Diving into the Cause of Death data from the ABS provides some sobering learnings regarding what the Australian government did to its people in 2021...
I have a different interpretation. I agree that lockdowns would cause an increase in chronic mortality as you demonstrate. But I don't think you would see any significant counter decrease in acute deaths within the time period you present.
Using your definition of "chronic", I would expect the decrease in acute deaths to be spread out over 1 to 20 years. Obviously, it depends how many life years those who died sooner than expected of their chronic condition had left but in the UK, according to the life tables, an 80 year old still has another 8 to 10 years of expected life on average if they made it that far.
What I think the data really shows is that COVID deaths are over-attributed.
My expectation would be for non-COVID sudden mortality to increase as well as chronic mortality, both during lockdown and in the aftermath due to the higher propensity for these to occur (higher levels of stress, for example) and lower propensity to treat properly (as you have correctly surmised).
As I showed in my two recent England analyses, the official COVID death count includes all the deaths due to what I described above of people who also, coincidentally, happened to either test positive or showed some ancillary symptoms of respiratory disease.
What you should really do is to assume that the sudden mortality deaths continue at the same rate as baseline. This is conservative. And then deduct those deaths you find from the official COVID tally.
What you might find is that there are very few deaths actually "due to" COVID at all. All the excess deaths were caused by government intervention. some were labelled erroneously as COVID. But COVID didn't kill anyone that wasn't already going to die of something else and more often than not, that something else was the government.
When I finally get the CoD data from the ONS for this period, I will most likely corroborate what you have here in the Australian data.
I do agree that misattribution of died "with" COVID would artificially lower mortality counts that were really non-COVID.
I would assume, however, that this would affect both Sudden and Chronic mortality figures equally (as a % of overall for each subcategory). No reason, for example, to think someone with cancer is more/less likely to contract COVID (and thus be falsely labelled as a COVID death) than someone who died of a heart attack.
And, considering Australia had such low mortality figures from even fake COVID deaths through to the end of 2021 (<1200 total COVID in 2021 vs. ~9000 Excess above baseline for the same period) then it stands to reason that the disproportionately high Chronic and disproportionately low Sudden are due to something else.
Further numbers - from Jan to July 2021, Australia did not even hit double figures for weekly COVID deaths (first double figures was Week 1 in August, 2021) for a total of 16 COVID deaths in the first 7 months. Excess Mortality was ~5700 deaths. And, yes, I typed correctly when I wrote 16 total - 21 out of the 30 weeks to that point in 2021 were 0 COVID deaths.
So, once again, while I do feel that you have a legitimate point regarding misattribution of COVID deaths, the low number of COVID deaths in Australia in 2021 gives a very unique ability to directly compare Sudden and Chronic deaths in a non-COVID population. The misattribution would definitely come into play in 2022, for Australia.
Which brings me back to my theory - you treat Chronic illnesses in order to push the deaths away. If you do that successfully then people will still, unfortunately, die but there is a higher chance of Sudden rather than some other Chronic condition.
''What I think the data really shows is that COVID deaths are over-attributed. ''
- No shit ! lol
Here's the thing with the Scottish data. 64K deaths total in 2020. Yet 5,012 of these were NON COVID excess deaths at home. Prior years 2018 and 2019 = >58.5K deaths total. So the majority of these excess deaths in 2020 were NON COVID and due to lockdown then where is your pandemic ? 64k-5k =59K = normal year.
We now KNOW (due to mass testing) about 95% of all excess deaths in scottish homes have always been NON COVID.
Lockdown may have taken out the few who weren't killed by blood clotting, vascular damage, neurological damage, organ damage, immune system damage, etc. caused by what are obviously horrifically dangerous, and ineffective, mRNA COVID injections (see VAERS reports in US). Worse still, medium to long term injection dangers remain to be seen. All for a virus which posed no meaningful danger for the vast majority of people (see IFR data), and virtually zero danger for healthy youngsters.
As yet, no Western government decision maker has admitted either mistakes or culpability. Our NHS is still wrapped in masks. Talk is of again closing schools. No one has said PCR test is flawed or that Vaccine passports were expensive ,coercive and wholly ineffective. The original justification for Lockdowns was to slow the transmission, in order to allow health services to get organised....I thought the original Pandemic plan contained that. After that ..why did we lock up people? Did anyone think a virus can actually be contained?---- Of course we cannot get asking the questions ,let alone anyone to answer.
Some researchers and MDs assert it was a matter of proper treatment and if we had this there would not have been a "pandemic." That is an unwarranted assumption. When has it ever been a thing that people had to have IVM, HCQ, or a bunch of supplements on board every time a virus came around to prevent death?
There was a never a pandemic and no unique viral pathogen that required extraordinary measures.
The excess mortality was CAUSED by aggressive government and medical actions that stressed and isolated fragile groups, not by denying treatment of infection for a particular pathogen.
Infection took hold and worsened because the vulnerable individuals were further weakened by added pharma toxins, psychological attacks and social isolation.
"Non-treatment" and "abusive treatment took many forms: denial of antibiotic use , remdesivir, vents, hosital. closures etc. The 2nd amplified the first. Objective: to maximise death.
None of this is contingent on there being a particular pathogen. Outright fear, psychological stress, pre-existing health conditions (mutually reinforcing in the cohort with these) and health system closure/denial of treatment for a "range" of infections/conditions increased the pool of vulnerable people.
This was and is a massive operation folks not an epidemiological event.
Off topic but I have just found, to my complete and utter astonishment, that there is a mainstream journalist, Frank Chung, from the Courier Mail, publishing accurate stories about vaccine injury in Australia. Long piece on Kerry Phelps' vaccine injury just appeared; she herself is on OZSAGE, which I didn't know.
You've got enough data in your various categories to run matched pair T-tests to reassure the pessimists among us that you really have significant differences between the two groups.
Working on 2022 now. Just need to make sure all the graphs are correct.
Needed to establish the 2021 Baseline, and in doing so show the Lockdown effect first. Because 2022 comes on the back of that and you need to show that the Lockdown effect still sits underneath it. Viewing 2022 with the Lockdown effect allows you to properly view 2022, and the changes that occur.
Should be this weekend. Next weekend at the latest.
I don’t know about ABS data, more people commenting about funerals this year. Oldies commenting on their new dodgy hips, looking frail, cardiologist visits, arthritic painful necks etc. Hear it a lot. Covid, in its entirety, is a mass disabling event. Fully expect with all the younger, new migrants in Australia, “democracy” will vote for nationalising individual superannuation accounts from the older traditional classes.
Well, I did make a mention of isolation would have increased depression and led to an upswing in Causes like Neurodegenerative (Alzheimer's and Parkinson's), but you can probably add some effect into Diabetes (not looking after yourself) as well.
The social effects of lockdowns most definitely had a negative effect.
I have a different interpretation. I agree that lockdowns would cause an increase in chronic mortality as you demonstrate. But I don't think you would see any significant counter decrease in acute deaths within the time period you present.
Using your definition of "chronic", I would expect the decrease in acute deaths to be spread out over 1 to 20 years. Obviously, it depends how many life years those who died sooner than expected of their chronic condition had left but in the UK, according to the life tables, an 80 year old still has another 8 to 10 years of expected life on average if they made it that far.
What I think the data really shows is that COVID deaths are over-attributed.
My expectation would be for non-COVID sudden mortality to increase as well as chronic mortality, both during lockdown and in the aftermath due to the higher propensity for these to occur (higher levels of stress, for example) and lower propensity to treat properly (as you have correctly surmised).
As I showed in my two recent England analyses, the official COVID death count includes all the deaths due to what I described above of people who also, coincidentally, happened to either test positive or showed some ancillary symptoms of respiratory disease.
What you should really do is to assume that the sudden mortality deaths continue at the same rate as baseline. This is conservative. And then deduct those deaths you find from the official COVID tally.
What you might find is that there are very few deaths actually "due to" COVID at all. All the excess deaths were caused by government intervention. some were labelled erroneously as COVID. But COVID didn't kill anyone that wasn't already going to die of something else and more often than not, that something else was the government.
When I finally get the CoD data from the ONS for this period, I will most likely corroborate what you have here in the Australian data.
I do agree that misattribution of died "with" COVID would artificially lower mortality counts that were really non-COVID.
I would assume, however, that this would affect both Sudden and Chronic mortality figures equally (as a % of overall for each subcategory). No reason, for example, to think someone with cancer is more/less likely to contract COVID (and thus be falsely labelled as a COVID death) than someone who died of a heart attack.
And, considering Australia had such low mortality figures from even fake COVID deaths through to the end of 2021 (<1200 total COVID in 2021 vs. ~9000 Excess above baseline for the same period) then it stands to reason that the disproportionately high Chronic and disproportionately low Sudden are due to something else.
Further numbers - from Jan to July 2021, Australia did not even hit double figures for weekly COVID deaths (first double figures was Week 1 in August, 2021) for a total of 16 COVID deaths in the first 7 months. Excess Mortality was ~5700 deaths. And, yes, I typed correctly when I wrote 16 total - 21 out of the 30 weeks to that point in 2021 were 0 COVID deaths.
So, once again, while I do feel that you have a legitimate point regarding misattribution of COVID deaths, the low number of COVID deaths in Australia in 2021 gives a very unique ability to directly compare Sudden and Chronic deaths in a non-COVID population. The misattribution would definitely come into play in 2022, for Australia.
Which brings me back to my theory - you treat Chronic illnesses in order to push the deaths away. If you do that successfully then people will still, unfortunately, die but there is a higher chance of Sudden rather than some other Chronic condition.
''What I think the data really shows is that COVID deaths are over-attributed. ''
- No shit ! lol
Here's the thing with the Scottish data. 64K deaths total in 2020. Yet 5,012 of these were NON COVID excess deaths at home. Prior years 2018 and 2019 = >58.5K deaths total. So the majority of these excess deaths in 2020 were NON COVID and due to lockdown then where is your pandemic ? 64k-5k =59K = normal year.
We now KNOW (due to mass testing) about 95% of all excess deaths in scottish homes have always been NON COVID.
Conclusion, DELIBERATE DEMOCIDE.
Thanks, ManDownUnder - it is good to see another Aussie.
Are you from Danwu Andrews' fiefdom?
And thanks Joel, for forwarding his Sub as I had not come across him before.
Nah, mate, I'm from Berejiklistan! Weather's a bit better up here :)
Oi!
I am a SW Sydney fibro. It is another beaut day.
She was the most mild among the feral lot, was babe Gladys.
The remix youtube clip of her was hilarious though
Lockdown may have taken out the few who weren't killed by blood clotting, vascular damage, neurological damage, organ damage, immune system damage, etc. caused by what are obviously horrifically dangerous, and ineffective, mRNA COVID injections (see VAERS reports in US). Worse still, medium to long term injection dangers remain to be seen. All for a virus which posed no meaningful danger for the vast majority of people (see IFR data), and virtually zero danger for healthy youngsters.
Ah, the good old vaccines...
Coming in a new post soon. Still finalising the graphs for 2022 to make sure I don't make any mistakes that people can rightly bash me over.
Ozzies are being genocided like everyone else. The end.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/12/10/incredibly-high-excess-deaths-must-be-investigated-says-australias-top-actuary-body/
Gotta get to her on Twitter and get her onto Substack's like Arkmedic.
As yet, no Western government decision maker has admitted either mistakes or culpability. Our NHS is still wrapped in masks. Talk is of again closing schools. No one has said PCR test is flawed or that Vaccine passports were expensive ,coercive and wholly ineffective. The original justification for Lockdowns was to slow the transmission, in order to allow health services to get organised....I thought the original Pandemic plan contained that. After that ..why did we lock up people? Did anyone think a virus can actually be contained?---- Of course we cannot get asking the questions ,let alone anyone to answer.
Some researchers and MDs assert it was a matter of proper treatment and if we had this there would not have been a "pandemic." That is an unwarranted assumption. When has it ever been a thing that people had to have IVM, HCQ, or a bunch of supplements on board every time a virus came around to prevent death?
There was a never a pandemic and no unique viral pathogen that required extraordinary measures.
The excess mortality was CAUSED by aggressive government and medical actions that stressed and isolated fragile groups, not by denying treatment of infection for a particular pathogen.
Infection took hold and worsened because the vulnerable individuals were further weakened by added pharma toxins, psychological attacks and social isolation.
"Non-treatment" and "abusive treatment took many forms: denial of antibiotic use , remdesivir, vents, hosital. closures etc. The 2nd amplified the first. Objective: to maximise death.
None of this is contingent on there being a particular pathogen. Outright fear, psychological stress, pre-existing health conditions (mutually reinforcing in the cohort with these) and health system closure/denial of treatment for a "range" of infections/conditions increased the pool of vulnerable people.
This was and is a massive operation folks not an epidemiological event.
But 2022 is far worse, for a different reason. The jabs , which not only kill but were ineffective against Omicron
Working on 2022. Just gotta make sure my graphs are accurate. Maybe next weekend, if all goes well.
Nice.
Off topic but I have just found, to my complete and utter astonishment, that there is a mainstream journalist, Frank Chung, from the Courier Mail, publishing accurate stories about vaccine injury in Australia. Long piece on Kerry Phelps' vaccine injury just appeared; she herself is on OZSAGE, which I didn't know.
You've got enough data in your various categories to run matched pair T-tests to reassure the pessimists among us that you really have significant differences between the two groups.
I think you'll find 2022 will make your eyes bulge. Aside from large numbers of Covid(?) deaths the death rates have really taken off - https://gab.com/Animal_Acts/posts/109477423351774868
Working on 2022 now. Just need to make sure all the graphs are correct.
Needed to establish the 2021 Baseline, and in doing so show the Lockdown effect first. Because 2022 comes on the back of that and you need to show that the Lockdown effect still sits underneath it. Viewing 2022 with the Lockdown effect allows you to properly view 2022, and the changes that occur.
Should be this weekend. Next weekend at the latest.
I don’t know about ABS data, more people commenting about funerals this year. Oldies commenting on their new dodgy hips, looking frail, cardiologist visits, arthritic painful necks etc. Hear it a lot. Covid, in its entirety, is a mass disabling event. Fully expect with all the younger, new migrants in Australia, “democracy” will vote for nationalising individual superannuation accounts from the older traditional classes.
Lockdown was THEE crime, telling us, this is jail. Now go to your cell
You do not factor in how stress contributes to mortality. Covid =detox. No pathogen! The only cause of death greater than government is doctors.
Well, I did make a mention of isolation would have increased depression and led to an upswing in Causes like Neurodegenerative (Alzheimer's and Parkinson's), but you can probably add some effect into Diabetes (not looking after yourself) as well.
The social effects of lockdowns most definitely had a negative effect.