaccinated doesn’t make much of a difference. But the 4 shot people, that is what sticks out, clearly and unambiguously negative. This aligns well with the many studies that not only show negative effectiveness, but dose-dependant negative effectiveness. Even when this isn’t seen, effectiveness is incredibly low. Makes me very suspicious when we see how the data has been manipulated in many different ways.
There's "effectiveness" and "duration of effectiveness". Looking at the duration of effectiveness of the Polio ( IPV) vaccine having been verified as lasting for decades ( https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/effectiveness-duration-protection.html#Duration%20of%20Protection) these Coronavirus vaccines are not 'fit for purpose' obviously! I want a refund!!!
By the way, has anyone thought of the likely reason behind the use of RED, ORANGE,YELLOW and GREY in the image.... After all we all know that the images presumably caught of this virus can only be in BLACK & WHITE because the Electron Microscope does not display colour...just shades of black and white, ONLY. Our designated responsible health professionals have apparently undertaken an advanced course in the use ( ie, misuse) of Photoshop software; clearly as part of their continuing education encompassing an advanced course in committed Newspeak.