You wrote: "It's stunning that 43% of all people (61,976) died after their 3rd shot, but only 23% (~4.3M) of the doses were issued as the 3rd shot or basically someone's first booster shot."
However most deaths are of course in elderly people, and most elderly people got a booster. And people also spent more time on average under the third dose than the first dose. I got much lower ASMR for people whose newest dose was the third dose than for unvaccinated people or people with only 1 or 2 doses: sars2.net/czech.html#Plot_for_ASMR_by_dose_and_date.
---
You wrote that "Steve Kirsch said vaccines were rolled out 'haphazardly' or randomly or basically whatever was on hand".
I took data for the number of adverse events per batch from this spreadsheet: https://github.com/PalackyUniversity/batch-dependent-safety/blob/main/data/SUKL-batches-AE.xlsx. The authors who published the data said that they received the data on July 4th 2023, so I took data for doses administered up to that date from the record-level data. But out of 136 batches that were included in both sources, FN5519 ranked 13th lowest for adverse event reports per doses administered.
In the code below I calculated an excess mortality percent for each batch in the record-level data from the day of vaccination up to the end of 2022. I calculated the expected number of deaths for each batch by multiplying the number of person-days for each combination of age group and ongoing month with the mortality rate among all people included in the record-level data for the same combination of age group and ongoing month. But now FN5519 got about -8% excess mortality, which was the 56th highest excess mortality percentage out of a total of 179 batches:
When I tried similarly comparing the excess mortality percentage of each batch to the number of adverse event reports per dose, the correlation was close to zero: sars2.net/czech3.html#Batch_study_by_authors_from_Palack_University. So I don't know if you can determine how toxic a batch is based on the all-cause mortality of people who got a vaccine dose from the batch.
Thank you for the spreadsheet, very helpful to see the size of lots. I'm wondering if those are total doses manufactured, shipped, or administered in Czechia only? For example FN5519 shows 625,950 batch size, yet in Czech data 185,156 doses were administered? Do you think part of the shipment went to Denmark, Sweden, etc.? I'm also wondering why the deaths and SAE's in the spreadsheet are so low? Are they abbreviated somehow like per 100,000? I don't think the SAE & deaths in spreadsheet are absolute counts? I see size wise FN5519 was one of the larger batches for Czechia at ~12th largest. I don't think I can calculate ACM per batch better than what you can produce. I might be able to a relative value toxic lot rank incorporating the SAEs with the total deaths while but also using a vax date cut off of 12/31/2022 considering there are no vax deaths recorded after that. I think that is what you were also conveying in your explanation? It's almost useless to attempt calculations on any new lot that started to rollout in say the last half of 2022. Considering the ~61,976 who died after their 3rd dose, about half of them died 200~450days after their 3rd dose. Considering the great drop off of people getting 4 or more jabs, I think these people skipped their opportunity to get a 4th dose aka next booster. Factor in age and natural ACM is fair for these mostly elderly, but how many of them were already maimed and injured from their 3rd and finally succumbed to injury within 6-9 months? Difficult to quantify... What do you think about the dip in age for all people born from 1959 to 1962, there seems to be a unnatural accounting going on? Almost that whole decade of people born in the 60's seems to be truncated somehow? You can see it well in my dashboard here https://postimg.cc/ctRZf7m6 and also in my age category heat map. I guess I can get more details if I put in the extra ~4M records that just record an age and nothing else. Since I'm skeptical about everything, I wondering if the Czech government simply deleted some vaccine data in some areas or ages and let them get lost in these ~4M records with just a DOB only?
I think it's absolute counts. The paper about the batch data also pointed out that there was a much lower rate of reports per dose than in the Danish data: sars2.net/i/czech-batch-study.jpg (I should've made my screenshots of the paper into a PDF instead of a JPG file, but I only bought temporary access to the paper and I don't want to buy it again).
The FOI response that was sent to Stanislav Veselý said this in Czech: "Technically, this dataset is created by combining information from ISIN vaccination module and deceased database. Persons not registered in any of these systems, are added based on demographic data from January 1, 2020 and the number of births in 2020-2022." (https://www.skirsch.com/covid/CzechFOIA.pdf) So it's possible that some of the people who only have a birth date listed have in fact died or been vaccinated, or maybe for example some of the imputed people could've moved to another country and been vaccinated outside of Czechia. The FOI response didn't say that they considered immigration and emigration when they added in the imputed people.
I tried comparing the yearly number of deaths in the record-level data in 2020-2022 to two other datasets, but all three datasets were otherwise identical except the record-level data was missing one death in 2021: sars2.net/czech3.html#Yearly_deaths_in_the_Czech_Republic_by_underlying_cause_of_death. Also when I compared the number of vaccinated people by vaccine type in the record-level data against a CSV file published by the Czech Ministry of Health, the results were almost identical: https://x.com/henjin256/status/1813630929795264733.
So the Czech data seems to have very high data integrity. I think it's still the holy grail dataset that everyone was waiting for, so it's weird that people seem to have forgotten about it already.
You wrote: "It's stunning that 43% of all people (61,976) died after their 3rd shot, but only 23% (~4.3M) of the doses were issued as the 3rd shot or basically someone's first booster shot."
However most deaths are of course in elderly people, and most elderly people got a booster. And people also spent more time on average under the third dose than the first dose. I got much lower ASMR for people whose newest dose was the third dose than for unvaccinated people or people with only 1 or 2 doses: sars2.net/czech.html#Plot_for_ASMR_by_dose_and_date.
---
You wrote that "Steve Kirsch said vaccines were rolled out 'haphazardly' or randomly or basically whatever was on hand".
However Kirsch was wrong when he said that people were not allowed to choose the vaccine type, because I now found that there was a dropdown for choosing your preferred vaccine type in the form for registering a vaccine appointment: sars2.net/czech4.html#Kirschs_claim_that_people_were_not_allowed_to_choose_if_they_got_a_Moderna_or_Pfizer_vaccine.
---
I took data for the number of adverse events per batch from this spreadsheet: https://github.com/PalackyUniversity/batch-dependent-safety/blob/main/data/SUKL-batches-AE.xlsx. The authors who published the data said that they received the data on July 4th 2023, so I took data for doses administered up to that date from the record-level data. But out of 136 batches that were included in both sources, FN5519 ranked 13th lowest for adverse event reports per doses administered.
In the code below I calculated an excess mortality percent for each batch in the record-level data from the day of vaccination up to the end of 2022. I calculated the expected number of deaths for each batch by multiplying the number of person-days for each combination of age group and ongoing month with the mortality rate among all people included in the record-level data for the same combination of age group and ongoing month. But now FN5519 got about -8% excess mortality, which was the 56th highest excess mortality percentage out of a total of 179 batches:
b=fread("curl -Ls sars2.net/f/czbucketsbatchkeep.csv.xz|xz -dc")[,age:=pmin(age,95)%/%5*5]
a=merge(b[dose>0&batch!=""&type!="Other"],b[dose<=1,.(base=sum(dead)/sum(alive)),.(age,month)])[,base:=base*alive]
a=a[,.(alive=sum(alive),dead=sum(dead),base=sum(base)),.(batch,age,type)]
p=a[,.(excess=(sum(dead)/sum(base)-1)*100),.(batch,type)]
print(p[order(-excess)],nrow=Inf)
When I tried similarly comparing the excess mortality percentage of each batch to the number of adverse event reports per dose, the correlation was close to zero: sars2.net/czech3.html#Batch_study_by_authors_from_Palack_University. So I don't know if you can determine how toxic a batch is based on the all-cause mortality of people who got a vaccine dose from the batch.
Thank you for the spreadsheet, very helpful to see the size of lots. I'm wondering if those are total doses manufactured, shipped, or administered in Czechia only? For example FN5519 shows 625,950 batch size, yet in Czech data 185,156 doses were administered? Do you think part of the shipment went to Denmark, Sweden, etc.? I'm also wondering why the deaths and SAE's in the spreadsheet are so low? Are they abbreviated somehow like per 100,000? I don't think the SAE & deaths in spreadsheet are absolute counts? I see size wise FN5519 was one of the larger batches for Czechia at ~12th largest. I don't think I can calculate ACM per batch better than what you can produce. I might be able to a relative value toxic lot rank incorporating the SAEs with the total deaths while but also using a vax date cut off of 12/31/2022 considering there are no vax deaths recorded after that. I think that is what you were also conveying in your explanation? It's almost useless to attempt calculations on any new lot that started to rollout in say the last half of 2022. Considering the ~61,976 who died after their 3rd dose, about half of them died 200~450days after their 3rd dose. Considering the great drop off of people getting 4 or more jabs, I think these people skipped their opportunity to get a 4th dose aka next booster. Factor in age and natural ACM is fair for these mostly elderly, but how many of them were already maimed and injured from their 3rd and finally succumbed to injury within 6-9 months? Difficult to quantify... What do you think about the dip in age for all people born from 1959 to 1962, there seems to be a unnatural accounting going on? Almost that whole decade of people born in the 60's seems to be truncated somehow? You can see it well in my dashboard here https://postimg.cc/ctRZf7m6 and also in my age category heat map. I guess I can get more details if I put in the extra ~4M records that just record an age and nothing else. Since I'm skeptical about everything, I wondering if the Czech government simply deleted some vaccine data in some areas or ages and let them get lost in these ~4M records with just a DOB only?
I think it's absolute counts. The paper about the batch data also pointed out that there was a much lower rate of reports per dose than in the Danish data: sars2.net/i/czech-batch-study.jpg (I should've made my screenshots of the paper into a PDF instead of a JPG file, but I only bought temporary access to the paper and I don't want to buy it again).
I hadn't noticed the dips in births around 1960 and 1966, but they seem to match actual Czech data for births: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Czech-Republic/Birth_rate/.
The FOI response that was sent to Stanislav Veselý said this in Czech: "Technically, this dataset is created by combining information from ISIN vaccination module and deceased database. Persons not registered in any of these systems, are added based on demographic data from January 1, 2020 and the number of births in 2020-2022." (https://www.skirsch.com/covid/CzechFOIA.pdf) So it's possible that some of the people who only have a birth date listed have in fact died or been vaccinated, or maybe for example some of the imputed people could've moved to another country and been vaccinated outside of Czechia. The FOI response didn't say that they considered immigration and emigration when they added in the imputed people.
I tried comparing the yearly number of deaths in the record-level data in 2020-2022 to two other datasets, but all three datasets were otherwise identical except the record-level data was missing one death in 2021: sars2.net/czech3.html#Yearly_deaths_in_the_Czech_Republic_by_underlying_cause_of_death. Also when I compared the number of vaccinated people by vaccine type in the record-level data against a CSV file published by the Czech Ministry of Health, the results were almost identical: https://x.com/henjin256/status/1813630929795264733.
So the Czech data seems to have very high data integrity. I think it's still the holy grail dataset that everyone was waiting for, so it's weird that people seem to have forgotten about it already.
This is very good…
Thank you!
I hate stats that’s why they moved me to analyze the causes nobody wanted to do…
It was their mistake… lol
Thank you.
Thanks very much Albert.
I have added this as an update to my article from June 2023.
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/urgent-please-remove-all-reference