Lying with Statistics
|

Lessons From the NZ Government: Lying With Statistics

Analysis of Covid-19 attributed deaths … shows convincingly here in Aotearoa that getting boosted is one of the most important things you can do to reduce your risk of death from Covid-19. Very consistent with the international evidence.

ASHLEY BLOOMFIELD LYING WITH STATISTICS

In his 307th and final pandemic press conference on 27 July 2022, Dr Bloomfield also stated that “People not fully vaccinated against Covid-19, that is, they’ve had less than two doses, are six times more likely to die if they catch Covid-19 compared with someone if they’ve had at least one booster dose“.

Multiple governments including our own appear to be lying with statistics in lockstep. A room full of ‘accredited journalists’ may accept Dr Bloomfield as their single ‘source of truth’. Away from the podium however, an ever-increasing number of informed citizens are looking beyond government claims about the Covid-19 narrative as multiple analysts present available data in accessible forms for public review.

Two essential features of infectious disease surveillance are clear and specific definitions of data components, such as “cases”, “vaccination status”, and “attributed death”; and accurate input of relevant and reliable data. This requires a functional system allowing for easy extraction of compatible data points for informative analysis.

Lying About Cases

The MOH require laboratory evidence to meet the definition of a confirmed Covid-19 case. Four different testing methods are listed, three of which rely on PCR.

The issue of PCR testing has been well documented, for example by New Zealand forensic microbiologist Dr Robin Wakeling; English pathologist Dr Clare Craig; and perhaps most robustly, the 22 authors of the famous Corman-Drosten Review including American microbiologist and PCR specialist, Kevin McKernan. Scientist and creator of the PCR test, Kary Mullis insisted that PCR should not be used as a diagnostic tool.

The flaws in using singular PCR for diagnosis make the definition of a confirmed case immediately unreliable. This is without considering other issues such as the violation of removing doctors from the diagnostic process, discarding the use of multiplex tests for differential diagnosis, and bias in testing requirements towards more testing of the unvaccinated.

Lying About Vaccination Status

This is detailed in The Hatchard Report on 8 July 2022 and 16 June 2022, and in The Exposé in March 2022. The government are clearly misrepresenting data in order to promote ongoing vaccination using products in which risk of harm increases with each successive dose.

The case definition for what constitutes being vaccinated is extremely important for a number of reasons. For example, someone with a history of only having one inoculation is defined as “unvaccinated”, and any vaccine given less than seven days ago is not counted in an individual’s vaccination status. This inflates the proportions of unvaccinated and partially vaccinated in reports of cases, hospitalisations and deaths.

Lying About Death Attribution

There are a number of ways to dishonestly claim Covid-19 as cause of death. This was covered by Guy Hatchard recently, as we reported here. They largely relate back to lying about cases.

If a cancer patient admitted to hospice for palliative care is required to have a Covid-19 PCR test upon admission which returns a positive result, then their death will be recorded as a Covid-19 attributed death. There is no requirement for respiratory symptoms, clinical assessment or differential diagnosis. The inconsequential presence of other viral species transiting through a person’s upper respiratory tract, as occurs multiple times throughout every lifespan beginning at birth, is (rightly) not invesitgated and SARS-Cov-II should be treated in the same way.

Most of us will remember the devastating footage out of Brazil last year, of babies and children dying in the hundreds. Trusted News Initiative sources headlined these as Covid-19 deaths. This was confusing given what is known about Covid-19 in childhood. Yet in the detail of their reports they frequently touched upon a much more likely cause of childhood illness which presents with multiple symptoms including respiratory disease: malnutrition resulting from the economic devastation of lockdown policy. Is this why Brazil’s paediatricians were reluctant to test their patients for Covid-19?

“More than half of Brazilians — 116 million people — faced food insecurity in 2020. Of those, 19 million people, or 9% of the population, are starving”

COVID-19 IS KILLING BRAZILIAN CHILDREN AT ALARMING RATES
CNN, PARTNER OF PFIZER, JUNE 2021

The November 2021 homicide of a 40 year old gunshot victim in Auckland, who tested PCR positive post mortem, exposes just how ludicrous these lies are. Another example is a 15yo boy in Australia who returned a positive Covid-19 PCR test prior to his death from pneumococcal meningitis. Deaths entirely unrelated to Covid-19 which occur within 28 days of testing positive are all counted as Covid-19 attributed.

See this 2021 review of Florida death certificates for further examples which help to highlight the significance of co-morbidities. These methods of lying with statistics are clear breaches of epidemiological integrity.

Lying with Models

Mathematical modeling is used in infectious disease epidemiology to predict the possible scale of epidemics, assist in planning control interventions and monitor outbreak progress. They come with enormous potential for inadvertent and deliberate error.

Perhaps the best known mathematical model is Imperial College London’s March 2020 report which recommended a range of population wide measures known now as “lockdown”, to avoid catastrophe including health system collapse. This team was led by Professor Neil Ferguson who is well known for wildly overestimating epidemics. The benefits of lockdown were shown to be distorted by the moderate public health approach taken in Sweden, and other real world data emerging across the globe over time.

In June 2022 The Lancet published an article claiming that the Covid-19 vaccines had saved “tens of millions of lives”. This was based on a mathematical modeling study undertaken by researchers, again at Imperial College, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), World Health Organisation (WHO) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; to name the three most obviously conflicted interests. Public Health Physician and infectious disease / global health expert Dr David Bell evaluated the study’s findings and suggests yet more research conclusions motivated by vested interests at the cost of human life.

Similar modelling is used in New Zealand via Te Pūnaha Matatini who claimed in September 2021 that high vaccination rates were needed to avoid thousands of Covid-19 deaths a year. In response, New Zealand is experiencing an explosion of independent data analysts working to alert the general public and health care community alike, that the truth is not being represented by these conflicted government departments. One example is KIBA Media who shared this analysis on 4 August 2022 using the Minstry of Health’s own data.

Update # 4 August 3, 2022: The Omicron sub-variants BA.5 and BA.4 became “dominant” in New Zealand, according to the Ministry of Health, around July 11, 2022. These highly transmissible strains are the justification used by the Covid Response Minister, Dr Ayesha Verrall, to roll-out the 4th shot to the 50+ age group. Since then, death rates in Aotearoa have skyrocketed. The graph above show the vaccination status of deaths where Covid was the cause or a contributing factor within 28 days of the date of death. 91.6% of these recent deaths in the 70+ age group were either fully vaccinated or boosted“.

International studies also directly contradict the Ministry’s claims regarding boosters. Recent data from the Netherlands (only available in Dutch) shows that efficacy wanes quickly, and seven months after mRNA Covid-19 inoculation the risk of severe disease, hospitalization and intensive care substantially increases. Whilst boosters seem to initially reverse this negative efficacy, the effect is short lasting and each subsequent dose appears to offer less protection, for a shorter period of time. See Alex Berenson’s review of the Dutch study for more detail. Medical blogger Arkmedic offers analysis of Australian data suggesting that boosters are associated with increased rates of infection, hospitalisation and death, and covering in some detail the tangled web of conflicted financial interests involved in dishonest reporting.

It has become abundantly clear that the most honest information is not available via government or mainstream media. Politics and corporate interests have interfered with public health to such a degree that the absurdities are offensive and catastrophic. At no time has it been more crucial for the medical and public health community, and general public, to scrutinise the interpretations and possible conflicts of interest, of once-trusted authorities against those of independent experts.

Watch: Same Data, Different Interpretation

Another great production from social media influencer, Coronavirus Plushie.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 628 Average: 1.2]
Share this post

Similar Posts