这是从《北美保守评论》林伟雄医生那里看来的关于英格兰青少年死亡率的数据,是两个年龄组在2021年前十个月的根据疫苗状态的每十万人的死亡率。我专门去网站检查了数据来源,是英国官方的人口统计数字,权威性应该是不容置疑的。英国作为最早完成全面免疫接种的国家,数据的准确性和透明度比较高,所以这个数据的结果应该是可信的。就是说英国人民勇于牺牲自己为全世界提供了一个可以分析疫苗的利弊得失的数据库。
首先解释一下死亡率的意思,就是这段时间之内英格兰的所有死亡人数,可以是任何原因:疾病,交通事故,运动伤害,自杀,或者猝死等等,这样就避免了死亡是否是疫苗副作用的争论。时间段是从2021年一月一号到十月三十一号,分组的唯一区别就是是否打疫苗。所以如果疫苗基本上没有副作用的话,死亡是一种随机事件,两组应该没有统计上的显著性差异。但根据林医生的数据,可以看到整个趋势很明显,死亡率随着打疫苗的针数上升(两针比一针高),随著年龄减小上升(年纪越小打完疫苗后死亡率增加越显著)。我检查了原始数据,里面的比例是准确的,当然他只选取了最年轻的两个年龄组:10-14及15-19岁,主要应该是因为这两个年龄组最明显。因为青少年本来就属于这种病毒风险极低,死亡率极低群体,一旦疫苗有了副作用死亡人数增加就很容易看出来。老年人本身就死亡率高,多死了一些人很难从死亡数据上看出来。
在数据里面,没有打疫苗的全部归为一类,而打了疫苗的分为四大类:只打一针并超过21天的;只打一针21天之内的;打了两针并且第二针超过21天;打了两针第二针没有超过21天的。林医生选取的是打完疫苗21天后的数据,我想原因在于打完疫苗21天之内只是一个暂时的状态,过几天就会进入21天组,所以这个组别的人数相对也比较少。所有的组别之间都呈统计学上显著差异,所以可以下结论不是抽样随机性误差,唯一的解释只能是因为疫苗原因导致了青少年死亡率的增加。其实几个月前也是根据英国的数据曾经有过一篇引起广泛关注的报道,就是2021从青少年开始注射疫苗开始,几个月的数据显示英国青少年的死亡率比起2020同期几乎增加了50%。当然后来又出来了别的报道来纠正这种说法。不过不是说事实不准确,而是说英国前些年的青少年死亡人数还有比2021还高的时候。所以是一种正常的波动。但如果将以前的青少年死亡增加报道和现在的死亡率一对照,二者相当一致,证明早期报道的疫苗导致青少年死亡增加并非空穴来风。唯一可能不太准确的是10-14岁打完两针后的死亡率,因为这个群体目前只有1千多人,随机偏差会比较大,而千分之2.38是一个相当高的死亡率了,可能有人会觉得这个数字有点离谱。随著人数的增加死亡率肯定会在一定范围内变化,所以到时候不一定有千分之2.38这么高。我将所有10-14岁的打疫苗的作为一个群体,死亡率是十万分之39.9,与非疫苗组的4.58差异非常显著,也明显高于15-19岁年龄组两针疫苗的32.8.
当然,林医生没有呈现别的年龄组的数据,我初略地看了一下各个年龄组的数据,可以大概描述一下。我将群体分为不打疫苗和打疫苗两大类,然后计算群体死亡率。在20-30岁范围,不打疫苗组的死亡率略微低于疫苗组,但不具有统计学显著性。超过30岁,不打疫苗组的死亡率开始超过打疫苗组,并且年龄越大,差异越显著,当然年龄越大的群体死亡率肯定也是越来越高。我们都知道这次的病毒的致死率和年龄显著相关,所以这些数据看起来很一致,就是高风险的群体从死亡率似乎看不出疫苗的副作用,或者说看起来是利大于弊。但在风险低的群体里面,副作用越来越明显,到了青少年之中明显看来弊大于利了。当然这个很好理解,如果一个群体本身死亡率高,即使疫苗有一些副作用导致的死亡,如果没有显著高过病毒本身增加的死亡,那么我们从死亡率是看不出来的。如果我们认为英国的大数据没有被篡改的话,结论就很明显了。疫苗的副作用明显存在,并且在青少年中,因为疫苗导致的死亡远远超过了病毒本身导致的死亡。
那么这些数据除了表明对低风险人群的副作用外,是否能够证明疫苗对高龄人群的保护很显著呢?其实不一定,我会具体分析为什么。因为疫苗和病毒的政治化,所以很多相关数据其实是被操纵了的,所以不得已才用死亡率来看疫苗的副作用。但这个比较有一个先天缺陷使得数据会极大地趋向于显示疫苗组明显低于非疫苗组。就是不打疫苗的人都是整个时间段都是不打疫苗,而疫苗组的人数是逐渐增加。最后计算死亡率的是时候却是按打疫苗的总人数,而这批人相当一段时间是处于非疫苗状态,所以在这段时间之内的死亡人数都被计数到非疫苗之中,导致非疫苗人群的死亡率会显著高于疫苗人群。举一个例子,如15-19岁人群组,正常十个月死亡率为万分之一。随机分为两组:非疫苗组和疫苗组。但非疫苗组一开始就是一百万人,十个月下来就是死亡100人。疫苗组是每个月加十万人(并不真打疫苗),到第十个月也是一百万人,可到时候疫苗组的死亡人数只有55人,这样算下来非疫苗组的死亡率明显高于疫苗组。但两组都没有任何处理,唯一差别就是取样方法的差异,结果导致本来同样的人群却变成有显著差异的两个组。原因在于疫苗组的人员是渐渐增加,但死亡率是根据最后的人数算的。可见我们分析死亡率有一个先天缺陷就会导致结果趋向疫苗组,除非在疫苗组引入一个疫苗注射时间的系数来调整,比如六月一号加入的在最后统计中只能算二分之一个人。死亡率越高,两组的差别越大。如果一个高龄群体一百万人,每个月随机抽五万人进疫苗组,如果每月死亡1%的人,十个月下来,到时候非疫苗组和疫苗组都是五十万人,可死亡人数之比却是七万多对两万多。这就是我对疫苗在高风险人群中到底起到了多少有效保护存疑的原因,但即使在如此不利的情况下,青少年疫苗组还明显超出了非疫苗组的死亡率,可见实际死亡率应该更高,而这些更高的死亡率只能归因于疫苗。
那么我们就需要问一下美国的CDC及FDA,为什么要在没有足够信息的情况下强推小孩子打疫苗?在前段时间FDA批准疫苗用于5-12岁小孩子的时候,虽然有不少专家谈到了副作用的问题,也强调了青少年本身就是低风险,但专家组的最终结论还是利大于弊批准了疫苗应用于小孩。当英国的大数据出来后,我想问一下那些专家们,利大于弊是如何得出的?英国的数据根本就没有疫苗的副作用,就是一个死亡率和死者的疫苗状态,这个死亡数字比起有多少人死于疫苗副作用来说显然更难做假。因为死于疫苗副作用可以通过各种定义来改变人数,但多少人死亡却不容易改动。FDA现在居然还要进一步批准将疫苗应用于六个月到五岁的小孩,我已经完全无语了。为什么在没有明显的好处的情况下还要一再将副作用不明的疫苗强行应用在风险极低的群体?在英国数据已经表明年龄越小潜在的危害更大的情况下,到底居心何在?我只能呼吁:救救孩子。
下面就是原始的excel数据。我也没有时间分析所有的图表,所有上述数据都来自referencetable 31中的table 9. 来源就是下面的英国统计办公室官方网站。
Vaccination status | Age group | Person-years | Deaths involving COVID-19 | Non-COVID-19 deaths | All deaths | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 10-14 | 6,648 | 0 | 3 | 3 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 15-19 | 174,667 | 0 | 32 | 32 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 20-24 | 259,467 | 4 | 53 | 57 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 25-29 | 266,233 | 2 | 89 | 91 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 30-34 | 270,687 | 5 | 129 | 134 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 35-39 | 296,112 | 10 | 245 | 255 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 40-44 | 319,798 | 9 | 412 | 421 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 45-49 | 365,756 | 27 | 690 | 717 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 50-54 | 439,858 | 52 | 1,331 | 1,383 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 55-59 | 452,574 | 84 | 2,135 | 2,219 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 60-64 | 405,762 | 141 | 3,076 | 3,217 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 65-69 | 351,500 | 203 | 4,230 | 4,433 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 70-74 | 348,157 | 359 | 6,971 | 7,330 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 75-79 | 260,820 | 741 | 8,948 | 9,689 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 80-84 | 166,968 | 1,359 | 10,456 | 11,815 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 85-89 | 103,068 | 1,701 | 11,658 | 13,359 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, at least 21 days ago | 90+ | 60,329 | 2,062 | 14,093 | 16,155 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 10-14 | 18,539 | 2 | 2 | 4 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 15-19 | 88,706 | 0 | 5 | 5 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 20-24 | 109,827 | 0 | 13 | 13 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 25-29 | 110,795 | 2 | 20 | 22 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 30-34 | 110,958 | 3 | 31 | 34 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 35-39 | 123,075 | 8 | 42 | 50 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 40-44 | 131,044 | 3 | 62 | 65 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 45-49 | 145,567 | 12 | 138 | 150 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 50-54 | 168,786 | 19 | 230 | 249 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 55-59 | 171,510 | 43 | 355 | 398 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 60-64 | 151,864 | 62 | 507 | 569 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 65-69 | 132,331 | 113 | 762 | 875 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 70-74 | 131,105 | 224 | 1,280 | 1,504 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 75-79 | 97,510 | 458 | 1,648 | 2,106 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 80-84 | 60,401 | 779 | 2,052 | 2,831 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 85-89 | 36,818 | 925 | 2,485 | 3,410 | |||||||
Received only the first dose, less than 21 days ago | 90+ | 21,495 | 1,237 | 3,249 | 4,486 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 10-14 | 1,678 | 0 | 4 | 4 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 15-19 | 127,842 | 1 | 41 | 42 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 20-24 | 359,959 | 2 | 69 | 71 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 25-29 | 427,061 | 8 | 108 | 116 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 30-34 | 480,574 | 11 | 183 | 194 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 35-39 | 589,849 | 14 | 309 | 323 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 40-44 | 720,804 | 33 | 594 | 627 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 45-49 | 852,707 | 58 | 1,120 | 1,178 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 50-54 | 1,129,045 | 100 | 2,261 | 2,361 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 55-59 | 1,194,925 | 222 | 3,976 | 4,198 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 60-64 | 1,107,106 | 311 | 6,116 | 6,427 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 65-69 | 1,030,612 | 451 | 9,126 | 9,577 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 70-74 | 1,128,526 | 798 | 16,431 | 17,229 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 75-79 | 896,876 | 992 | 22,338 | 23,330 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 80-84 | 677,380 | 1,277 | 30,126 | 31,403 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 85-89 | 422,042 | 1,237 | 33,571 | 34,808 | |||||||
Received the second dose, at least 21 days ago | 90+ | 236,443 | 1,371 | 40,685 | 42,056 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 10-14 | 494 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 15-19 | 43,091 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 20-24 | 96,399 | 0 | 10 | 10 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 25-29 | 100,587 | 0 | 6 | 6 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 30-34 | 102,598 | 0 | 15 | 15 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 35-39 | 116,463 | 0 | 27 | 27 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 40-44 | 127,130 | 0 | 61 | 61 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 45-49 | 141,171 | 1 | 111 | 112 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 50-54 | 167,271 | 0 | 189 | 189 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 55-59 | 170,997 | 3 | 304 | 307 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 60-64 | 152,535 | 2 | 470 | 472 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 65-69 | 133,284 | 8 | 624 | 632 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 70-74 | 137,270 | 10 | 1,091 | 1,101 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 75-79 | 101,149 | 15 | 1,440 | 1,*** | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 80-84 | 70,858 | 35 | 1,796 | 1,831 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 85-89 | 42,909 | 56 | 2,019 | 2,075 | |||||||
Received the second dose, less than 21 days ago | 90+ | 24,260 | 43 | 2,640 | 2,683 | |||||||
Unvaccinated | 10-14 | 2,094,711 | 2 | 94 | 96 | |||||||
Unvaccinated | 15-19 | 1,587,072 | 18 | 142 | 160 | |||||||
Unvaccinated | 20-24 | 1,253,977 | 31 | 189 | 220 | |||||||
Unvaccinated | 25-29 | 1,246,537 | 55 | 282 | 337 | |||||||
Unvaccinated | 30-34 | 1,130,675 | 101 | 424 | 525 | fuz2022-02-10 12:55:48 俺在美国刚推孩子疫苗时,说了 石头村2022-02-10 14:26:00 为什么在博客可以看见的图到了论坛就看不见了? 石头村2022-02-10 14:28:00 本来应用在孩子身上就需要特别慎重,大人应该有自由选择的权力,觉得利大于弊就大,觉得弊大于利就不打。 大文嚎2022-02-10 14:38:57 还有一个关键是孩子往往对身体可能有的一些警告,不察觉,不敏感,不了解 大文嚎2022-02-10 14:39:34 婴幼儿就更不说了。 石头村2022-02-10 14:42:14 图看不见了,在这里。 周老大2022-02-10 15:23:49 意大利在医疗挤兑时是拔老人管子救年轻人,哪个混蛋出的主意给小孩打未知疫苗企图(然并卵)救老年人? lawattaction2022-02-10 15:49:32 费心了!赞!好奇的问一句,你打疫苗了吗? fuz2022-02-10 16:49:25 唉,这话问的。在有些人看来,不是在找茬儿,就是在挑事儿 lilyofthevalley2022-02-10 16:57:06 你给的链接的表没有一个是10-14岁分组,只有18-39岁;10-39岁;15–19岁unvaccined中总人数是接种过人数的 lilyofthevalley2022-02-10 16:57:47 图 lilyofthevalley2022-02-10 16:58:25 图2 lilyofthevalley2022-02-10 16:58:59 图3 lilyofthevalley2022-02-10 17:00:34 你给信息中15–19岁unvaccined中总人数是接种过人数的好几倍,这个数据准确吗? 石头村2022-02-10 17:26:54 哈哈,看来我早下手下载了数据保存了证据。这个新的数据将10-14,15-19,20-24,25-29全部合并到了39岁以下组,这 石头村2022-02-10 17:29:48 不过我已经在文章中附上了原始数据,大家有兴趣可以去研究。 pickshell2022-02-10 17:56:12 唉,主观诱导性曲解太明显。死亡数据能解读成仅是疫苗导致?死亡与新冠疫情趋势及其它因素都无关? callalily662022-02-10 18:07:47 mark 吃与活2022-02-10 18:14:19 青少年打疫苗初期的数据,打疫苗的青少年很可能在健康上有些问题。另外数据太少,需要等到该年龄段普遍打疫苗时 安卓手机2022-02-10 18:39:10 实验性疫苗使用在未成年身上,完全是属于道德问题。属于成年人对青少年的强奸(类比)。 石头村2022-02-10 18:40:47 回你一句,我一开始就没有感到病毒有多恐怖,所以抱着先看看的态度,但越看越发觉问题。 石头村2022-02-10 18:43:24 尤其美国的CDC和FDA,对可能的副作用完全回避,还要推小孩子,这应该属于反人类罪。 石头村2022-02-10 18:45:06 只要实验组的数据大到一定程度,准确性就不是问题。 julie1162022-02-10 18:49:25 本身就是披在健康外衣下的战争 周老大2022-02-10 18:55:39 教授,台湾死于新冠疫苗的多于死于新冠感染的。 吃与活2022-02-10 19:00:40 台湾从来就没有大规模感染过,没法与美国的情况相比 周老大2022-02-10 19:25:06 又信口开河了,在亚洲你听说过谁被噎死的? 吃与活2022-02-10 19:35:28 看 周老大2022-02-10 19:55:32 俩例?疫苗死一千多 吃与活2022-02-10 20:03:58 数据从哪里来的 周老大2022-02-10 20:49:06 网上 lawattaction2022-02-10 21:10:10 谢谢回答!实话!去年7月30 号 ,开放了,容许25 人室外party,大家都打了疫苗 吃与活2022-02-10 21:10:40 黃立民:9成以上死亡個案跟疫苗無關 周老大2022-02-10 21:15:33 鼓掌! wearing12022-02-10 21:21:33 people deserve the government they elected! yanzi32022-02-10 21:57:13 It is a bio weapon for depopulation 继续阅读 终于到了fuz 2022-02-10 04:07:26夫子,我找到了台灣的報道,相信是同一個研究dudaan 2022-02-10 03:17:20不小心银杏吃多了有解药吗?老糊涂母亲可能大年初二排骨汤放多了银杏,她现毎天清晨背痛,走路困难。四季桔 2022-02-10 01:24:11介绍一例天天服用泰诺后来中风的例子fuz 2022-02-10 00:54:29工作中的趣事,春妮 2022-02-10 00:23:07a lot of kids have C1, C2 misaligned which cause ENT problem.ULS 2022-02-09 23:32:25DIY Protein Bar蛋白棒松鼠跪鱼 2022-02-09 22:30:37手背上起了疹子uniwander1 2022-02-09 21:27:06膝盖疼含羞草草 2022-02-09 20:58:35龙卷风健康快递 144kylelong 2022-02-09 20:42:28 同作者 大选舞弊展开谈(7)近观2020年大选之下石头村 2022-10-18 14:29:47Oregon的海岸线(5)石头村 2022-10-14 18:31:55最是一年秋色浓石头村 2022-10-13 16:32:25我也就一剑的诗来几句石头村 2022-10-13 15:12:44最是一年秋色浓石头村 2022-10-13 13:46:14赏秋归来,先贴几张照片,希望山水君也能有感赋诗几首石头村 2022-10-11 18:59:50(6) 近观2020年大选之中石头村 2022-10-10 18:37:18Oregon的海岸线(4)石头村 2022-10-07 15:01:06大选舞弊展开谈(5)近观2020年大选之上石头村 2022-10-03 14:35:34Oregon的海岸线(3)石头村 2022-09-30 17:10:20 |