A review of efficacy and safety data for the COVID-19 vaccines by three scientists has been published in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccines and comes to the disturbing conclusion that for every three deaths the vaccines prevent, two people die from an adverse reaction, while another four suffer serious side effects. The authors conclude: “This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.”
Here is the abstract:
Background: COVID-19 vaccines have had expedited reviews without sufficient safety data. We wanted to compare risks and benefits.
Method: We calculated the number needed to vaccinate (NNTV) from a large Israeli field study to prevent one death. We accessed the Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) database of the European Medicines Agency and of the Dutch National Register (lareb.nl) to extract the number of cases reporting severe side effects and the number of cases with fatal side effects.
Result: The NNTV is between 200–700 to prevent one case of COVID-19 for the mRNA vaccine marketed by Pfizer, while the NNTV to prevent one death is between 9,000 and 50,000 (95% confidence interval), with 16,000 as a point estimate. The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations. Currently, we see 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations, and the number of fatal side effects is at 4.11 per 100,000 vaccinations. For three deaths prevented by vaccination, we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination.
Conclusions: This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.
The authors note this conclusion is based on the reported adverse reactions, whereas the true number of adverse reactions may be considerably more.
Finally, we note that from experience with reporting side effects from other drugs, only a small fraction of side effects is reported to adverse events databases. The median underreporting can be as high as 95%. Given this fact and the high number of serious side effects already reported, the current political trend to vaccinate children who are at very low risk of suffering from COVID-19 in the first place must be reconsidered.
They note that the “risks and benefits” of the vaccines are “on the same order of magnitude” and suggest: “Perhaps it might be necessary to dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts?”
The present assessment raises the question whether it would be necessary to rethink policies and use COVID-19 vaccines more sparingly and with some discretion only in those that are willing to accept the risk because they feel more at risk from the true infection than the mock infection. Perhaps it might be necessary to dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts? In our view, the EMA and national authorities should instigate a safety review into the safety database of COVID-19 vaccines and governments should carefully consider their policies in light of these data. Ideally, independent scientists should carry out thorough case reviews of the very severe cases, so that there can be evidence-based recommendations on who is likely to benefit from a SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and who is in danger of suffering from side effects. Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks and benefits on the same order of magnitude.
The full study can be found here.
UPDATE: The study has been updated. It originally stated that: “For three deaths prevented by vaccination, we have to accept one inflicted by vaccination.” This has been amended to say “we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination”. This article has been updated accordingly.
UPDATE 2: The study has been retracted by the journal. The retraction notice reads:
Serious concerns were brought to the attention of the publisher regarding misinterpretation of data, leading to incorrect and distorted conclusions.
The article was evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief with the support of several Editorial Board Members. They found that the article contained several errors that fundamentally affect the interpretation of the findings.
These include, but are not limited to:
The data from the Lareb report in The Netherlands were used to calculate the number of severe and fatal side effects per 100,000 vaccinations. Unfortunately, in the manuscript by Harald Walach et al. these data were incorrectly interpreted which led to erroneous conclusions. The data was presented as being causally related to adverse events by the authors. This is inaccurate. In The Netherlands, healthcare professionals and patients are invited to report suspicions of adverse events that may be associated with vaccination. For this type of reporting a causal relation between the event and the vaccine is not needed, therefore a reported event that occurred after vaccination is not necessarily attributable to vaccination. Thus, reporting of a death following vaccination does not imply that this is a vaccine-related event. There are several other inaccuracies in the paper by Harald Walach et al. one of which is that fatal cases were certified by medical specialists. It should be known that even this false claim does not imply causation, which the authors imply. Further, the authors have called the events ‘effects’ and ‘reactions’ when this is not established, and until causality is established they are ‘events’ that may or may not be caused by exposure to a vaccine. It does not matter what statistics one may apply, this is incorrect and misleading.
The authors were asked to respond to the claims, but were not able to do so satisfactorily. The authors were notified of the retraction and did not agree.
The focus on the events not being established as reactions appears to miss the point that they are reported because they are suspected of being reactions. It may be a fair criticism that the authors should have been more cautious in how they characterised the events. However, they did acknowledge the issue of causality and address it. They argue that in the Dutch system the fatal adverse events are “certified by a medical specialist”. This is not true in every case, as the editors point out. However, the official guidance the authors quote from in the paper does indicate a system of verification in which doctors are involved in some cases:
All reports received are checked for completeness and possible ambiguities. If necessary, additional information is requested from the reporting party and/or the treating doctor. The report is entered into the database with all the necessary information. Side effects are coded according to the applicable (international) standards. Subsequently an individual assessment of the report is made. The reports are forwarded to the European database (Eudravigilance) and the database of the WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring in Uppsala. The registration holders are informed about the reports concerning their product.
Note that the guidance also refers to the events as “side effects”, underlining that this is the working assumption of the reporting system. The authors also note that the proportion of reported adverse events is similar in America, and that studies have shown that adverse events are typically under-reported rather than over-reported.
The paper is by no means perfect, and perhaps would benefit from revision to tidy up some unclear or inaccurate claims and incautious language (this is what the peer-review process is supposed to achieve). But retraction feels a little too convenient as a way of burying one of the few peer-reviewed papers that raises questions about the safety profile of the vaccines in light of the unprecedented number of adverse event reports lodged in connection with them.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I really do want a “designer vaccine”. I’m so disappointed that’s not a thing. Ahh, what Lagerfeld could have put in a jab were he still alive! Such possibilities!
I think Hugo Boss might be interested too.
LONDON -~TOMORROW
Sat, 26 June, 1pm
The Next Big One!
Freedom from Vax Passport Enslavement
Hyde Park, North Carriage Drive Entrance
https://t.me/londonrallies
https://www.standupx.info/
Making our plans right now!
I don’t think there is any data that could produce these conclusions. But nevertheless the conclusions are more than troubling.
I and others warned of these problems before the programme got started because we’d read about the issues with all mRNA vaccines to date causing severe inflammation and because we’d read what (very healthy) trial volunteers had had to say about the effects of the vaccine on their functioning (to be seen on social media – not part of the official trial process). The fact that even the vaccine manufacturers said the vaccine would NOT be a “walk in the park” for people, should have rung many alarm bells.
But no, probably 99% of our politicians, MSM, and commentariat got swept up in vaxomania and vilified those who urged extreme caution as “conspiracists”, “uneducated anti-vaxxers” and “5Gers”.
I told my mother there was no way in hell I was ever getting a covid vaccine and she immediately replied with ‘Are you one of those anti-vaxxers?’. The brainwashing is off the charts
Similar with my ancient 94 year old Aunt. She won’t let me visit her now. So sad – she might as well be dead already. I miss her. Fuck this brainwashing!
She may be. If she is her death will be ascribed to old age or some other cause that is not the ‘vaccine’.
Have you asked her if the vaccine works and is so good then why, if she has had the vaccine, is she concerned about you visiting her whether she is vaccinated or not.
I had a similar experience – my mother told me that as I knew she was worried I’d refused the vaccine if I respected my recently deceased father (died early 2021) I’d have the vaccine to stop her worrying. I let it pass but, as you will realise, I was a bit cross. Unfortunately this is what happens when weak minds are subjected to propaganda and psy-ops.
Yep, my wife and I have been subjected to similar nonsensical guilt tripping. Very sad. That generation is now bonkers, thanks The New World Order.
Taking facts a bit further, New World Order are in reality the Freemasons, of which only the higher members of the order are truly allowed to be made aware of this situation.
Show her the pictures and accounts of young men with heart attacks from Robert Kennedy Jnr’s site and say if she respected your father you’d also respect your judgement.
Sorry, downvoted by mistake and don’t seem able to correct it. Please ignore.
My in-laws are ‘damaged’, My mother in-law has serious concernz with our unvaccinated status lol, so much so she doesn’t want to visit. Can’t say i’m too upset lol.
On a more serious note I think we’re all going to lose friends and family to the propaganda but the way I see it is those who stay close are the ones you want around you, the rest can take a hike.
My in laws (one of which is a retired pharmacist ffs) have adopted the same attitude towards my wife and I. It’s astonishing how brainwashed that generation has been through this. I have no idea what information they’ve been subjected to to end up in this state, but suspect (in their case) that it’s got something to do with The Guardian.
I come from a family of Guardian readers. It’s definitely a thing.
I’m pretty impressed that there still are enough Guardian readers for there to be actual families of them.
Must take a pretty determined intention to enstupidate yourself, to keep reading it week after week.
Their sense of superiority and smugness is quite nauseating. They need their daily fix to reinforce their champagne socialist lives.
This happens because we are what we think we are?
After the “B”BC have bought most of the copies i thought only one or two people were foolish enough to buy it.
What a fantastic word I commend your inventiveness. Can I borrow it?
Also, that generation grew up with constant ‘jabs’. They can’t distinguish though between a traditional, fully tested vaccine which has been around for many years, TB for example, and a hastily developed, completely novel type of gene therapy, which hasn’t yet completed all the proper safety trials.
“They”? A whole generation?
Don’t talk daft.
There are those who “read-up” on a pandemic and those who believe that “Nanny knows best”, and this regardless of age.
Some who have read up on Covid decided that their lifestyle (diet, dietary supplements, exercise, …) would suffice to protect them until the vaccines had been tested over a period of 3 years or so, and then they would, possibly, reconsider.
Others decided that a similar lifestyle would protect them from the potential side effects of largely untested vaccines.
I belong to the first category, my wife and “children” to the second.
I have not (yet?) succumbed to the Covid virus.
My wife and daughter have had both jabs with NO side-effects.
My sons have had their first jab, again, no side-effects.
(Me, late 70s, Wife early 70s).
““They”? A whole generation?
Don’t talk daft.”
I’m afraid that there is a tendency for some posters to indulge in this sort of generalized rubbish, for some reason.It’s a bit embarrassing for
the sceptical cause, which rests on evidence rather than myth and confected narrative.
The truth is that gullibility is a variable that stretches across demographic divides – and, given the propaganda campaign and induction of Fear, this is hardly surprising. Actually, as a crude litmus test, I see as many younger people wearing masks outdoors as I do older people.
I don’t see evidence of critical thinking being taught much in schools. But then, it wasn’t in my schools either. I’m assuming that critical thinking is an essential part of the A levels in Science, and degrees in Science? Any comment on that? But if so, we should have more scientists blowing whistles.
The regular pay packet stifles the expression of critical thinking then. And did in Germany in the 1930s, no doubt.
I think the vast majority of old and young in Britain, and other democratic countries, assume that those governing them have their best interests at heart. And that those labelled “experts” know best. We aboriginal Britons made good serfs and, I have read, were valued in Rome as slaves. We are an obedient people to authority.
It would be interesting to read why people commenting here do not fall into that category.
Interesting question. Science degrees definitely do not instill critical thinking as routine – a lot encourage respect for authority.
Other degrees are theoretically more likely to do so.
But it ain’t that simple.
So do I. I get p***ed off with being blamed for the vaccine panic, being a boomer myself. Not a single one of my family has been vaccinated because we all, without exception (and half of us are over 65) believe we are being lied to, that this ‘pandemic’ is no more than a nastier-than-usual flu. Most of us have also caught and recovered from covid and refuse the jab on the grounds that we’ve already got antibodies, and the jab is more liely than not to interfere with our naturally-acquired immunity.
Millions of us have had covid and are now immune (T-cell immunity is probably life-long) but the fools amongst them are still getting the shot because this government and its accolytes are keeping silent about that. I still get people saying to me – always young people – “but you can get it twice”. Arrgggghhh!!!
Patiently I reply “but I have antibodies. If the virus had not caused my body to make them I’d be dead now!” A blank stare ensues; a kind of brain-fog seems to have descended upon the young, inactivating their grey-matter. It’s not all boomers, it’s cross-generational.
No side effects – so far…….
UK govt funds behavioural-nudge units, the BBC is an extension of that, ergo upper age Boomers and 80s are completely petrified sheep led anywhere the narrative flows.
There are cases of GP’s who get paid £12-50 per shot who are willingly vaccinating patients, whilst declining the vaccine themselves. What a vile country this place has become
“it’s got something to do with The Guardian”
Indeed it has – but the rest of the MSM, too.
The Groan is important, however, since it retains its reputation as an independent paper, outside the circle of the press-baron stranglehold, and targets a particular demographic.
It’s interesting how few people have grasped the change in the paper’s status from ten or so years ago, when the Scott Trust became a limited company (after the Snowden) affair, and was lassoed into the Cabinet Office propaganda corral, taking up a place on the D-notice committee, which it had previously studiously refused.
At that time, it’s previous editor went, as did a number of ‘proper’ investigative journalists, and Katherine Viner – an editor of no distinction was put in place. Since then, it has been a channel for pro-establishment propaganda, using its wider historical image as cover. It was an important cue in the narrowing of press freedom.
What’s the D notice please?
A D-Notice is an official request to news editors not to publish or broadcast items on specified subjects for reasons of national security.
In my opinion they are an affront to democracy.
When I worked on Fleet Street, Rick, the Gaurdion was staffed almost entirely by those who had gone to private schools, and who virtue signalled positions in a kind of apology for privilege. They did also have some excellent senior journalists (also from private schools) who considered awkward questions. They now probably still take public schoolers, but I am told that they often employ them cheaply on short contracts so they can fire them before they develop employment rights.
The “press baron” papers (other than The Times) had journalists largely from the lower middle class who were Labour voters, and this was true at the Indie when it began and at the Telegraph. When I worked on the Mail, the only journalists I knew who voted Conservative (other than me) were in the fashion department. I was not there for long, but I longed for an opportunity to resign on principle, having being raised to do this. One never came. On all those papers, if I went to the news desk and said, “This story you have given me is not true for the following reasons,” the news desk would accept that.
Rules in the comment sections were different.
I have a retired pharmacist friend. She’s vaccinated.
After a brief chat with her yesterday, it hit home just how much the prospect of resuming normal life frightens her.
It’s like being caught in a cruel vortex where the brainwashed drag the rational down with them.
For anti-vaccer insults, they really know in their hearts we are truth seekers?
scepticism is the first step towards to truth: Denis Diderot
A neighbour asked if we were vaccine rebels! LOL!
Not sure what your meaning is here but 5G and electromagnetic microwave and millimeter wave radiation is no joke. Take a look at this collection of documents to get an idea of the serious issues there are with this crap. What they are planning with 5G is horrendous. Small cell millimeter wave transmitters EVERYWHERE, NO ESCAPE.
The Bioeffects of Millimeter Waves Documented Years Ago
A Russian Review on Millimeter Waves declassified by the CIA in 2015 “Biological Effect of Millimeter Waves” reported multiple research findings and concluded that:
“Morphological, functional and biochemical studies conducted in humans and animals revealed that millimeter wave caused changes in the body manifested in structural alterations in the skin and internal organs, qualitative and quantitative changes of the blood and bone marrow composition and changes of the conditioned reflex activity, tissue respiration, activity of enzymes participating in the process of tissue respiration and nucleic metabolism.” (Zalyubovskaya) “
Does that sound like something you want in your world 24/7? It’s no more of a joke than being injected with mRNA and nanotechnology is a joke.
Published Scientific Research on 5G, Small Cells Wireless and Health
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/2230/html/
The introduction to this video gives a good outline of the problems with the industry:
5G – Kevin Mottus
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Me1YfVZgHlA
A from the horse’s mouth admission that the industry has put no money at all into researching the health effects of the products it wants to unleash on society:
US Senator Blumenthal Raises Concerns on 5G Wireless Technology Health Risks at Senate Hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekNC0J3xx1w
That’s not ‘Da Nang Richard’ Blumenthal, is it?
I have one attached to the telephone post about 20 feet from my bedroom. I am feeling the effects – they are not pleasant.
Best keep an eye on it. There are people with funny ideas about those things and it would be awful if something were to happen to it, I’m sure you’d agree.
I’m really not sure what your point is – are you sneering at my concerns? If so you ought to educate yourself a bit on the subject first.
I can tell you what I would LOVE to see happen to it – I would love to see someone remove it so that it wasn’t affecting the people who have the misfortune to live in its vicinity but have absolutely no say whatsoever about what they are subjected to but are still taxed to the eyeballs based on the (questionable) value of the homes they live in
There are many ways of depopulating the planet – the jabs will do some of it, then there is the 5G to mop up those who didn’t get jabbed and then there are the smart meters – the equivalent of having a mobile phone mast in your living room but are being peddled to the whole country as being essential to combat climate change – more like are being pushed so that a fat cat somewhere makes a trouser load of money. Do you think that TPTB have a 5G transmitter or similar within 20 ft of their home???
This deserves attention and shouldn’t be sneered at. At this point in time, nothing can be ruled out.
I would imagine – that in the fullness of time – the REAL data gleaned from what actually happens in the population which has been jabbed will likely be far worse than this prediction – albeit it is a dire one. Provided of course that a death which is caused by the jab is actually recorded as such. Considering that a lot of deaths which were “with” covid were recorded as being “from” covid, you will have to forgive me if I don’t hold out a lot of faith that we will ever get accurate data on deaths from the covid jabs.
Unfortunately it’s going to take ‘a lot of deaths’ for the masses to wake up. Anything less and I fear this whole event will blow over in the minds of those who didn’t wake up, as does much in history. Only time will tell.
On an aside, and to those guilty…. please stop the divisive comments…. ‘Guardian readers’; ‘that generation’ etc. It’s irksome. Of the folk I know who are not getting jabbed, we are all between 50 and 75 and half are G readers, the other half are committed T’s. The scepticism goes across the board. The cognitive dissonance is not about so called wokism but is much more fundamental. Thank you.
The winning side writes history.
Why don’t you think there’s any data that could produced these conclusions? That’s pretty much the exact definition of what these scientists have just published, in a peer reviewed journal. Why doesn’t their data hold up to your scrutiny?
Yes, these are brave guys submitting this, and a brave journal publishing it, and brave of LS to highlight it.
What world are we in, that scientific discourse has to be applauded in itself?
The mastermind of mRNA vaccines Dr. Malone has been giving interviews lately, expressing his concerns. Please see the Highwire, Del Bigtree June 24th episode to listen to Dr. Malone’s concerns and a frightening explanation of how the FDA functions.
Also check out Bret Weinstein’s Dark Horse stuff on youtube. There is a long piece with Dr. Malone (might be only available in bits now because ….). Weinstein is a PhD level evolutionary biologist.
We won’t be hearimg about this on the BBC then.
I’ll just check “Ceefax” health news…
Ivermectin trials (previous ones “small and low quality, plus no mention of the rigged vitamin D trials); long Covid; and that’s it. You’re right, nothing on “vaccine risks”. Then again, I suppose the BBC is not really a news organisation in the proper sense.
Any news on where the Saturday demonstration starts?
Hyde Park, I think. It’s where all the previous ones started.
I hope someone is compiling a list of all those, worldwide, who have participated in this scam/genocide.
I’m buying shares in gallows-makers.
A small price for these fecking idiots to pay
This is how I feel about vaccines too … its all this government ever goes on about as if its the be all and end all of everything and I’m totally sick of it …
You can watch Mike Graham’s denunciation of this governments obsession with vaccines here ..
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1408012720469852163
I heard it and it did my heart good. I get the feeling he hasn’t been jabbed, although he would never say (and no one should ask) – it’s just that those who have had it tend to brag about it.
I am definitely coming to like Mike Graham more and more.
Love Mike Graham. Totally the voice of common sense.
Presumably that is an average across all ages? If that’s the case you would expect the ‘lives saved’ to be clustered at older ages, whereas the side effects will not. It’s not a case of should we vaccinate, or shouldn’t we? It’s a question of who.
There really can be no excuse now if the government decides to “vaccinate” children anyway. (Healthy children dying of Covid: that number again – O ).
The article seems to suggest the older cohort are both more affected by the disease, and also by the vaccines ‘It is to be hoped that the tally of fatalities will become lower as a consequence of the vaccinations, as the age of those vaccinated decreases’
You would expect older people to be more impacted by side effects of the vaccine, but it’s hard to believe it would be as stratified as the impact of Covid which is unusually weighted to older people.
True….. and ‘it is to be hoped’ is a bit feeble
Death is unusually weighted to older people.
“Hope” is not a plan nor is it scientific
This government were warned numerous times by many of the worlds most leading experts about the dangers of these experimental vaccines and the serious side-effects they could expect to happen if they went ahead with a mass vacination program but instead of chosing to heed these warnings they chose instead to take the advice from those experts that told them what they wanted to hear – the expert advice that would fit the narrative they have manufacturing since day one and now this whole fiasco is falling to pieces.
Heads should roll for this..
Peter wears face knickers so as to protect Mary.
Mary dies so as to protect Peter.
Fair do’s, eh?
I stated recently on LDS the number of deaths from the vaxx was likely to be 1 in 32k. It turns out to be (officially) higher at 1 in 24,331 – but again subject to the usual under-reporting caveat that would bring it nearer 1 in 2,500*.
What I simply don’t see is the corresponding C19 mortality rate for healthy persons that justifies the three lives saved to one life lost statement – so I call this out as misleading bordering on disingenuous.
Using this ONS data it has been calculated that the likelihood of dying from C19 for anyone in the 10 – 19 age group is around 1 in 2.5 million. This means (using these official vaxx death figure of 1 in 24,331) that a healthy in this 10-19 age group person has ONE HUNDRED TIMES more chance of dying from the vaxx than from C19 (and up to ONE THOUSAND TIMES more chance of dying if the under-reporting caveat is applied).
Following through by age group:
20-29 y/o – c20x (up to 200x*) more chance of dying from the vaxx
30-39 y/o – c7x (up to 70x*) more chance of dying from the vaxx
40-49 y/o – c2x (up to 20x*) more chance of dying from the vaxx
(*) The above article claims the the median under-reporting can be as high as 95%, but I have only applied an ‘up to 90%’ under-reporting caveat.
Quite how these figures would translate into three lives saved from vaxx to one life lost seems like a somewhat deluded sleight of hand. Looking at the study it sources the most extreme C19 death figures including those older folks that sadly dies WITH (not OF) C19. The survey states:
So we have a deliberate (presumabaly PCR pushed) overestimate of C19 deaths worldwide from all age groups (but mostly older), which is hardly relevent for younger healthy people in the UK considering playing Russki Roulette with these jabs. Indeed, looking at the survey, there is no age indexed balance or comparisons at all Certainly the clunky often unverified ‘worldometers’ death figures used need to be approached with caution in any event.
Finally, these figures do not factor in other more numerous non-fatal serious and life changing side effects of the vaxx that have sadly proved to have blighted this ill considered experimental treatment. And, more importantly perhaps, it fails completely to factor in long term vaxx impacts (inevitably including deaths) as these treatments are still experimental and so unknown.
Thanks for this. This will help with the notice of liability I am currently drafting to the headteacher at my school when and if it becomes a child vaccination centre.
Additionally, as you can see from the quoted ONS figures, the chances of a healthy child under 10 dying from C19 is 1 in 4m, thus this younger age group has 164x more chance of dying from the vaxx than from C19 (and up to 1640x more chance of dying if the under-reporting caveat is applied).
One can only hope common sense, basic mathematics, collective courage and shared humanity will finally come to the fore long before the under 10s are considered as (yet another) virus reservoir (sic) to be experimented on.
I wish you all the best in your efforts to ensure sanity prevails.
The only alternative here is that they don’t care. They know and continue anyway. Which moves us right into some extremely disturbing territory. Why are they doing this?
Keep up the good work!
UPDATE: This morning (25/06) the headline of this article has been revised from:
as it was 24/06 to
In my critique I quote the initial claimed figure of one person dying from every three lives saved. This figure, however, is only used as for comparison only and is NOT integral to the age related calculations provided.
I do, however, use the claimed deaths per vaxx rate in this study (fatal side effects is at 4.11 per 100,000 vaccinations), which has not altered.
Thus all the above figures stand.
Notwithstanding this doubling of the claimed vaxx death rate v lives saved, this 2:3 figure still fails to remotely approach the actual age index related ‘experimental vaxx v C19’ fatality risk, as I have outlined above (based on ONS and MHRA data).
And we still don’t know what the long term effects might be (by definition).
Giving these treatments to minors should be classed as medical malpractice and abuse (at least).
It’s at least manslaughter, but I agree with Yeaden that it’s murder. They know, in the States, that healthy children will die and have proceeded in that knowledge. As more deaths are reported, and this scheme continues, their guilt becomes more visible.
So: who’s going to do it? Who’s going to kill me (healthy 47-year-old woman, very low risk of dying of covid, likely life expectancy c. 85-90 years), in order to save the lives of three poorly people in their 80s?
Why, the local GPs who are staffing the vaccination centres, of course!
I’m not!
They’ve got to catch you first…..
It would be interesting to see this risk broken down for different age groups, as the chances of a healthy person under the age of 65 dying from Covid are virtually nil, so the risk to them from the vaccine must vastly outweigh any supposed benefits.
So true …
“…the NNTV to prevent one death is between 9,000 and 50,000 (95% confidence interval), with 16,000 as a point estimate. The number of cases experiencing adverse reactions has been reported to be 700 per 100,000 vaccinations. Currently, we see 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations, and the number of fatal side effects is at 4.11 per 100,000 vaccinations. For three deaths prevented by vaccination, we have to accept one inflicted by vaccination.”
They made an error in their abstract. It should have been two, not one, death(s) inflicted by ‘vaccination’.
According to the study, if we take 16,000 as their point estimate as NNTV to prevent one death, then every 100,000 so-called ‘vaccinations’ on average would save 100/16 = 6.25 lives, yet would kill 4.11 people and result in 700 adverse reactions. Or around 1.52 people are allegedly ‘saved’ for each person killed, and many, many more injured or disabled, even if we accept the implausible claim that some lives are saved by injecting a toxic spike protein.
The results section of the paper clarifies:
“Thus, we need to accept that around 16 cases will develop severe adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines per 100,000 vaccinations delivered, and approximately four people will die from the consequences of being vaccinated per 100,000 vaccinations delivered. Adopting the point estimate of NNTV = 16,000 (95% CI, 9000–50,000) to prevent one COVID-19-related death, for every six (95% CI, 2–11) deaths prevented by vaccination, we may incur four deaths as a consequence of or associated with the vaccination. Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths.”
So here they’ve corrected their error in the abstract.
However, now that official government data shows the Delta variant CFR to be 0.210% for the jabbed and 0.0957% for the unjabbed, any claims about saving lives are even more dubious.
And this is before we even count the wholly unknown longterm consequences, and the massive under-reporting of Yellow Card adverse reactions.
And how much worse would the 1-3 be if countries raised their vitamin D to the top countries in the link below. It beggars belief what damage this Gov is doing. They need putting in the dock.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.11.21253361v1.full-text
Vit D recommendations have been tweaked in the background recently, in particular external dietary intake (setting aside our automatic generation under sunlight). In England, it has been doubled, and in German it has been doubled again. 5 μg (5000 ng) per day to 10 to 20. In simple terms, there is a lot of uncertainty about the numbers to use, and the functionality that is performed within our natural system. Still much to be learnt, even by the ‘experts’.
Get some sun, another reason lockdown is harmful.
I’m just surprised this study saw the light of day. It will probably be withdrawn soon.
Considering how many people in the UK have already been double jabbed the question of whether this research should cause the government to re-think its vaxx strategy is more than moot – it is too late. The only people who would be saved by any re-think would be children. Unfortunately I’m not holding my breath waiting for the announcement that they won’t have to be jabbed to go to school.
I’m inclined to think they haven’t fully vaccinated as many people as they’re claiming
I think I’ve broken through to one person who told me today they won’t be having their second. I have a few good friends I believe are with me in refusing and hopefully one of the wives is too.
Couple of youngsters off work today with vax sickness, so sad, the social media posts of 20yr olds showing their vax cards is making me dry heave daily.
If that person has had a first jab it is too late.
I hope you are right
There’s all those boosters to come, though….
booster implies you have had jabs one and two – if you have had them you can’t be helped /saved
They’ll be spending time writing out their defence arguments, and working out which barristers to hire.
It can wake them up to the boosters.
What do the authors mean by the three they save? Do they mean those who are not killed by ‘the vaccines’?
How can they determine whether a recipient has been ‘saved’ from a fate no worse than flu or simply survived the vaccine?
“Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks and benefits on the same order of magnitude.”
The bit that is missing from this is the “serious side effects” number for suffering the illness. In other words the “Long Covid” question.
How many people are crippled by Covid rather than killed?
Bear in mind that serious adverse side effects are overwhelmingly unreported.
“Long Covid” may or may not be significant, but until there’s a compelling body of evidence to show that it is more significant than the general run of post-viral problems, we shouldn’t treat it as “special”. I’m not aware that there is such a body of evidence.
It’s not about being special as such. It’s what the impact of it is. Presumably such post viral effects is one of the reasons we have a flu vaccine but not a mild sniffle vaccine.
But you still need that to compare against a vaccine and work out what the trade off is.
I’d like to see the trade off for flu too.
There is no reason to treat Covid any differently from Flu, measles or scarlet fever.
Long Covid never has and never will be a justification for what we are doing to the human race.
It’s the justification for the flu vaccine, which works on the balance of risks like everything else. How many does the vaccine kill or injure vs how many does the disease kill or injure per population head per time period.
Assuming of course you are using rational enlightenment thinking, rather than just extreme feelings.
In other words actual science rather than religion, tin foil hat beliefs or the ‘believe the expert’ Scientism we’ve been bombarded with over the last two years.
Lucan Bot, Insinuating that the flu, measles, scarlet fever vaccines etc and the experimental gene therapy are the same thing is entirely untrue and disingenuous. They are nothing like the same, and should be treated entirely differently for that reason. You can try to keep selling but I’m not buying.
I have Long Covid. I completely agree with you. I was unlucky, it happens with viruses. The drive to vaccinate the entire population is incredibly scary.
How about comparing the ages of those that died with the likely ages of those lives that have been saved?
I expect that the former would be considerably lower than the latter.
Take account of the QALY aspect and the under reporting of vaccine deaths and the results are horrendous.
I wish there was somewhere I could get fake-administered the vaccine… So it’s on record but they don’t actually give it to me. There must be someone doing it
Take an orange and £300 cash
In the privacy of the treatment room get the nurse to inject the orange instead of you in exchange for the cash
genius!!
The article headline is wrong.
The quote from the study is wrong.
It is not ‘1 death for 3 saved’.
It is “2” deaths.
Here is the study extract (red circle):
well spotted
NNT vs NNH (plus ARR vs RRR in thread)
Data from NEJM Israeli study and Pfizer trial published by UK Gov MHRA.
(References and data summary pic in tweet link below, see thread for ARR vs RRR):
https://mobile.twitter.com/JavRoJav/status/1372749574629060608
Ooof
how on earth can anyone think vaccination is a good idea with that kind of data?
Yes – a good reminder of that basic data.
What has made me wonder, is why do the great majority of people seem to have reactions to the vaccines, from just a sore arm and a headache to nasty reactions that keep them in bed or in hospital …. And yet two friends of mine have had zero reactions? Nothing? Not even a sore arm or a mark where the needle went in? As though they’ve never had the vaccine at all. Have they been lucky and their immune systems have been stronger than the vaccine or was it just saline solution? Crazy I know, but then we have a bat crazy government whose health minister is completely evil.
It’s more likely that they have weaker immune systems and don’t react? Or given that manufacturing has been scaled up so fast, QC is probably slack and some doses will be more pure than others. If you’ve got contaminates, you’re going to have high levels of reactogeneicity
You could be right Sophie. I’ve heard that some doses have been found to not be as potent as others, and one batch missed a vital ingredient altogether. I didn’t pay much attention at the time but you’ve reminded me of it. Also one friend who showed no reaction whatsoever seems to have a fantastic immune system, never gets colds, never ill, which was why I was wondering if she’d just thrown the vaccine off. It just seems so odd.
Yes I wondered about the QC problem, some may be made in state of the art factories and some knocked up in a shed.
I also ponder that it might be deliberate, only some doses are actual “vaccine” ir order to throw off the stats for side effects/death. They can catch up with the boosters.
“some knocked up in a shed” – I am hoping you are kidding us, but if that is true then heaven help us
Chris C – I was wondering that myself to be honest. Then I thought, surely they couldn’t keep something like that hushed up? Surely it would leak out if that is what is going on?
Could they be lying? I suspect some people will lie about it to save problems with friends.
For one friend, that’s possible yes, although I have seen her vaccination card (easily bought on eBay though I know) but the other friend has showed me her NHS app with the vaccination details. Yet she had zero reaction and felt nothing.
I suppose it must depend on the individual. I have also spoken to people who claim to have felt fine after the first shot. All of the people I know haven’t had a second one yet. Maybe it has something to do with whether it’s the first or the second. And then again maybe it has something to do with people’s genetic makeup.
I’ve wondered about that too. My husband for one – excellent immune system – slight tenderness on site that’s all. We do our cause no good to pretend that some people – many people – will dodge the bullet fine. Short term anyway!
There are a number of possibilities, but the fact is that even I, as a total sceptic, was surprised at the rate of adverse reactions seen amongst friends, family and acquaintances.
I am the same. I’m a dye in the wool vaccine skeptic of many year’s standing. But even I wouldn’t’ have believed the level of both compliance, and sickness and death. And now the desperate silencing of the families left behind. But most if all the silence on the part of neighbours and friends valiantly “supporting” these devastated families. We aren’t allowed to discuss it or reference it. It’s a conspiracy of silence, but I can feel them wondering who is next?
I think it’s the mix with the saline. Sloppiness at vaccine centres, plus delays as (especially the Pfizer vaccine), is left standing or at the wrong temps means that the majority of the dose sinks to the bottom of the vial, (see use of SPIONs), or possibly floats to the top. Either way, anything that has to be mixed on site, is going to be non-uniform. Add to that the incredibly variable levels of adulteration they’re finding in this vaccine compared even to the flu vaccine, and there won’t be one precise reason. Suffice it to say that some folk will have had basically saline, and others a lethal dose of blood clotting agent.
I have a serious explanation, I call it the Multiple Tail Risk hypothesis.
Unlike ordinary vaccines, where a refined dose of a dead pathogen is administered here, a defined dose of coded instructions are given.
The extent to which it leaves the injection site will vary, low to high.
The anatomical regions into which most of it goes will vary, low to high risk.
It’ll be taken up variously into blood cells & endothelial lining cells, low to high.
It’ll be copied into spike protein with varying efficiency, low to high.
The sensitivity of the recipient to thromboembolic events will vary low to high.
Consider the person at one end of the tail of risk, with low amounts of vaccine leaving the injection site; with low amounts taken up into anatomical sites which aren’t particularly dangerous; low amounts of spike protein made & in a person not easily provoked into blood clots or bleeding.
Nothing much by way of side effects.
Consider the person at the other end of the tail of risk; with high amounts of vaccine leaving the injection site; with high amounts taken up into anatomical sites which are particularly dangerous; high amounts of spike protein made & in a person easily provoked into blood clots or bleeding.
This is the person who perished with eg. Cerebral vein sinus thrombosis.
The manufacturers were not required to study ANY of these components.
Tail risk is unavoidable because of the multistep nature of the mechanism of action.
Thank you. That makes sense.
Thank you Mike! A really good explanation, appreciated. Are you saying then that a person who twice had no or little reaction to both doses of the AZ vaccine is unlikely to have been hurt badly by them and thus may not suffer long term consequences? But that a person who had bad side effects for both jabs is more likely to have longer term consequences?
What also concerns me about the two people involved, is that because they had no reaction to this series of two AZ jabs, they are both saying they will take the boosters when on offer. I’m horrified.
If any of these clearly dangerous experimental vaccines ends up being officially approved for non-emergency use, it must be strictly on condition that the manufacturers are no longer indemnified against consequential damage caused.
Otherwise, outlaw their dodgy snake oil.
I don’t see how they can be officially approved now without going back to square one and undertaking 8-10 years of proper controlled trials. As I understand it, the original control groups for the vaccine trials appear to have been ‘nullified’ since by offering all the participants the ‘real’ potion. And there does not appear to be (maybe that should be ‘there is not…’) any credible monitoring of the effects of the vaccines during the global roll out.
I would be intrigued to know how exactly the £1.5m of taxpayers’ money awarded to Genpact UK is being used.
https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/emea/uk-use-ai-covid-19-vaccine-side-effects
Exactly. The testing program is entirely screwed, and data is now unblinded observational, unsampled garbage.
Wow, this is huge. At last. Now when will the findings of this study be shared with the general public via MSM, the FDA, MHRA and the European Medical Authorities. To ignore this could be classified as criminal negligence, crimes against humanity. But we already knew this.
Why ‘at last’? This type of info. has been available for a while. Look at the Israeli data posted above, and the ARR figures of ~1%.
Stunning conclusions and proves those with an iota of intelligence were right about using novel, untested ‘vaccines’ (experimental gene therapies) on human test subjects. This government, along with others are guilty of genocide.
Well, I’m glad I said no, at the start. At the time, I was 50/50 about what to do, but it appeared to be wise to wait and see. The more I see, the less I like about it.
Here is a peer reviewed study in Vaccines saying alarming things about the toxic injury and death inducing qualities of the vaccine.
This comments section has clearly been infiltrated 77th etc pointing the other way, using bad language or mumbling about ‘feelings’ and 5G.
This study helps confirm, to the hard of thinking, that the VACCINE is very dangerous, especially to the young, whether or not we agree that Covid is very to dangerous to the old. It has no benefit to the young whatsoever and there is no pandemic.
‘Don’t take the Vaccine’ because it’s a ‘theatrical poison’ should be the take home here.
And of course, bin the masks.
Thank you Toby Young for publishing this study.
Hear hear
This almost perfectly fits my own fag packet calculations based on yellow card data.
NNTV varies according to prevalence. So what was the prevalence for the Israeli study? I can’t work it out from either the Vaccine paper or the Israeli study paper.
The Title needs changing to ‘Two for Three at best!’.
The mortality rate of the majority of those who died with Covid was a few weeks at best so it is not surprising that pumping them with strange chemicals triiggered an adverse reaction. The problem is that Governments have made vaccine roll out a condition for our freedom or what will pass for it in the years to come.
Is “inflicted” the same as dead? Or just experiencing side effects?
Playing God and trying to trick nature will always have such results.
If it ever was about health, they always would have had to stick to vaccinating the vulnerable only.
Even then, this ratio would probably just have been 1:1, but at least, they wouldn’t have committed a most heinous crime.
That the vaccines are killing people is incontrovertible, that they are saving lives is totally unproven and almost certainly a lie.
Of course, the medium and long term damage caused by these gene therapy agents masquerading as vaccines is yet to come and judging by the level of vaccine damage to date it may well be catastrophic.
Those who have been vaccinated have been entered into the trials of unlicensed and highly dubious experimental offerings, but I very much doubt this was made clear at the vaccination centres. Informed consent for Covid for injection vaccines, is a contradiction in terms, as properly informed people wouldn’t go anywhere near these highly dangerous products.
We know the average age of death from Covid is in the 80’s (slightly higher than ave life expectancy) but what about the vaccines? If the ave age of death from vaccines is in 50’s or 60’s or even 70’s, then the vaccines are seriously reducing life years lived not extending them! Approximately 1200 lives lost from vaccine so far, so that means 1800 lives saved so far from the vaccines. Which is not a very impressive return even before accounting for life expectancy factors. The vaccine roll out appears to be an unmitigated disaster! This explains why we keep being told by Handjob et al how fantastic it is…
From what I’ve read, the two vaxx deaths will be of healthy 35 year-olds (destroying 90 years of life) and the three saved lives will be of 80 year-olds (saving 6 years total). 6-90 = -84 years, or 28 years of life destroyed per ‘life saved’ by vaxx.
It is not contested that adverse events are underreported.
In light of that fact, the data already tell us that the net impact of mass vaccination is NEGATIVE.
This also discounts to zero the possibility of additional delayed serious adverse events.
Time to call a halt on covid19 vaccination.
These were never needed for there is a good handful of safe & effective treatments.
Best wishes
Mike
Anyone able to reverse engineer the absolute risk reduction from the NNTV?
This is absolutely appalling.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4347/rr-4
2018-21 apparently had no more age-adjusted deaths than 2015-18 or 2012-15. I tend to agree with Mike Yeadon’s comment; the net impact may be negative. Note: these figures seem to go from June one year to May the next year inclusive.
I suppose matters may be clearer in coming years. If all-cause mortality rises vs. the above periods, it’ll be a bad sign.
But if the mortality risk from the vaccines is 1:25,000, and we assume that 45,000,000 will get jabbed, that’s 1,800 individuals who’ll sadly die. Is this statistically detectable above the noise? Maybe not.
Thanks John. Yes, I also agree with Dr. Yeadon’s comment.
I fear the number will be far greater than 1,800 – if you haven’t read this then I recommend you do (click the “PDF” button).
https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/23
The government and their advisors have continued to lie and treat us as imbeciles I see no reason why we should believe anything they claim regarding the efficacy of their gene therapy, in fact if you take the opposing view on everything they spout you won’t be far off the mark.
I am 83 and my wife 84. We have both had Pfizer with no side effects other than tiredness three days after the first dose. We are in good health and have had flu vaccinations every year for twenty years with no ‘flu, as well as a vaccination for pneumonia (lifetime immunity). I think it likely that all this helps Covid vaccination to work well.
Neighbours who refused ‘flu vaccinations both had influenza quite badly two years ago.
I have not had the flu vaccine and have never had the flu. Strangely 3 of my cousins are the same so our genes must have something to do with it.
Today I had to visit our local village post office. I don’t like the post mistress and so with my naked face I entered her shop and saw her sitting behind the counter with a glass screen masked. I smiled and before I could say good morning she screeched M A S K!! at me whilst pointing at her own mask as if I couldn’t understand what a mask was. I approached her slowly putting my hand into my coat pocket and producing my exemption card. It was a wonderful moment!!
“This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.”
Almost fell of my Unicorn when I read that.
Let’s hope there are no longer term side affects.
“For three deaths prevented by vaccination, we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination”
Well I have yet to read the paper and maybe once I have read it I will have been convinced. But that conclusion, in view of the 100,000+ in the UK killed by covid, does not, for me, pass the sniff test.
Rethink their vaccine strategy
Yeah like that’s going to happen