One of the most telling statistics about Covid-19 is the breakdown of deaths and cases into age brackets.
Having tried to do some thorough analysis on the situation, I can tell you, the authorities make it exceptionally difficult to obtain data connected with age. It’s almost as if goes against the narrative, and must be suppressed. It’s like Kryptonite to the Covid narrative, and must be kept away from the plebs, lest they start to make a personal assessment of risk.
Sources all vary in how they play games with the data: from just not providing it, right through to being dishonest with how they present it.
Think I’m being paranoid? I noticed this from the ABC Covid-19 data page. One of but many examples.
What Statistician orders the age brackets like that?
I’ll tell you; one who wants to make high death rates appear to be occurring along the entire spectrum, or at least at both ends.
As most people would expect ages to be ordered in accordance with numerical convention, only the neurotics and the paranoid will notice the trickery…as is the aim.
They are pushing the narrative that the Delta variant is ‘cruelling’ the young, but the figures just won’t play along…so they must be ‘nudged’ somehow.
24 thoughts on “Mater’s Musings #28: Why Would The ABC Do This – I Wonder?”
Unless it has a numerical scale, it’s a meaningless graphic, simply showing proportionality. And they can’t even be honest with that.
They just keep proving, day after day, what a waste of space they are.
It could be a “death from Covid” graph or a “death from all causes” graph. They would show the same thing – the old die and the young survive.
The slight of hand is so obvious and yet…
Posting this here in the hope it doesn’t get lost on other threads ….
Just checked the ABC website; the graph has been corrected.
You only have to look at the way the MSN overhype the rare cases of younger people dying of the coof to understand the reality of it. If you are over 60, there is a chance of dying. Under 60? Not so much.
Take whatever precautions that YOU feel are required.
Nah, still there, Roger.
The ‘Cases’ graph is in order (and always has been) because it shows that the young are the vast majority of cases, as they always have been. This suits the narrative.
Go to the ‘Deaths’ by Age, and the screwed up order still exists, because it helps the illusion that high case numbers equals high death rate.
I’m seeing a corrected version.
Indeed. I just went to another Device, and still wrong.
Another trick is to lump the ages 12-50 in one pile and have them as cases instead of deaths.
If you do the same with deaths it looks farcical.
If the ALPBC didn’t exist, such hysterical fraudulent idiocy wouldn’t be an issue.
Yes, and then in the next report, change it to 0-44 so direct comparisons are impossible. After that, they change from raw numbers to rate per 100,000 of population, but conveniently fail to say what ‘population’ they are using.
I went to the site. Mater’s graph as depicted above is still there. All the other graphs appear to have a rational listing and distribution.
So, it’s either deliberate or their graphics guru has stuffed up.
Minitru appears to have “corrected” it.
There are many other tricks in the media’s reporting of statistics to the public. I think the most dishonest one is to only report cumulative totals since Covid 19 reporting in Australia commenced in early March 2020. This means that we are looking at 18 months totals which makes figures appear much larger than if reported on a monthly basis or annual basis and makes it very difficult to make comparisons. If it was reported that only 193 people had died of Covid 19 since January 2021 which is .75 people (i.e. less than person per hundred thousand Australia wide, does this sound as scary to you? No, but it is true. Go down to the table and graph depicting how Australia compares to the World here https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-case-numbers-and-statistics#cases-and-deaths-by-age-and-sex
This whole thing is the biggest beat up in human history.
No one under 60 should give a tuppenny fuck.
All the scared old fucks should lock themselves up instead of locking up everyone else.
Take a vax, don’t take a vax, what’s it to do with anyone but yourself.
The world has gone insane, I want off.
The ABC.? I remember them when they were a great asset. That was a long time ago though. Before they got arse cancer and devolved into collocca they are now.
Otherwise what Arky said just above + lots.
Does the land of Arkadia have trains?
If not, do you have any openings in your Citizens’ Defence Militia?
And do I need proof of vaccination to get in?
The other glaring omission is an x-axis scale.
I’ll bet if you asked your average arts grad ABC viewer to estimate the x-axis values, they would over-estimate by an order of magnitude.
Mak Siccar says:
September 18, 2021 at 8:36 am
I had been wondering the same thing about how exactly from here on will the control group be constituted for future blood testing. That is to say the reference range in future clinicians compare a patient’s blood test results to. In general though, with high vaccination rates how much of an impact will this have on what is normal in all other aspects of health and the inferences used(?) Biochemical, Haematological, Radiological, physiological…. Will unvaccinated people longer term be the evidence of how monged-up the rest of the population in future are?
The better known ( to in particular clinical chemistry people and endocrinologists) historical example is blood testosterone. How when current day male populations are compared to populations from 150 years ago, virtually all current day men would appear to be abnormally low these days.
And they’ve completely removed the ‘Under 10’ category that that other graphs have…because it consists of two big donuts.
Does the single male death (10-19) look 220 times less than the 220 80-89 deaths just above it (in the incorrect version)? No, that’s why they don’t have a scale on it.
It’s all subtle, but it all counts.
I think the charts are created with an Adobe program, that has a hover function to give the number for each bar. If it’s converted to a picture before putting on that website they probably lose the x- axis info.
Likewise, the shifting around of the bars could be a stuff up rather than a conspiracy.
I’d be more sympathetic to this view if the “Under 10” data was included (like the rest of the data sets), and if the rest of those bar graphs were similarly screwed up…but they’re not.
Anaesthesia Palace Chook, her flunkey Young and the ABC’s ‘Australia’s most trusted doctor’ Norman Swan have done more than anyone to slow down vaccination by talking up the risks of AZ (which are about the same as being killed by a lightning strike if untreated, and far less if treated). But the Chook for the ABC and its media satellites can do no wrong because of her extremist baby- and granny-killimg legislation.