For the bottom ten per cent in the US, life expectancy is about 20 years less than in most other equivalent n countries at just 36 years.
Gun deaths and opiate addiction are the obvious factors making up the difference, but healthcare must also come into it.
There are few health care things which, if you’ve survived childhood, are likely to kill you before you’re 35 or 40. Drugs and guns, yes, but few health care things. That “must” is an incorrect assumption.
Meanwhile he advocates a Fusion of state and business – where have I seen that before? He would need to lose a few pounds, dye his hair and get a pencil moustache but the direction of travel is clear:
Deep down we all know what that song is. It requires that we spend more on our public services. It demands that we re-distribute wealth from those who save it to those who need it. And it requires that we talk about society again.
That means that we do not treat government as separate from business , or business as being in competition with individuals, but that instead we look at how, working together, we can create better outcomes for everyone.
I hear a lot of people in that age cohort are catching myocarditis.
And he’s concerned by events in the US.
What is apparent is that the Trump supporters in the party want to bring democracy down and are intent on achieving that goal. As we watch fascists are trying to end democracy in the country that prided itself above all else on being a democracy above all else.
The risk of democratic failure in the US is now very real.
And where the US goes others follow.
The demise of choice – the ultimate goal of the neoliberal philosophy – is happening
The last sentence is amusing.
The man who
– Wants to ban flying
– Wants to ban people eating meat
– Wants to ban his political opponents from accessing social media
– Wants to ban smoking
Is lamenting the ‘demise of choice’?
As for his contention I’d add in a few other reasons why the bottom 10% are struggling
– Diversity, equity and Inclusion
– Commitment to ‘Net Zero’ making food and transport unaffordable
– Unlimited migration destroying the value of benefits
– A massive government bureaucracy that means the economy is crippled but which delivers no services
Of course the kicker being that he proposes the continuation and expansion of all these in the UK even though eventually they will reduce the life expectancy of the bottom 95% to zero, as per WEF guidelines.
Yes, but you can’t imply it’s because of the “V” word. That’s why “Died Suddenly” has become a euphemism to add to the classic list of other obituary euphemisms like “He Didn’t Suffer Fools Gladly” (he was a bastard) or “Was a confirmed bachelor” (was a committed homosexualist).
Which are these “equivalent countries” that have 14% African-American population?
“Passionate about the environment” (troughing lunatic who wants to starve your family to death)
“Committed to antiracism” (hates white people and Jews)
“The adults are back in charge” (we’ve just installed an Indian midget to stop you from getting any conservative stuff, fuck you)
Dearieme – Africa holds the future of the West’s workforce.
Which is why Baltimore is such a thriving city and everybody loves being in Tottenham after dark.
Yes, but you can’t imply it’s because of the “V” word
Heaven forfend – hence “catching”.
Africa holds the future of the West’s workforce
Funny you should say that. My daughter is a physiotherapist and she is currently mentoring a Nigerian who the NHS recruited over there. Are there no physiotherapists in the UK looking for jobs?
I think you will find it is complete bollox.
“Life expectancy at birth ranged from 68.8 years in the lowest SES decile” (1)
Took me 2 mins to check that outlier stat was wrong.
But there is higher infant mortality (because abortion access is retricted), and they do tend to shoot each other quite a lot.
(1) https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fgeronb%2Fgbac030
I hear a lot of people in that age cohort are catching myocarditis.
Yes, but you can’t imply it’s because of the “V” word. That’s why “Died Suddenly” has become a euphemism to add to the classic list of other obituary euphemisms like “He Didn’t Suffer Fools Gladly” (he was a bastard) or “Was a confirmed bachelor” (was a committed homosexualist).
Given that myocarditis is listed on the information leaflet as a known side effect why do they need to get all conspiratorial?
Furthermore, all unexplained deaths have to be investigated by a coroner, a branch of the judiciary that is fiercely independent how are they getting away with this conspiracy?
People drop dead for no apparent reason quite often. Pre Covid a neighbour, 40, grandmother, very healthy, outward going and a popular manager of the local pub got up from the breakfast table and dropped dead. When they did the autopsy it turned out she was dead before she hit the ground.
” all unexplained deaths have to be investigated by a coroner, ”
Yeah, but they are often explained in medical terms for the coroner to rubber-stamp, although a few have blamed the V. But not all vaccine deaths are of the drop dead variety., some of the excess deaths (and that there is an excess is not in dispute) are from heart problems not contemperaneous with the V, or ‘turbo cancer, ditto. Those of us who doubt the narrative want a proper investigation. With post-mortems and histology which can detect vaccine-related organ damage.
BiND – People drop dead for no apparent reason quite often.
I never heard of so many people in their 40’s dying of Suddenly before they all got Mystery Jabs.
Excess deaths are still way up since the Mystery Jabs. The only thing our trusted medical experts (clap clap clap!) all seem to agree on is that it couldn’t possibly be the Mystery Jabs, that’s an outrageous allegation.
TG – I’m afraid you don’t understand how the modern economy works.
If we simply import foreigners to do the jobs British people won’t do (for the comedy wages we want to offer), export to India the jobs British people thought they were going to do (hello Infosys), and make all other non-public-sector jobs illegal, unaffordable, or – let’s be realistic here – both, we will all get RICH*
This Is What Conservatives Actually Believe.
*after 60% of the UK’s legally mandated Net Zero “savings” are taken directly out of what the British government calls your “lifestyle”. I.e. the things you need to live.
I never heard of so many people in their 40’s dying of Suddenly before they all got Mystery Jabs.
Citation needed
Yeah, but they are often explained in medical terms for the coroner to rubber-stamp, although a few have blamed the V. But not all vaccine deaths are of the drop dead variety., some of the excess deaths (and that there is an excess is not in dispute) are from heart problems not contemperaneous with the V, or ‘turbo cancer, ditto. Those of us who doubt the narrative want a proper investigation. With post-mortems and histology which can detect vaccine-related organ damage.>/i>
Fair enough, and if there are some issues it may take years to come through in the data. But so far all we see is shouty conspiracy claims when the data to date shows that the vast majority of the older population is better off vaccinated.
https://x.com/ActuaryByDay/status/1709509805289730309?s=20
BiND
That ONS dataset has been analysed/challenged by Fenton and others and errors pointed out.
It actually doesn’t show what the ONS claims it does. Or, if it does, it also then proves (using the same denominators) that the Covid vaccines are very effective cures for non-Covid deaths such as cancer, heart disease etc. Which is self-evidently nonsense. Or that there are other factors in play, such as (for example) healthy vaccinated effects (to explain the non-Covid anomalies), but which then of course one must also take into account in looking at the Covid comparison graph you’ve provided.
Hence, it’s simply not reliable/useful for the purpose claimed, however much people would like it to be.
BiND –
Citation needed
It’s there in the subject, my brother in clotted cream. Very first word in the sentence.
Which is completely subjective, obvs. But who am I meant to believe, my own lying eyes? (Source: me)
I never heard of so many people in apparently robust middle age keeling over and dying before. The Vaccinated World is plagued with mysteriously elevated death rates across most age groups. Random ink splotches, or a pattern?
I dunno, but I have a reckon.
As that thread makes clear a lot of people having been using the wrong data and it isn’t the ONS. There’s so much data in the public domain we’re now beyond a couple of people showing that the establishment is one massive conspiracy, that’s 9/11 conspiracy theory territory.
By all means take rhoda’s position that it’s too early to tell but to be claiming there’s a massive problem with people dying is not only nonsense, it’s Wakefield level dangerous.
“As that thread makes clear a lot of people having been using the wrong data and it isn’t the ONS”
Yes, because the ONS really knows how many people there are in the country……..in some age ranges the number of jabs given managed to be over 100% of the declared population, which is a good trick if you can manage it.
BiND – the graphic in that link is unhelpful because it is not raw ONS data (and goodness knows how dodgy that has proved) but ONS data compiled by a third-party group with no assumptions declared in their modelling.
Lumping together infants with over 90’s and then producing an age-standardised concoction is a bit cheeky.
There is no definition given of what vaccinated and unvaccinated actually mean. In ONS terms “unvaccinated” includes “vaccinated within the last 14/21 days” a period in which the shot is deemed by the manufacturers not to have become effective but during which paradoxically the risk of infection and of adverse events is enhanced.
Try this thread for a thoroughgoing examination which considers excess all cause mortality without considering vaccination status.
Compelling stuff. Joel Smalley’s own substack is the place to go (as well as Norman Fenton’s) for thorough analyses.
Gosh. Proud racism and antivax conspiracy guff (almost) all the way down.
Hate to be a miserable old fuck, but ‘below the line’ around here used to be a good read with just a smattering of that sort of thing. I guess pandering to MAGA and culture war talking points has trashed the neighbourhood.
Probably ‘climate deniers” here as well I shouldn’t wonder, with all their “facts.”
– Proud racism and antivax conspiracy guff (almost) all the way down.
And then you came in and lowered the tone.
Yes, because the ONS really knows how many people there are in the country……..in some age ranges the number of jabs given managed to be over 100% of the declared population, which is a good trick if you can manage it.
My Google foo has failed because I can’t find that claim with analysis, perhaps you could provide a link but please not to the guy with a PhD in making nursing videos I really can’t go through anymore of his drivel..
Try this thread for a thoroughgoing examination which considers excess all cause mortality without considering vaccination status.
I used to follow one of the founders of the Hart Group and am sympathetic to their aims so I have tried to be as objective as possible reading that link. I’m not a statistician but I have done a lot of data analysis and presentation in my time.
I found his presentation very confusing with his charts very poorly designed and presented. For example in graph 2 is the Y-Axis cumulative or percentage? I presume its % ie roughly 25% of 87 year-olds die in any year? I’d say all the Y-Axis scales are poorly labelled. Additionally the readers is expected to guess that those spikes coincide with the Covid spikes, some reference would have made reading easier.
Anyway for clarity this is his conclusion and I don’t disagree with it, not least because it confirmed my priors:
Bollocks, screwed up the HTML tags. For the avoidance of doubt, although it should be clear, the last 2 paragraphs are mine not his conclusion:
Arguments I’ve made myself and still agree with and I did say that if I was 50 years younger I probably would have 2nd thoughts about the vaccination. That also appears to be the governments approach as the vaccination is free and recommended above a certain age.
Anyway, I don’t see this as some sort of gotcha that even implies there’s a great conspiracy theory behind it to get us all vaxxed but it does support the argument that that the authoritarians with their “if it just saves one life” arguments had far more control over the government and therefore the rest of us than was healthy.
Gosh. Proud racism and antivax conspiracy guff (almost) all the way down.
Good morning, I hate Gaza.
Yeah, it’s not as if anything has happened in the last few years that might make people talk about this stuff.
We should keep talking about the stuff we were talking about in 2010 instead. Are you excited for the bonfire of the quangos ? I’m excited for the bonfire of the quangos.
“My Google foo has failed because I can’t find that claim with analysis”
Thats because google doesn’t allow you to find anything anti-vax. Its part of the world government Blob now.
I can’t remember exactly where I read it, it was in an analysis of the two ways of counting the UK’s population (there’s two data sets produced by different bodies). One is bigger than the other. If you use the smaller one (which IIRC is the ONS one) then for some of the older age groups more people had at least one shot than there were people in that age group, which is obvious nonsense. So the larger one was the more sensible to use. But of course by using the larger population dataset, the number of unvaccinated goes up significantly (as the number of people jabbed is a fixed figure) and thus the calculations for vaccine effectiveness go down. To the extent there is little or no effectiveness.
And I would argue that there are probably many more people in the country than any of the official figures admit, which would increase the number of unvaccinated even more (and thus reduce their death rate, as the number of unvaccinated deaths is also a fixed figure, for any given time period).
Jim – looks like you’ve noticed that Google has been nerfed.
They broke their own search algorithm, Google has been trying to stop you finding websites for a few years now. Google Fu was a useful skill circa 2007, waste of time now.
Idk if the market is gonna fix this one.
BiND
and I did say that if I was 50 years younger I probably would have 2nd thoughts about the vaccination. That also appears to be the governments approach as the vaccination is free and recommended above a certain age.
I agree, but we should be quite clear. In the UK, the original NHS leaflet in early 2021 recommended the vaccine for anyone over 65 or with certain co-morbidities (and those in health settings) – those categories “should” take it. There was no such recommendation in that leaflet wrt the rest of the population – I read it very carefully. The narrative then slowly changed (politically), and despite that serious adverse side effects were increasingly being reported…
Ie, something else was taking place, and it wasn’t clinical. That should have been the red flag for any younger person at that stage. But it was also a red flag for older people who hadn’t yet taken it and were in any way sceptical about what had been taking place. Because it added to the weight of evidence at that point (and from since lockdowns) that governments around the world had been lying their arses off.
Anyway, I don’t see this as some sort of gotcha that even implies there’s a great conspiracy theory behind it to get us all vaxxed but it does support the argument that that the authoritarians with their “if it just saves one life” arguments had far more control over the government and therefore the rest of us than was healthy.
The strongest arguments (for me) for “get everyone vaccinated” were simply power and money. Don’t need to elaborate, they are well rehearsed.
I’ve never understood any depop narrative because if that was an objective then 1) you’re focusing on the wrong people (!), and 2) it was bloody useless (even if there might be some longer term kick still to come?)
Another argument I’ve seen, that is perhaps the most benign – and not inconsistent with everything that we’ve seen – is:
US DOD, which have led this process (not US Health), needed to know if this mRNA technology really could work (in case of biological threats etc, time taken for normal processes, this can be implemented far more quickly, etc). Normally, if done properly/safely, this could have continued to take many years, decades even. Hence, this was an opportunity to accelerate that process and learn quickly. Everyone was frightened senseless – the vaccine was then the way out, our escape from the virus… Which created the psychological need for most to participate, along with in/out groups and similar tactics. And yes, there will have been a mass of valuable data collected as a result of that.
No idea (?), but – for me – that wouldn’t contradict the power and money angles, they’re complimentary.
ONS figures show excess deaths. At one time they were running at 15% or so. Given such a case in a time when covid deaths should have caused an early harvest effect and the excess should have been a reduction, why has there been no investigation? A thousand extra deaths each week and nothing from the authorities apart from some vague nonsense about NHS failure to catch things early (which in itself is reprehensible and inexcusable, but hey, it’s the NHS).
Under what circumstances would this not require serious investigation, inquests, post-mortems etc?
However my reward for asking simple questions is to be labelled a conspiracy theorist (no, not here). I don’t much believe in conspiracies. I do however accept confluence of interests causing some people to do things which prompt questioning of their actions.
Oh, and entirely separately, if you have to argue competing data sets to determine whether a vaccine works, it doesn’t.
we’re now beyond a couple of people showing that the establishment is one massive conspiracy, that’s 9/11 conspiracy theory territory.
I’m not the slightest believer in conspiracies. My experience, any conspiracy greater than two people is destined to fail. And I wouldn’t be sure about the two. People will always put their personal interests above any agreements they may have with others. So conspiracies only survive until the personal interests of conspirators diverge to the point where personal advantage trumps the advantage gained from the conspiracy.
That said, there can always be things where sufficient people’s personal interests align, that they seem to all be acting in union. The Great Climate Change Boondoggle is an outstanding example. That’s why they’re so resilient. But that doesn’t imply there’s any overall cooperation. They’re resilient because it’s in the overwhelming personal interests of the participants that they should continue. They don’t need to be coordinated.
It’s not hard to work with the Great Vaccine Scam who the participants are & the nature of their personal interests. They may be diverse but that doesn’t mean they don’t align.
Overall mortality in the UK is still higher than it was before the covid-19 pandemic, despite a downward trend, a new analysis shows.
From the start of the pandemic through to 29 September this year around 204 700 more deaths from all causes were registered than expected, the analysis shows. Of these deaths, 75 600 were in 2020, 56 500 in 2021, 39 400 in 2022, and 33 200 in the first three quarters of 2023, shows the analysis by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries’ continuous mortality investigation (CMI).
BiS – My experience, any conspiracy greater than two people is destined to fail.
Operation Barbarossa, Operation Overlord, the October Revolution and the Glorious Revolution were all conspiracies. Our history books are full of conspiracies, and our criminal and civil courts are full of people who tried to coordinate in secret for their common interests.
Humans conspire all the time, as naturally as taking a piss. You can barely bring three children together without the first two conspiring against the third.
The greatest conspiracy is the one that gaslit the public into thinking “conspiracy theorists” are wibble-spouting loonies, while the people who tell you you’re scummy racists who should be forced to eat flies are OBE’s, KCMG’s, and board members of FTSE 100 companies.
With the COVID-19 thing there are conspiracies ranging from mRNA being a killshot to 5G being a mechanism to turn all vaccine participants into NPC zombies (admittedly, this one does seem true)
What we’re arguing here is that mRNA was an untested and unproven technology to attack COVID-19 and was delivered to the public with insufficient testing because the government needed to be seen to be doing something and a vaccine was the only way out of the manufactured crisis.
The Government were incentivised by publicity and virtue signalling. They weakened our vaccine protection protocols by allowing mRNA vaccines to be used without testing and gave the pharmaceutical companies immunity from prosecution should the vaccine have side-effects which the testing would have demonstrated.
The pharmaceutical companies were incentivised by the billions they would make flogging untested vaccines to the world at large.
So, not a conspiracy theory, but alignment of incentives to create the problems that seem to be emerging about the vaccines being unsafe.
@John Galt – “What we’re arguing here is that mRNA was an untested and unproven technology”
Except that’s obviously false because all the vaccines went through the usual randomised controlled trials.
Charles – I always read your comments with interest and that’s one of your acutest contributions.
Only intellects of the highest calibre recognise that all vaccines and indeed “vaccines” receive Emergency Use Authorisations.
Is Charles being sarcastic? He can’t believe the trials were completed. Doesn’t he know they vaccinated the control group quite early on, as soon as the vaccine group started dying more than them?
Why were the vaccine contracts kept so secret when they involved governments signing away the rights of vaccinees without telling them?
John Galt is right, you don’t need a conspiracy where people are making money and ducking responsibility.
@Charles – I explicitly said “Insufficient testing” by which I clearly meant the level of testing that would be normally expected for a vaccine before it is allowed to be rolled out to the general population.
I never said that “No testing” took place.
This whole problem exists because the testing that took place was insufficient and if the normal FDA process (and EU equivalents) had taken place then the mRNA vaccines would never have been cleared for public use.
Is that sufficiently clear?
…and before anyone starts banging on about how medical testing for pharmaceuticals works, I was responsible for the IT for Pfizer Pharmaceuticals control testing during the 1990’s, so I am aware of the sorts of things involved, even if more from an IT perspective than anything else.
@John Galt – “I never said that “No testing” took place.”
I quoted you saying “untested”. That’s what “untested ” means.
And if you think the testing was inadequate, what testing woul you consider to be adequate?
And if you think the testing was inadequate, what testing woul you consider to be adequate?
One where the manufacturers didn’t require an indemnity from government aginst claims for damages caused by their products would be a good start.
@The Meissen Bison – “One where the manufacturers didn’t require an indemnity from government”
That is not a level of testing. Without such an indemnity, manufacturers stopped making safe and effective vaccines. That was why the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed in 1986. There are two problems with liability.
Firstly, the benefits do not match the liabilities. Benefits are widely dispersed and nobody can tell if a vaccince has saved their life – either by making them personally resisitant or by preventing someone else spreading the disease to them. This means that even where there is a genuine injury, the balancing benefit cannot be collected to pay for it, so manufacturers will just stop making a product which is overall of great benefit.
Secondly, there is a strong element of the process being the punishment when assessing liability. Even when a manufacturer successfully defends against a lawsuit, it can be very expensive.
And thirdly, assessing liability is very difficult and in places like the USA where a jury will assess the evidence there is a strong possibility that a manufacturer will be found liable for harm that was not caused by their product.
Taken overall, this means that no indemnity menas no vaccines – even safe and effective ones. With indemnity, the state pays for any alleged harm (often without the need to prove it was actually caused by the vaccine), so whether you get vaccinated becomes a case of personal responsibility.