LANCET again with bogus MODELLING 'junk' research, telling us the under-vaccinated (DARPA Malone, Weissman & Bourla mRNA vaccines) had severe outcomes from COVID! NAKEDEMPEROR tells us truth, that

UNVACCINATED, not UNDER-VACCINATED, it is the unvaccinated; so LANCET & these researchers are contorting & bending the interpretation, usual phuck around of the public! Screw them!

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02467-4/fulltext#seccestitle160

“Researchers then used mathematical modelling to come up with their 7,000 hospitalisations and deaths figure.

Setting aside the mathematical modelling factor, which more often than not is less accurate than reading tea leaves, I’m sure you have already spotted the biggest error.

That’s correct, the study lumps together everyone who hasn’t had an optimal amount of vaccines. Which means the unvaccinated are in the same group as people who have had 1, 2 or even 3 doses.

Searching through the supplemental data, they have not separated the unvaccinated data from the under-vaccinated data anywhere.

How can they possibly claim that vaccines have saved lives and hospitalisations when they aren’t comparing the vaccinated against a control group (the unvaccinated).

But they obviously did separate out the data somewhere, it’s just that they won’t tell us. Tucked away at the end of the paragraph in the ‘Discussion’ section is this little snippet:

Our estimates for the 16–74 years and 75 years and older age groups show that being unvaccinated (strictly maximum dose deficit) was associated with similar or lower hazard ratio for severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with being vaccinated but having a vaccine deficit of at least one dose. This association could be due to vaccine waning and the fact that the most recent dose for those with a vaccine deficit frequently occurred many months before the study start date. The association could also be due to an uncontrolled selection effect for healthier individuals being more likely to be unvaccinated.

Their hidden data shows that being unvaccinated (not under-vaccinated) was associated with a LOWER hazard ratio for severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with the vaccinated (with a vaccine deficit of at least one dose).

The researchers try to come up with excuses as to why this might be happening - vaccine waning or that the unvaccinated are healthier.”

Lancet Study Confirms Unvaccinated Have Less Severe Covid-19 Outcomes Than Under-Vaccinated Individuals

But it hasn't been spun that way in the media

Lancet Study Confirms Unvaccinated Have Less Severe Covid-19 Outcomes Than Under-Vaccinated Individuals

Start Naked here, excellent, support them:

‘Read the papers today and you would be fooled into thinking that the Covid vaccines saved countless lives and not administrating enough vaccines caused excess deaths.

The Mirror told us that 7,000 hospitalisations and deaths may have been averted if only there had been more vaccinations.

Prof Sir Aziz Sheikh, from the University of Edinburgh, which carried out the survey with Health Data Research, said: “Covid-19 vaccines save lives. As new variants emerge, this study will help to pinpoint groups of our society and areas of the country where public health campaigns should be focused.”

The BBC told a similar story.

This time, more than 7,000 Covid-related hospital admissions could have been prevented if the population had received the full number of recommended jabs.

With about 40,000 severe hospital admissions related to Covid during that summer, the research estimates that more than 7,000 - 17% - would have been avoided if everyone had taken up the offer of the vaccine and booster doses for which they were eligible.

Same thing in the Guardian.

“The research outcome is a powerful validation of the benefits of vaccination,” said Alan Keys of HDR UK, who sat on the steering group of the study and is a co-author on the paper.

So what is this new paper and should I get vaccinated? Or are the papers not telling the whole story?

The study was published in the Lancet yesterday and is called “Under-vaccination and severe COVID-19 outcome: meta-analysis of national cohort studies in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales”.

It looked at the entire population of the UK, 67 million people, over the age of five and examined how many people in June 2022 were under-vaccinated.

Under-vaccinated means different things for different age groups:

• 5-11 = <1 dose

• 12-15 = <2 doses

• 16-74 = <3 doses

• ≥75 = <4 doses

If found that, in total 49.8% of Northern Ireland was under-vaccinated, as well as 45.7% of England, 34% of Scotland and 32.8% of Wales.

Researchers then used mathematical modelling to come up with their 7,000 hospitalisations and deaths figure.

Setting aside the mathematical modelling factor, which more often than not is less accurate than reading tea leaves, I’m sure you have already spotted the biggest error.

That’s correct, the study lumps together everyone who hasn’t had an optimal amount of vaccines. Which means the unvaccinated are in the same group as people who have had 1, 2 or even 3 doses.

Searching through the supplemental data, they have not separated the unvaccinated data from the under-vaccinated data anywhere.

How can they possibly claim that vaccines have saved lives and hospitalisations when they aren’t comparing the vaccinated against a control group (the unvaccinated).

But they obviously did separate out the data somewhere, it’s just that they won’t tell us. Tucked away at the end of the paragraph in the ‘Discussion’ section is this little snippet:

Our estimates for the 16–74 years and 75 years and older age groups show that being unvaccinated (strictly maximum dose deficit) was associated with similar or lower hazard ratio for severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with being vaccinated but having a vaccine deficit of at least one dose. This association could be due to vaccine waning and the fact that the most recent dose for those with a vaccine deficit frequently occurred many months before the study start date. The association could also be due to an uncontrolled selection effect for healthier individuals being more likely to be unvaccinated.

Their hidden data shows that being unvaccinated (not under-vaccinated) was associated with a LOWER hazard ratio for severe COVID-19 outcomes compared with the vaccinated (with a vaccine deficit of at least one dose).

The researchers try to come up with excuses as to why this might be happening - vaccine waning or that the unvaccinated are healthier.

But you won’t read this part in any of the news reports. Instead, thousands of deaths and hospitalisations could have been prevented because the vaccinated didn’t get enough vaccines.’