Important Data: Delta Variant Not So Bad

According to this ongoing analysis by a data scientist in Israel… the story is that in the last month we have seen the precipitous failure of the vaccines in terms of mortality. Look at the trend. This is happening now, in real time… and cumulative data analysis won’t tell the story right now because the corner was just turned (in Israel at least) in the last month. The same appears to be happening in Scotland. We have to watch the week-to-week to see this right now IMO.
I believe the variants are real. Why? Well, first off, Geert Vanden Bossche predicted just this scenario, i.e. that the vaccines could and would cause the emergence of vaccine-resistant strains. Also I have seen several papers that look at antibody responses to the different strains that actually show the reduced neutralizing capability of the vaccinal antibodies… was this all made up? It doesn’t exactly build confidence in the vaccines if it is made up. I like David Martin very much, but a small percentage of what he says baffles me…
https://twitter.com/MatanHolzer/status/1413202799102414851

Well, since no mRNA serum (“vaccine”) sterilizes the body of SARS COV2, since no mRNA serum prevents infection of SARS COV2, since no mRNA serum prevents the transmission of SARS COV2, since no mRNA serum prevents one from becoming ill with COVID19, I would have to say that every single strain of SARS COV2, along with any real, or fictional, variant of SARS COV2…IS “VACCINE” RESISTANT.
Every aspect of the original pandemic pathogen, including the original pathogen, is resistant to all the mRNA serums, currently being injected into the unwitting.
SARS COV2 was created at the “University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill” under contract with the NIAID, managed by Dr. Fauci, and patented on April 19th, 2002, Patent Number 7279327. SARS COV2 is entirely artificial, being a chimera, which it would HAVE TO BE…in order to be allowed a Patent…as it is NOT POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN A PATENT ON ANY NATURAL ORGANISM, OR NATURALLY OCCURRING VIRUS.
There is nothing NOVEL…or NEW…about this virus, nor the fictional “vaccine” for it.

Thanks, Grover. I would really like someone to tell me/us why this information, presented by David Martin, is not true, or that it is not relevant to his conclusion, or…?.
https://www.brighteon.com/a569c7c9-9572-47ed-ba3c-130b0c13aa55

Since you may download the entire document pack, which includes all the Patents involved and may access these same documents directly from the Patent Office,…nothing Dr. David Martin has stated is subject to doubt. You will note Dr. Martin does not go into detail regarding motivations of the criminals involved. He stops after he proves, beyond doubt, the lies behind the origins of this pandemic…and its creators.

Totally agree, Just measuring the data for hospitalisation/ICU/deaths of vac vs unvac without considering the general population ratios of these vac vs unvac by age groups is why this table looks weird.
To say it simply more unvac people appear to be admitted to hospital in the <50 age group because more people in the <50 age group are unvac in the general population?
So is it possible that what we are seeing is vacc vs unvac people suffering deaths and hospitalisation in a ratio similar to that of the general population?
If this is true and the ratios are similar then it’s probably just more evidence to support that the vaccine doesn’t really have a significant impact on whether are person fairs well with the delta virus or not.
Am I missing something? Seems pretty obvious to me.

Follow this link to download a 205 page document with all the info for >5000 patents issued for the creation and exploitation of SARS-COV2. If you look these up on the US Patent Office website, you will see that they are legitimate.
https://www.davidmartin.world/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The_Fauci_COVID-19_Dossier.pdf

Yes, when speaking with someone about the UK data , I did caveat that they took AZ and not the MRNA. So it seems we may be seeing some ADE with the UK data. However, this could explain why we see something different with the Israel. That data shows almost no difference, and seems to say it makes no difference for vaxxed vs unvaxxed. But again, you have to be cautious with that, as there is such much smaller subset of unvaxxed people there. You are working with a population that is more than 70% vaxxed.

Thanks, Ision… (now for the rest of the story… from the lawsuit?)

I wasn’t using Chris’s video, I was using the actual data which you can see at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1001358/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_18.pdf
The CFR amongst the total unvaccinated group is 0.13% so you are correct to assert that it should be less than 0.2%. However that still leaves us to account for the somewhat suspicious difference between the over 50s in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.

The issue with this is who exactly are these remaining unvaccinated in the over 50s population? If they are people who couldn’t take it because they are frail and close to death then again this will give very skewed numbers about vaccine effectiveness. If they are healthy but unvaccinated people between the age of 50 and 85 then the vaccine is working. So basically the PHE report is utterly useless without that information. Cheers.

  1. Particularly in the 50-65 age group, anybody with a preexisting condition was pushed pretty hard to get a vaccine. At least around here a higher percent of vaccinated people are generally unhealthy and therefore more likely to have complications.
  2. Do we know anything about outcomes for people who already had covid?
    I heard a comment that in areas with low rates of vaccination, a lot of people (20%+) already had covid. They will show as unvaccinated, but if it’s more likely they could be re-infected by the delta variant, they still might end up with milder cases in the same way politicians claim the vaccinated have milder cases.
    CHRIS, do you have any data on reinfection rates at all? Data on outcome of vaccination of people who already had covid?

Sorry, I personally know people in India with family members who died of the delta variant. Just saying, harmless is probably NOT the appropriate term. Now it is true that in the US and UK, you get oxygen if you need it. In India, the consensus from folks who were dealing with it was that for average middle class people, hospitals were a crap shoot. Your grandma could easily end up stranded on the cement outside with NO treatment and the rest of the family either got exposed to the other covid patients or left her there alone.
Just saying, while it’s not ebola, it’s also not harmless, especially for vulnerable populations. And in the US that appears to include high risk already unhealthy over 50’s, even if vaccinated. Maybe vaccination didn’t decrease the risk as much as “they” would like us to believe.

Barbara and Chris, I love all the UK data but I had the same question as Barbara regarding natural immunity. Of the 170,000 cases with the delta variant, were there any cases who had natural immunity and still got the delta variant? I know they are not tracking this information and I want to know why. I think the likely answer is natural immunity is better than the vaccine. I have natural immunity and have been directly exposed by my daughter who I had to drive home from college (she had head cold symptoms only) and six months the later, my husband who was half vaccinated. I did not test positive either time and had zero symptoms except for leg aches. Is anyone doing any natural immunity studies anymore?

I think we’re too early in “the delta wave” to be able to confidently make statements about the variant being “not so bad.” In the UK the case rates didn’t really start accelerating until about 4 weeks. In the September wave the increase in deaths lagged the increase in cases by almost 4 weeks. So, they may be just at the start of the exponential growth in deaths. This is all complicated further by the large number of vaccinated in the UK which wasn’t a factor last fall.
The data Chris presented is encouraging but man, the data quality is so questionable these days. I have a hard time feeling confident about anything at this point.
Does anyone here work in a hospital (or know someone who does) in an area where case rates have increased recently? If so, what are you seeing/hearing about how this variant is behaving? I saw a story somewhere (not sure where) that claimed delta was hitting people faster and harder than previous variants. Maybe that is just propaganda. Who knows anymore.

Hey, great conversation and use of data in this thread! Thank you everyone who is adding to this.
I wish we had better data with which to work.
Already many of you have pointed out the limitations. We don’t know:

  1. Which vaccines were under or over-represented in the UK hospitalization and death data. It would be great to know if the people showing up with the Delta in the hospital were AZ or Pfizer jabbed, for example. You can be 100% sure this data exists, I just couldn't find it.
  2. We don't know the preexisting health status of those who ended up in the hospital.
  3. We don't know that these people died OF Covid or WITH Covid. In a sample size as large as a country, hey, people die. It happens. Heart attacks, strokes, etc are a part of the daily routine. So how do we know that these people who were reported as dying of Covid actually did? We don't, and our prior experience says that there's a lot of overcounting because of the arbitrary "died any time within 28 days of a positive test" inclusion criteria.
  4. We don't know why people who weren't vaccinated haven't done so. Maybe they had underlying conditions that prevented? Maybe their health status is not unbiased?
But here's what we do know. At the highest possible level, and without having to adjust for anything, we can compare the 170,023 with detected Delta variant infection to the total number that died of/with that variant (330) and derive an overall death rate (so, far, we can expect it to climb a bit over time perhaps?) of 0.2% (more accurately 0.194%). We can also say that in the under 50 crowd, whether vaccinated or not, that as SDHodges rightly pointed out, the numbers can and should be rounded to zero:
Vaccinated under 50: 2 deaths from 5600 cases = CFR 0.04% (normally reported as 0.0%) Unvaccinated under 50: 21 deaths from 70664 cases = CFR 0.03% (normally reported as 0.0%)
And those numbers are seriously underreported as well because the total "cases" reported is actually 170,023 and the "cases" reported in the hospital add up to ~76,000. This, of course, reveals the true difference between an "infection fatality rate" or IFR and a true "case fatality rate" or CFR which should always be distinguished from one another. For the under 50 crowd, the data as given does not reflect any protective effect of vaccines, but we don't know the true prevalence of vaccination rates within the populations that finally arrived at the hospitals. Perhaps they came from a low vaccination area in which case you get one conclusion. Perhaps they came from high vaccination areas in which case you get another. We don't know except to say that the Delta variant doesn't seem to lead to much death in the under 50 crowd. The total IFR, as reported then - across all age groups and all vaccination statuses - is ~0.2%. This is a maximum because not every infection is detected. Many if not most go unreported and undetected as they are entirely asymptomatic or lightly symptomatic and could easily be mistaken for a common cold. The CFR, as reported, for both vaccinated and unvaccinated in the under 50 cohort are both effectively at zero. Where I should have been more careful was in adjusting for the vaccination status of the over 50 populations which would have revealed a decent and respectable hazard ratio improvement. Note: My data gives my 158 deaths in vaccinated (all vaccine status columns) otherwise from SDHodges:
Vaccinated over 50: 158 deaths from 5,234 cases = CFR 3.02% Unvaccinated over 50: 71 deaths from 1267 cases = CFR 5.6%
That's a huge improvement, especially once you adjust for vaccine prevalence. Back of the envelope ... if we assume 90% vaccinated in the over 50 crowd we would have expected to see 12,670 true cases and 710 deaths (obtained by dividing the unvaccinated numbers by 0.1). Instead, we saw only 41% the cases and only 22% of the 'expected' deaths. However, again, we can't simply do that because we don't know if the 10% unvaccinated over 50 crowd is a fair sample with the same underlying health status as the vaccinated crowd. My instinct (and personal experiences/anecdotes) say that most vaccine-hesitant people have somewhat worse underlying disease conditions. Bottom line: It's all very complex and it'd be swell if we had better data! But the data we do have says that "the Delta Variant is less deadly" That much is (so far) true. Also, the decision to get a vaccine is not straightforward and is an important individual choice. It makes sense for some. Not for others. At least not based on the data we have. Why is this so hard of an idea for many to grasp? I'm personally not worried by the delta variant. It's definitely vastly more transmissive and my prediction is this - we're going to see case counts fall dramatically in the coming months as the virus runs out of permissive hosts because both vaccinated and natural immunity will combine to create actual herd immunity. Unless....Geert's immune escape thing comes to pass. Then we'll have to see.  

> For the vast majority of people covid is no more than a cough and a bad cold, so we could speculate anybody over the age of 50 who has been fully vaccinated and thinks they are invincible may well pass off covid as simple cold symptoms and not get tested.
Say that to the four million fatalities so far. As for the role of the current vaccines, we’ll wait for you to catch up.

> We don’t know that these people died OF Covid or WITH Covid.
This may sound confusing, but is it not possible to, instead of ‘of’ and ‘with’, apply ‘because of’? Otherwise it does confused. Cheers, Mr Chris!

Is there a protocol that indicates 40 or 28? A year ago WHO protocol called for testing to 40 Ct. With introduction of vax, CDC has changed to 28 … I guess they wanted the ‘virus’ to look as bad as they could manage it (denying HCQ, IVM, etc), and the ‘vax’ to look as good as they could manage it. So - any Ct info?

Hi Chris
I chose to concentrate on the data for the fully vaccinated and the unvaccinated because we would always have the government/pharma arguments that you have to do that comparison because the partially vaccinated are not a good guide. As it turns out there is no FFFiing difference even in the under 50’s so why are they suggesting vaccinating children with experimental vaccines!

New view of UK data… it appears that the beams have been crossed.
https://twitter.com/ClareCraigPath/status/1415677813919678486