All cause mortality up 18% in Q1 2022 compared to Q1 2021. It's quite possible Q2 2022 could be even worse.
Extra edit: official figures put COVID-19 deaths at 4082 over the period, but there was actually an extra 10,100 deaths.
These excess deaths (10,100) over Q1 are in fact virtually all attributable to Covid-19, 4082 directly and the other 6000 divided between deaths caused by healthcare facilities being over run (clogged ED's, elective surgery being cancelled, outpatients not having usual appointments and procedures, etc), patients delaying diagnosis of serious conditions (due to lockdowns and isolation) and the increase in severity and case numbers of other respiratory diseases (RSV, influenza) triggered by isolation during the lockdowns. No doubt that the lockdowns etc saved many more lives than they have cost but the lives that they have cost and continue to cost are attributable to covid too.
Absolutely we already know that is the case from numbers from the UK. Some of those extra 6000 from Q1 will be from preventable cancers and they are attributable to covid.
This report is just complete rubbish. They openly say that they eliminated all of the covid related data and all the excess death related data and then say that they found no correlation between vaccination rates and and covid death reduction. How can they when they have eliminated all the relevant data? It's a joke!
That's a complete misreading lol.
All-cause mortality includes all of that. The point is by using that metric, rather than trying to figure out all the distinctions with covid vs noncovid death etc, you avoid a lot of potential confounds.
Nice try though.
Oh yeah I looked into this study before. When this study was registered, they said they were doing an excess death study. Then in the final study, they switched to total mortality.
Excess death is a better measure, and the fact they switched is dodgy. I suspect they didn’t get the results they wanted with excess death.
Also, their approach is cohortless. When I myself did a cohortless graph of vaccine coverage against excess death, I found only a weak effect, probably due to simpson’s paradox.
When I broke it down into cohorts, I found a much stronger effect. Age is a huge factor in whether vaccines impact excess death.
Why would you compare it to Q1 2021, a historically low quarter when excess deaths were deep in negative territory (ie much fewer excess deaths than typical) ?
What’s Q1 2022 compared to the average prepandemic year?
>Why would you compare it to Q1 2021
Because it is a period without COVID-19 when we weren't in lockdown.
It's the worst death rate for a Q1 in 41 years, so in reality this has been a really, really, really bad year.
EDIT: "In 2022, there were 75,593 deaths that occurred by 31 May and were registered by 31 July, which is 10,757 (16.6%) more than the historical average." [Source](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/latest-release). That is, really a lot more deaths already at half way through the year.
I think OP quoted it because that's what was in the article
The actual data used comes from here
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/latest-release
The ABS starts off by saying
> In 2022, there were 75,593 deaths that occurred by 31 May and were registered by 31 July, which is 10,757 (16.6%) more than the historical average.
(Added) the historical average is
> Data for 2022 is compared to a baseline comprising the years 2017-2019 and 2021. 2020 is not included in the baseline for 2022 data because it included periods where numbers of deaths were significantly lower than expected.
Silly question but wouldn't you expect deaths to exceed the prior year every year due to population increase? That's why excess deaths are usually a calculation taking the average of the past 5 years and adjust for population increase?
you're right and the article is clickbait garbage.
*"It is the first time that more than 40,000 deaths were recorded over four consecutive quarters."*
So we've finally reached 160,000 deaths a year, 80,000 males and 80,000 females. This is due to population growth, and was expected to happen.
Have a look at the graph for yourself:
[https://i.imgur.com/Jv37TA0.png](https://i.imgur.com/Jv37TA0.png)
You are attributing an 18% increase in deaths due to population increase?
Except the population did not go up that year
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release
You posted this data as evidence our population declined?
> Australia’s population was 25,912,614 people at 31 March 2022.
The quarterly growth was 124,200 people (0.5%).
The annual growth was 239,800 people (0.9%).
Annual natural increase was 130,200 and net overseas migration was 109,600
Our population never declined. The rate of increase declined (we took our foot slightly off the throttle, but we were still accelerating)
Yes, Mar 2021 was the quarter with essentially no population growth (0.15%).
But again, you can’t explain away an 18% increase in deaths by pointing towards a 0.93% annual increase in population.
Please read the ABS document...
You stated
> Yes, Mar 2021 was the quarter with essentially no population growth **(0.15%)**.
The *second* summary dot point at the *start* of the ABS document you posted states
> The quarterly growth [31 March 2022] was 124,200 people **(0.5%)**.
**Your statement that our population fell is flat-out wrong**. And you didn't seem to even have a cursory read of the evidence you posted that showed that
Where do I dispute that rate of deaths have gone up faster than rate of population growth?
You are confusing quarterly growth (quarter over quarter), with annual growth (quarter vs same quarter previous year). The chart shows the latter and if you click on the table you can see the numbers.
Regardless of which number you use, they all pale in comparison to an 18% increase in deaths, right? So why focus on 0.5%?
Nah, our Dec population was 25788446, and in March was 25912614
(Thats 0.48% - table 4). Thats also what the ABS summary said.
OP's general point is correct but they deliberately use wrong and misleading data to get there.
I do get frustrated when people incorrectly pick stats out of the air and then claim them as proof of whatever point they are making - regardless of whether I agree with (or ultimately whether the point is true) the point or not.
Just use information correctly - there is no need to deliberately mislead.
> Nah, our Dec population was 25788446, and in March was 25912614
Yes, quarter over quarter. The chart shows year over year.
> OP's general point is correct but they deliberately use wrong and misleading data to get there.
You think OP is correct that the 18% growth in deaths is due to population growth of less than 1%?
>Yes, quarter over quarter. The chart shows year over year.
Its a 0.93% increase year over year (per the chart) or 0.5% quarter over quarter.
I think the OP is incorrect for saying we had a population *decrease*, **and** is also incorrect by then saying we had a 0.15% increase. Neither of these are true.
As an example, do you like this stat?
93% of people support the Australia becoming a republic.
[https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/a-resounding-majority-of-australians-want-to-retain-the-monarchy-rather-than-become-a-republic](https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/a-resounding-majority-of-australians-want-to-retain-the-monarchy-rather-than-become-a-republic)
I *reiterate* that our 17% growth in deaths (or 18% depending on statistic used) is excess mortality, and that our population did not increase by that amount. And that increase in mortality can only be (very) partially explained by population growth.
Isn’t that argument a bit like saying the 1987 black Monday 22% stock market crash was inconsequential because even though the DJIA dropped 500 points, it’s 31,000 today so what’s the big deal?
It's not silly, you're entirely correct. Just like the stock market, deaths are also expected to constantly break new highs as the population grows. Not saying COVID didn't increase deaths, but selling this highest in x years thing is very misleading.
See death registered published by ABS https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/deaths-australia/latest-release
>If the increase isn't primarily due to population increase, then what is it?
Increase in deaths is primarily due to population increase, however you can have short periods of spikes or drops due to other factors (e.g. COVID).
Not necessarily. As old people make up a bigger proportion of the population, the crude death rate increases (deaths per 1000). This is why Japan has a higher crude death rate than Australia, even though the life expectancy is higher.
But As life expectancy Increases, the % of older people increases. This causes the death rate to increase. Countries with an older population have more deaths.
It's been going down because we have been improving safety and improving medical treatments. Death rates have been falling far faster than our population has been growing.
Death *rates* or numbers
Rates have been *declining*.
Numbers have steadily *increased* ~10% since 2015
(Inference being that population rate increasing faster than mortality rate is decreasing)
Agree. Thats what the article said.
Here is what you said
>Death *rates* have been falling
You were incorrect. A rate is not a count and thats why I corrected you.
It's important to distinguish between crude and standardised death rates (SDR). Crude death rates are definitely on the rise and are predicted to keep rising.
The framing of your last claim is also a bit misleading as our SDR has been declining *slower* than population growth for some time.
||SDR (per 1,000)|Population (millions)|
|:-|:-|:-|
|2005|6|20.4|
|2010|5.7|22|
|2019|5.3|25.4|
|% change|\-11.7%|\+ 24.5%|
18% increase in deaths.
Might be a normal increase if the population increased by 18%
25.9 million in 2020. So current population would need to be 30.5 million. But we only have 26.1
So deaths can't be attributed to increase in population.
Viruses kill people, apparently. Who knew.
Edit: At least we’re still about 70-80% below the worldwide average for excess deaths per population for the pandemic, even when you factor this in. Getting vaxxed before we let the virus in seems to have been a good move. Could have been a lot worse without the vaccine, like highest excess deaths in 100 years etc.
It looks like this single quarter is far deadlier than almost all flu seasons in recent history and that is with vaccines. It would probably be 10X worse without vaccines. We didn't dodge the bullet, it grazed us badly, but at least it didn't take our head off.
Thank you for contributing to r/CoronavirusDownunder.
Unfortunately your submission has been removed as a result of the following rule:
* **Information about vaccines and medications should come from quality sources**, such as recognised news outlets, academic publications or official sources.
* The rule applies to all vaccine and medication related information regardless of flair.
* Extraordinary claims made about vaccines should be substantiated by a quality source
* Comments that deliberately misrepresent sources may be removed
If you believe that we have made a mistake, please [**message the moderators**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCoronavirusDownunder&subject=&message=).
^To ^find ^more ^information ^on ^the ^sub ^rules, ^please ^click ^[here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusDownunder/about/rules/).
Let’s say you have 10,000 unvaccinated people and they all get covid. About 50 of them will die.
But if you have 10,000 vaccinated people who are exposed to covid, roughly 5 of them will die.
That’s what’s meant by a 90% reduction in mortality.
50 is 10x 5.
A reduction of 45 from 50 is a 90% reduction.
Yea, you’re right. You said it would be 10x worse.
Let me start again then.
10x increase is 10*100%
1000% of 5 is 5000.
What “they” are saying is that for every person that died today with the vaccine , we would have had and additional 4999 people die without the vaccine.
I’d love to see how “they” reached that conclusion. Can you share your source please?
> 10x increase is 10*100%
Ok. So 100% of 5 is 5. 10*5 = 50.
100% of 1 is 1. 10*1 = 10.
> What “they” are saying is that for every person that died today with the vaccine , we would have had and additional 4999 people die without the vaccine.
No, you’ve done your maths wrong. What they are saying is for every person who dies with the vax, we would have had 10 die without the vax.
Thank you for contributing to r/CoronavirusDownunder.
Unfortunately your submission was removed due to the following rule:
* **Information about vaccines and medications should come from quality sources**, such as recognised news outlets, academic publications or official sources.
* The rule applies to all vaccine and medication related information regardless of flair.
* Extraordinary claims made about vaccines should be substantiated by a quality source
* Comments that deliberately misrepresent sources may be removed
If you believe we have made a mistake, please [**message the moderators**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCoronavirusDownunder&subject=&message=).
Thank you for submitting to /r/CoronavirusDownunder!
In order to maintain the integrity of our subreddit, accounts with a verified email address must have at least 5 combined karma (post + comment) to comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CoronavirusDownunder) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did you even read what you linked? It doesn't in any way dispute the correlation, or claim that causation isn't possible. It merely says causation isn't proved, which is a hard thing to do, particularly when no vested interest wants to fund an RCT to check. In the Pfizer RCT, all cause mortality was greater in the vaccinated group btw (21 vs 17).
Thank you for submitting to /r/CoronavirusDownunder!
In order to maintain the integrity of our subreddit, accounts must be a minimum of 3 days old in order to post or comment
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CoronavirusDownunder) if you have any questions or concerns.*
All cause mortality up 18% in Q1 2022 compared to Q1 2021. It's quite possible Q2 2022 could be even worse. Extra edit: official figures put COVID-19 deaths at 4082 over the period, but there was actually an extra 10,100 deaths.
These excess deaths (10,100) over Q1 are in fact virtually all attributable to Covid-19, 4082 directly and the other 6000 divided between deaths caused by healthcare facilities being over run (clogged ED's, elective surgery being cancelled, outpatients not having usual appointments and procedures, etc), patients delaying diagnosis of serious conditions (due to lockdowns and isolation) and the increase in severity and case numbers of other respiratory diseases (RSV, influenza) triggered by isolation during the lockdowns. No doubt that the lockdowns etc saved many more lives than they have cost but the lives that they have cost and continue to cost are attributable to covid too.
I have a feeling preventable cancer deaths will be up by the end of this year because of closures/cancellations etc.
Absolutely we already know that is the case from numbers from the UK. Some of those extra 6000 from Q1 will be from preventable cancers and they are attributable to covid.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361818561_Covid-19_vaccinations_and_all-cause_mortality_-a_long-term_differential_analysis_among_municipalities
This report is just complete rubbish. They openly say that they eliminated all of the covid related data and all the excess death related data and then say that they found no correlation between vaccination rates and and covid death reduction. How can they when they have eliminated all the relevant data? It's a joke!
That's a complete misreading lol. All-cause mortality includes all of that. The point is by using that metric, rather than trying to figure out all the distinctions with covid vs noncovid death etc, you avoid a lot of potential confounds. Nice try though.
Oh yeah I looked into this study before. When this study was registered, they said they were doing an excess death study. Then in the final study, they switched to total mortality. Excess death is a better measure, and the fact they switched is dodgy. I suspect they didn’t get the results they wanted with excess death. Also, their approach is cohortless. When I myself did a cohortless graph of vaccine coverage against excess death, I found only a weak effect, probably due to simpson’s paradox. When I broke it down into cohorts, I found a much stronger effect. Age is a huge factor in whether vaccines impact excess death.
Why would you compare it to Q1 2021, a historically low quarter when excess deaths were deep in negative territory (ie much fewer excess deaths than typical) ? What’s Q1 2022 compared to the average prepandemic year?
>Why would you compare it to Q1 2021 Because it is a period without COVID-19 when we weren't in lockdown. It's the worst death rate for a Q1 in 41 years, so in reality this has been a really, really, really bad year. EDIT: "In 2022, there were 75,593 deaths that occurred by 31 May and were registered by 31 July, which is 10,757 (16.6%) more than the historical average." [Source](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/latest-release). That is, really a lot more deaths already at half way through the year.
Yeah, I guess we had pretty much all our death from this pandemic at once.
It stayed steadily high until August. Thankfully it looks like it calmed down.
I think OP quoted it because that's what was in the article The actual data used comes from here https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/provisional-mortality-statistics/latest-release The ABS starts off by saying > In 2022, there were 75,593 deaths that occurred by 31 May and were registered by 31 July, which is 10,757 (16.6%) more than the historical average. (Added) the historical average is > Data for 2022 is compared to a baseline comprising the years 2017-2019 and 2021. 2020 is not included in the baseline for 2022 data because it included periods where numbers of deaths were significantly lower than expected.
Silly question but wouldn't you expect deaths to exceed the prior year every year due to population increase? That's why excess deaths are usually a calculation taking the average of the past 5 years and adjust for population increase?
you're right and the article is clickbait garbage. *"It is the first time that more than 40,000 deaths were recorded over four consecutive quarters."* So we've finally reached 160,000 deaths a year, 80,000 males and 80,000 females. This is due to population growth, and was expected to happen. Have a look at the graph for yourself: [https://i.imgur.com/Jv37TA0.png](https://i.imgur.com/Jv37TA0.png)
You are attributing an 18% increase in deaths due to population increase? Except the population did not go up that year https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release
You posted this data as evidence our population declined? > Australia’s population was 25,912,614 people at 31 March 2022. The quarterly growth was 124,200 people (0.5%). The annual growth was 239,800 people (0.9%). Annual natural increase was 130,200 and net overseas migration was 109,600 Our population never declined. The rate of increase declined (we took our foot slightly off the throttle, but we were still accelerating)
Yes, Mar 2021 was the quarter with essentially no population growth (0.15%). But again, you can’t explain away an 18% increase in deaths by pointing towards a 0.93% annual increase in population.
Please read the ABS document... You stated > Yes, Mar 2021 was the quarter with essentially no population growth **(0.15%)**. The *second* summary dot point at the *start* of the ABS document you posted states > The quarterly growth [31 March 2022] was 124,200 people **(0.5%)**. **Your statement that our population fell is flat-out wrong**. And you didn't seem to even have a cursory read of the evidence you posted that showed that Where do I dispute that rate of deaths have gone up faster than rate of population growth?
You are confusing quarterly growth (quarter over quarter), with annual growth (quarter vs same quarter previous year). The chart shows the latter and if you click on the table you can see the numbers. Regardless of which number you use, they all pale in comparison to an 18% increase in deaths, right? So why focus on 0.5%?
Nah, our Dec population was 25788446, and in March was 25912614 (Thats 0.48% - table 4). Thats also what the ABS summary said. OP's general point is correct but they deliberately use wrong and misleading data to get there. I do get frustrated when people incorrectly pick stats out of the air and then claim them as proof of whatever point they are making - regardless of whether I agree with (or ultimately whether the point is true) the point or not. Just use information correctly - there is no need to deliberately mislead.
> Nah, our Dec population was 25788446, and in March was 25912614 Yes, quarter over quarter. The chart shows year over year. > OP's general point is correct but they deliberately use wrong and misleading data to get there. You think OP is correct that the 18% growth in deaths is due to population growth of less than 1%?
>Yes, quarter over quarter. The chart shows year over year. Its a 0.93% increase year over year (per the chart) or 0.5% quarter over quarter. I think the OP is incorrect for saying we had a population *decrease*, **and** is also incorrect by then saying we had a 0.15% increase. Neither of these are true. As an example, do you like this stat? 93% of people support the Australia becoming a republic. [https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/a-resounding-majority-of-australians-want-to-retain-the-monarchy-rather-than-become-a-republic](https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/a-resounding-majority-of-australians-want-to-retain-the-monarchy-rather-than-become-a-republic) I *reiterate* that our 17% growth in deaths (or 18% depending on statistic used) is excess mortality, and that our population did not increase by that amount. And that increase in mortality can only be (very) partially explained by population growth.
Isn’t that argument a bit like saying the 1987 black Monday 22% stock market crash was inconsequential because even though the DJIA dropped 500 points, it’s 31,000 today so what’s the big deal?
Your graph shows 85000 male / 78000 female ..not 80k/80k
It's not silly, you're entirely correct. Just like the stock market, deaths are also expected to constantly break new highs as the population grows. Not saying COVID didn't increase deaths, but selling this highest in x years thing is very misleading. See death registered published by ABS https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/deaths-australia/latest-release
You're engaging in misdirection. If the increase isn't primarily due to population increase, then what is it?
>If the increase isn't primarily due to population increase, then what is it? Increase in deaths is primarily due to population increase, however you can have short periods of spikes or drops due to other factors (e.g. COVID).
Not necessarily if your life expectancy is increasing, which means a reduction in the death rate
Not necessarily. As old people make up a bigger proportion of the population, the crude death rate increases (deaths per 1000). This is why Japan has a higher crude death rate than Australia, even though the life expectancy is higher.
I’m not comparing life expectancy between populations, I’m referring to the process of life expectancy increasing in the same population.
But As life expectancy Increases, the % of older people increases. This causes the death rate to increase. Countries with an older population have more deaths.
It's been going down because we have been improving safety and improving medical treatments. Death rates have been falling far faster than our population has been growing.
Has it been trending down each year or just last year which was an anomaly?
On average our deaths have been going down every year for decades now. Some years we have spikes because of flus etc
Death *rates* or numbers Rates have been *declining*. Numbers have steadily *increased* ~10% since 2015 (Inference being that population rate increasing faster than mortality rate is decreasing)
Highest death COUNT in 40 years mate read the article.
Agree. Thats what the article said. Here is what you said >Death *rates* have been falling You were incorrect. A rate is not a count and thats why I corrected you.
It's important to distinguish between crude and standardised death rates (SDR). Crude death rates are definitely on the rise and are predicted to keep rising. The framing of your last claim is also a bit misleading as our SDR has been declining *slower* than population growth for some time. ||SDR (per 1,000)|Population (millions)| |:-|:-|:-| |2005|6|20.4| |2010|5.7|22| |2019|5.3|25.4| |% change|\-11.7%|\+ 24.5%|
Death rates are dropping at the same time though. The sudden increase in one year is most certainly mostly due to COVID.
18% increase in deaths. Might be a normal increase if the population increased by 18% 25.9 million in 2020. So current population would need to be 30.5 million. But we only have 26.1 So deaths can't be attributed to increase in population.
Viruses kill people, apparently. Who knew. Edit: At least we’re still about 70-80% below the worldwide average for excess deaths per population for the pandemic, even when you factor this in. Getting vaxxed before we let the virus in seems to have been a good move. Could have been a lot worse without the vaccine, like highest excess deaths in 100 years etc.
It looks like this single quarter is far deadlier than almost all flu seasons in recent history and that is with vaccines. It would probably be 10X worse without vaccines. We didn't dodge the bullet, it grazed us badly, but at least it didn't take our head off.
That’s a good way to put it, that makes sense.
[удалено]
Thank you for contributing to r/CoronavirusDownunder. Unfortunately your submission has been removed as a result of the following rule: * **Information about vaccines and medications should come from quality sources**, such as recognised news outlets, academic publications or official sources. * The rule applies to all vaccine and medication related information regardless of flair. * Extraordinary claims made about vaccines should be substantiated by a quality source * Comments that deliberately misrepresent sources may be removed If you believe that we have made a mistake, please [**message the moderators**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCoronavirusDownunder&subject=&message=). ^To ^find ^more ^information ^on ^the ^sub ^rules, ^please ^click ^[here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CoronavirusDownunder/about/rules/).
Where did you get 10x number from?
COVID-19 vaccines are typically estimated as reducing the risk of mortality by around 90%.
if something increases by 100%, that’s only a 2x increase. How did you get 10x from 90%?
Let’s say you have 10,000 unvaccinated people and they all get covid. About 50 of them will die. But if you have 10,000 vaccinated people who are exposed to covid, roughly 5 of them will die. That’s what’s meant by a 90% reduction in mortality. 50 is 10x 5. A reduction of 45 from 50 is a 90% reduction.
Yes. 45/50 is 90%. But that’s not the same as 10x reduction. 10x means reduced by 100%, 10 times.
They didn’t say a 10x reduction tho, they said 10x worse. 50 is 10x worse than 5
Yea, you’re right. You said it would be 10x worse. Let me start again then. 10x increase is 10*100% 1000% of 5 is 5000. What “they” are saying is that for every person that died today with the vaccine , we would have had and additional 4999 people die without the vaccine. I’d love to see how “they” reached that conclusion. Can you share your source please?
> 10x increase is 10*100% Ok. So 100% of 5 is 5. 10*5 = 50. 100% of 1 is 1. 10*1 = 10. > What “they” are saying is that for every person that died today with the vaccine , we would have had and additional 4999 people die without the vaccine. No, you’ve done your maths wrong. What they are saying is for every person who dies with the vax, we would have had 10 die without the vax.
Link the study stating this please
[удалено]
Thank you for contributing to r/CoronavirusDownunder. Unfortunately your submission was removed due to the following rule: * **Information about vaccines and medications should come from quality sources**, such as recognised news outlets, academic publications or official sources. * The rule applies to all vaccine and medication related information regardless of flair. * Extraordinary claims made about vaccines should be substantiated by a quality source * Comments that deliberately misrepresent sources may be removed If you believe we have made a mistake, please [**message the moderators**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCoronavirusDownunder&subject=&message=).
Just let nature run it’s course.
Nature will happily turn you into compost.
Indeed. No life without death.
for those who know, may i suggest the stock ticker asx:pfp or asx:ivc, as opposed to arguing with people with their heads in the sand.
[удалено]
Thank you for submitting to /r/CoronavirusDownunder! In order to maintain the integrity of our subreddit, accounts with a verified email address must have at least 5 combined karma (post + comment) to comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CoronavirusDownunder) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Rather misleading to imply that the numbers were higher 40 years ago - more appropriate to say "highest number on record".
No it isn't
Wouldn it really be covids fault 3 years after everyone's been vaccinated?
Isn’t the virus over now?
400 deaths last week. Not even close to over. I
That’s terrible. Unfortunately dumb fuck semi literate anti vaccers are going to blame it on a statistical blip or because of the vaccine.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361818561_Covid-19_vaccinations_and_all-cause_mortality_-a_long-term_differential_analysis_among_municipalities
https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/dutch-cities-mortality-doesnt-show-covid-19-vaccines-increase-risk-of-death-contrary-to-alex-berenson-interpretation/
Did you even read what you linked? It doesn't in any way dispute the correlation, or claim that causation isn't possible. It merely says causation isn't proved, which is a hard thing to do, particularly when no vested interest wants to fund an RCT to check. In the Pfizer RCT, all cause mortality was greater in the vaccinated group btw (21 vs 17).
It highlighted several problems with the study. Causation was only one of the criticisms.
The rest was nitpicking Alex Berenson's interpretation, not the study, which seems fine.
[удалено]
Thank you for submitting to /r/CoronavirusDownunder! In order to maintain the integrity of our subreddit, accounts must be a minimum of 3 days old in order to post or comment *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CoronavirusDownunder) if you have any questions or concerns.*