the allegory of the cave platos republic

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As with the post/controversy referenced here, it is extremely difficult for a layperson to conclude definitive things about the data being released - in that skilled statisticians are invariably able to offer a different perspective/take on what any given data indicates. To this end, you will find at least two opposing perspectives summarized or linked/referenced below. You will have to make up your own mind - in that I'm not able to offer you any more than referencing opposing perspectives on the same data. Ofc, there is that well know saying maybe prudent to bear in mind that there are 'lies, damned lies, and statistics'. We can be sure too, that the govs of the world have their very best statisticians in play, so as to defuse concerns about the vax - however this in itself doesn't mean that such statisticians analyses would be inaccurate.

To note, there is far more 'agreement' between different groups on what the second graph below indicates - particularly in regard to myocarditis occurring as a result of the vax in young men.


1) The first graph is based on UK official mortality data, published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS).


ons mortality data

As can be observed, the mortality rate for people who have received the cv19 vax is shown as approx twice as high as for the unvaxed.

There is an important argument about 'data confounding' which can be made as regards the data shown on the graph -which goes as as follows:

Using such wide age ranges potentially produces the following confounding issue. Those towards the upper age of 59 years can be expected to be more likely to have taken the vax, as well as more likely to die anyway, given they are older. Whereas those towards the lower age range (of 10 years) can be expected to be less likely to have taken the vax as well as less likely to suffer death because of their youth. These factors operating together might therefore explain the dramtic nature of what the graph initially indicates.

Alex Berensom, a blogger on substack who was largely responsible for the graph going viral states this as to what meaning can be legitimately (and accurately) derived from the graph:

Something is wrong. The promises that the health authorities have made over the last 12 months about the vaccines are not coming true. Despite near-complete levels of adult vaccination in Europe, many countries are seeing skyrocketing Covid cases and deaths. And worst of all, all-cause non-Covid mortality is running well above normal in country after country. (source)

You can find an indepth opposing perspective of the above graph's data here (i.e. support for a claim that there is actually nothing to be concerned about in terms of what the graph seemingly implies). Though you might read all the associated comments too.


2) This second graph shows athlete collapses and deaths in 2021. It is described as a plot of 'a non-exhaustive and continuously growing list of young athletes who had major medical issues in 2021 after receiving one or more COVID vaccines'. Athletes are a particularly useful group to consider because by default they can be expected to be fit, healthy and quite likely to have been subject to regular medicals and health checkups over recent years.


athlete mortality 2021


Conditions reported re athletes covered by the graph data have included (but not been limited to):

  • Cardiac Arrest
  • Blood Clots or Thrombosis
  • Stroke
  • Irregular Heartbeat
  • Arrhythmia
  • Neuropathy
  • Death

You can read more about the data behind this graph including a full list of references/lnks for all the cases/reports included in the graph plot here.


There is much controversy over c19 vax injury and mortality figures, with some claiming to show that at least in regards to mortality, that it is no higher than the mortality associated with an influenza jab. However as regards myocarditus in younger men following the c19 vax, there appears to be more agreement. I consider the following might well be a reasonably accurate appraisal of what the data shows:

First, a very good study published in New England Journal of Medicine in August looks at population-level data in Israel, covering 1/2 of their country's population, and looking at the rate of various serious adverse events (SAE) feared to be potentially related to Pfizer vaccines (the only ones used in Israel) in those vaccinated, and compared with matched cohorts (matched by age, region and other demographics) of unvaccinated and of previously COVID-19 infected and not vaccinated. They considered many key cardiovascular SAE relevant to our discussion here -- myocarditis, pericarditis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and others. They affirmed what we already know -- that Myocarditis has risk about 3x higher in vaccinated than unvaccinated (this is entire population, not just young men). But all of the other cardiovascular SAE's had just as high of rates in matched unvaccinated as vaccinated. And further, they showed that those previously infected have an 18x higher risk of myocarditis than matched unvaccinated/not previously infected, which is 6x higher than those vaccinated but not previously infected.


Another study just came out in Nature Medicine (


It is a large population based study in the UK looking at rates of mycarditis, pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmia hospitalizations and deaths within days 1-28 of 1st or 2nd doses of vaccination by AstraZeneca (20 million), Pfizer (17 million) or Moderna (1 million), or after positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test (3 million).


It shows that the risk of pericarditis and cardiac arrhythmias are clearly higher after SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR test, but not vaccines. But it shows the higher risk from mRNA vaccines, in particularly for young men. These data look at within 28 days of first dose (or SARS-COV-2 test) and find for Pfizer, 1.5-2.5x higher risk in vaccinated after 2nd/first dose, with PCR+ test about 10x higher risk, 4-6x higher than the Pfizer vaccine. This agrees with the NEJM paper. For Moderna, the risk is clearly higher, with the 9-10x higher risk of Myocarditis after 1st/2nd dose in line with the risk after infection. This is stronger in those <40yrs old, and in men. This suggests the highest risk for young men of myocarditis is after Moderna vaccination, with substantial risk also for SARS-CoV-2+ infection that is higher than the risk of myocarditis on Pfizer vaccine. This data adds nicely to what we know and affirms the risk. (source)