The latest UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance report was released yesterday. It has a new section entitled “Vaccine effectiveness publications” which lists the relevant UKHSA and PHE publications, and which may well have been added in response to the emails of Daily Sceptic readers asking for an update on the UKHSA vaccine effectiveness study.
The top item in the list is the latest from their ongoing test-negative case control study – or rather the update-before-last, as for some reason the link goes to a pre-print from September, which then redirects you to a newer version published on October 6th. In any case, this means I was incorrect to state that there had not been an update using data since May, as these papers had somehow flown under my radar (for which, sincere apologies). In fact, the latest update uses data up to September 3rd, so still two months behind and including nothing from the autumn, but it’s certainly better than stopping in spring.
The chart below shows the estimates over time for the two main vaccines, indicating declining effectiveness.
It is immediately apparent, however that these estimates are significantly above those found in other studies. The new study claims, for example, that the AstraZeneca vaccine remains 47% effective after 20 weeks (five months), when a recent Swedish study found it was down to zero (or lower) after four months. It puts Pfizer at 70% effective after 20 weeks (five months), when the Swedish study put it at 47% after four to six months, and zero after seven months. A Qatari study similarly found the Pfizer vaccine effectiveness down to around zero after five to seven months (these figures are all for symptomatic infection). The UKHSA acknowledges the Qatari study and says it is in line with its own findings in terms of showing decline, but doesn’t discuss why its own study still found substantial protection when the other did not.
The suspicion is that there is something wrong with the design of the UKHSA study that means it is coming up with inflated vaccine effectiveness estimates owing to biases that it is failing to adjust for (and may not be able to). That was certainly the inkling I got in May when I analysed the study design when it first came out with data up to February 19th.
The biggest problem at that point was it wasn’t clear how well the study had controlled for calendar week, and thus for the phase of the epidemic and the background incidence. There were also questions of how representative the sample groups were of the general population given the case-control design and thus the fact that everyone in the study, positive or negative, was suffering from Covid-like symptoms (just not necessarily Covid). These issues may explain why, when comparing the unadjusted and adjusted data, huge adjustments were being made. For instance, AstraZeneca vaccine effectiveness was adjusted from 4% to 73%, while Pfizer was adjusted from 27% to 57%. These are for one dose, and the AstraZeneca figure at least is clearly way too high, given that the trial only found 70% efficacy for two doses.
This hardly gives us confidence for the latest round. However, this time we can’t compare unadjusted and adjusted figures as the study doesn’t provide the unadjusted figures. It provides some raw data, but not broken down over time so we can’t see how it’s changing so as to compare it to the vaccine effectiveness estimates. So we’re none the wiser. However, we can spot some strange features in the adjusted vaccine effectiveness estimates, such as that both vaccines are significantly better against Delta than against Alpha when it comes to hospital admissions for 40-64 year-olds, which raise an eyebrow.
In short, the UKHSA is publishing estimates of vaccine effectiveness that, while declining, are considerably higher than other studies without any real explanation as to why. This means it remains unclear why the real-world data the UKHSA publishes (see below) is showing infection rates in many age groups significantly higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. Signals in the data indicate it may be owing to faults in the study design, which adjustments do not successfully address.
When the UKHSA publishes its next update with data from the autumn (which it really ought to do sooner rather than later), it should include the unadjusted estimates and raw data broken down by time so we can get a better idea of what’s going on. Another improvement would be for the agency to undertake another study using a different design (e.g. a retrospective cohort study) and compare the outcomes in order to assess the reliability of the findings.
In the meantime, we continue to use the real-world data in the Vaccine Surveillance report to estimate unadjusted vaccine effectiveness, with the latest table and charts shown below. These are unadjusted rates of course, and there may also be issues with the population estimates, but they give us some indication of what the vaccines are doing, particularly in the trends. Note that most of the vaccine effectiveness values have stabilised now, though the much higher infection rates in the vaccinated persist. Protection against death for the over-80s continues to decline steadily.
Stop Press: eugyppius has written a Substack post about the UKHSA’s latest data drop.
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.
Surely the clue as to vaccine effectiveness is that the authorities are trying to force boosters on people after 6 months – less in some cases.
5 months in Israel. 20 weeks (5% weekly drop for 20 weeks then it don’t stop!) Welcome to subscription immune system.
Had a workmate return yesterday after Covid which she picked up shortly after the 3rd jab.
Be interesting to see the number of triple jabbed cases pans out and how long before the wonderous booster is supposed to take effect?
While we were discussing symptoms (I’m a dirty unvaxxed) another double jabbed workmate decided to do a test (he did one at the start of the week), what we were describing was the same as his ‘cold’.
So that’s him off for 10 days.
I’m sticking with my natural immunity and for some odd reason my glass back disappeared with Covid so I think its a fantastic virus.
Locusts gonna jab, jab, jab, jab, jab. https://txti.es/fifthtrumpet
Unfortunately I don’t know how many swarms there will be, or more importantly, how people’s immune systems will hold out after being Spiked every 5-6 months.
I’ll wait and see. (At a safe distance.)
Written after reading Dr Seuss to daughter at bedtime:
I do not like these new vaccines!
I do not like these spike proteins.
I do not want them in my vein!
I do not want them in my brain!
Would you could you for a train?
Would you could you for a plane?
I would not could not for a flight.
And freedom is a human right!
Would you could you for career?
Would you could you for a beer?
I would not could not just for work.
Or any other kind kind of perk!
Would you could you for a pass?
Would you could you for a class?
I will not take for passport checks.
I do not want the side effects!
I will not take it here or there.
I will not take it anywhere!
Viral vector / RNA.
I do not want it either way!
I will not take these new vaccines,
I do not like those spike proteins!
Bravo! 👏
Brilliant! Send it to Julia Hartley-Brewer!
Bravissimo!
Just too good not to.
Ha! Amazing! Thanks!
There’s a repeated word in third stanza that needs removing if you have time… couldn’t edit it once entered!
I also acknowledge that RNA should read mRNA but that was too many syllables.
Also of course the unnamed character does indeed end up trying and liking green eggs and ham, which in the case of spike protein is unlikely.
A pleasure!
Amazing thank you!
I also think but can’t prove that Dr Seuss would have been on our side.
Brilliant.
Well done both.
Very nice!
Well done. Love it.
Excellent! This needs to go viral (sorry, no pun….!)
Thanks! Dr Seuss would have had a field day with this; don’t know if you’ve ever seen The Butter Battle Book; he was all over Kafkaesque bureaucracy, hubris, the dangers of science and the madness of crowds. He would have had a lot to say about this scenario!
Stroke. Of Genius. (Not of the clot shots).
Thanks ! ✊
It’s interesting that the data shows the vaccinated as being more at risk than those unvaccinated.
we are so reliant on MSM to provide accurate data and reporting, they should be challenging everything to ensure we the public are not mislead.
at the start of the pandemic I was encouraged by the honesty of the data coming out of no 10, as time went on and the tide was turning it got less reliable and sensational, pushing a clear narrative of do as we say because you won’t understand the data.
the truth is many of us do understand the data and do want to take responsibility for ourselves, the nhs won’t no matter how much people clap for it.
There was no honesty coming out of number 10 from day one. They inadvertently told the truth a couple of times and immediately U-Turned.
How are the double jabbed doing based on the latest sheet?
80+ (~94% uptake)
87% of cases
87% of deaths (1477)
70-79 (~95% uptake)
91% of cases
83% of deaths (765)
60-69 (~89% uptake)
90% of cases
70% of deaths (339)
50-59 (~85% uptake)
87% of cases
52% of deaths (102)
40-49 (~74% uptake)
82% of cases
46% of deaths (38)
30-39 (~63% uptake)
63% of cases
30% of deaths (10)
18-29 (~55% uptake)
46% of cases
11% of deaths (1)
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032859/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_45.pdf
Link’s not working NC – can you re-post it please?
Click the link again but remove the “%E2%80%8B” at the end, leaving just …”.pdf”
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032859/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_45.pdf
Given that the time from infection to death is about 4 weeks it would be interesting to see the deaths v vaccination rates from a month ago in particular for younger age groups.
At the moment there are too few deaths for under 18’s to make the percentages relevant but I am tracking them in case that changes.
double jabbed + 2 weeks (in case the jab kills them)
Our Pfizer, which art in Manhattan,
hallowed be thy name
Thy prickdom come
Thy will be done
on companies as it is in government
Give us this day our daily jab,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we never forgive those who trespass against us …..
prickdom 🙂
The difficulties may be arising from that fact that the scientific data has to be made to fit in with the political hole the government has dug for itself.
The assumptions required for the test-negative case-control methodology are not being met — they should sort this out or use another method to estimate vaccine effectiveness.
Sales Reps often tell porkies
https://twitter.com/Rob_E_Dresser/status/1458762743062962183
”I must have got this wrong. For the next five months, both the vaccinated and unvaccinated NHS staff will be allowed to transmit Covid to patients. As from the 1st April, only the vaccinated will be able to do it”
Brilliant!
PERFECT!
They are lying.
Simples.
They know we know they are lying…and they don’t care
But they also know that the majority of the population still believes them – there are no doubt more sceptics now than six months ago, but we are still very much in the minority. With most of the population, the government / puppet media makes a pronouncement and the sheeple say ‘Baaaa’.
Unfortunately, I have to agree.
Just like Brexit, noone wanted to really leave if you looked at the MSM.
Regimes are now using covid laws to target political opponents
The Pig Dictator will regard health and care workers as comprising largely of Labour voters. Therefore it is OK to sack 130,000 of them. They are not his people
Meanwhile over the border in Wales there will be no cull of health and care workers. The Rapist Dad will protect the Labour voting heroes
Instead the Rapist Dad has decided to attack anyone connected with business (Tory voting scum) using ‘vaccine’ passports.
We are heading for a very dark place
“Why Are the UKHSA’s Estimates of Vaccine Effectiveness Consistently Far Higher Than Other Studies?”
Because the UKHSA lie in order to collect their handsome salaries?
Just looking at the tables on the UKHSA vaccine week 45 surveillance study:
In the 70-79 age group 2.6% of ‘cases’ were of the unvaccinated.
12.2% of the emergency care admissions were unvaxxed
15.1% of the deaths were unvaxxed
This data is for the weeks 41-44.
The more interesting data is trying to find out how many died in the two weeks from being jabbed to “vaccinated” status .
I found one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_Chameleon
In an interview, Culture Club frontman Boy George explained: “The song is about the terrible fear of alienation that people have, the fear of standing up for one thing. It’s about trying to suck up to everybody. Basically, if you aren’t true, if you don’t act like you feel, then you get Karma-justice, that’s nature’s way of paying you back.”
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032859/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_45.pdf
Link for the report.
Vaccines are a sacred cow and no one must be allowed to question them! Anyone who does raise questions must be discredited by calling them anti vax. It’s gone so far with the covid vaccines they are seen as some kind of magic miracle.
At my fathers care home they came to do the boosters for residents on Tuesday morning. We knew he would be put on end of life care by his GP later that day and he was, but the vaccinators wanted him to have the vaccine – we said no. As we were there with Dad we could over hear the vaccines being given, one resident said he didn’t want one, said he doesn’t have vaccines. This wasn’t acceptable to the vaccinators, but the care home staff said he has decided and he should not be forced – thank goodness there are some sensible people left.
The Swedish matched pairs study cannot be dismissed and the boosters are a clear indication they know the vaccines are not as effective. The more they push, coerce and shove these vaccines, the more resistant, the less trusting, the more outside of society I feel.
They are indeed something of a holy sacrament – please don’t ask why you need it, or what good it will do, just shut up and take it seems to be the prevailing sentiment amongst formerly rational people and institutions. We’re in the Twilight Zone.
I’ve been having discussions with some of my colleagues recently (all people who I would describe as normally intelligent and rational). The main reasons for accepting the pricks seems to be to travel (in the case of the younger ones), and with the older ones it’s because they’ve been told (and believe) that doing so will prevent them spreading it to their elderly relatives. When I point out that actually it doesn’t do this and case numbers in nearly all age groups are now higher in the spiked than the unspiked I just get blank looks (of the ‘you are a conspiracy theorist but we are too polite to say so’ type). I really don’t know how society moves on from this now that it has literally become like a religion, and people ‘believe’ that it’s much more dangerous than it actually is, and that the pricks are the saviour – and seem unable to absorb or think about anything which shows otherwise.
Same. Even when you direct them to the UKHSA report and say “it’s not a made up website thing”, they might acknowledge it (kinda), but then immediately slip back into the mainstream narrative with its complete lack of evidence.
I had a disconcerting experience earlier this week, when I met with a senior ex colleague, now on the board of the NHS. She is full-on Covidian. She asked me if I was vaxxed, and when I said no (but recently recovered and with antibodies) I got the look of death and was told if I wasn’t recently recovered, I would have to leave! Insane. She also wore a mask from the table to the buffet, because “you don’t know where these people [other customers in the hotel] have been”.
I know where they’ve been. Sat 6 feet away breathing the same air as you while you drank your coffee maskless (I didn’t say, as I was being polite, but was sorely tempted). Utterly irrational and insane. She is a very clever woman, yet her brain has been completely scrambled by this. I find it so baffling.
If she is on the board of the NHS, and the government is populated with 60 somethings who are thinking like this, we are doomed.
How utterly dispiriting. What is going on in people’s heads? I let my ‘status’ slip earlier this week in a room full of sixth formers and was actually verbally attacked by a few of them and called all the predictable names. Unfortunately I bit and demolished all of the nonsense they had absorbed from I imagine their parents, some of whom were doctors. Showed them the UKHSA report and watched their brains short circuit, then asked them to take back what they had said about me being irresponsible and selfish. I know we all keep saying it, but I just can’t believe how brainwashed people are. However, after the angry ones had left, four of them stopped back to say they agreed with me and respected my position but hadn’t been brave enough to say so during the debate. A logic grenade has been thrown into society.
Imagine the peer pressure those sixth formers must be under.
Really has highlighted how many fucking morons there are out there hasn’t it? I had my suspicions, but didn’t think it was this pathetic. The one highlight though is when you meet a fellow sceptic …
I always start by making the cost-benefit (particularly to health) argument first – I find people more receptive to this line of fire – once you gain credibility and agreement you can move on to the more contentious subjects.
Might not be your thing, or might not work for you, but I thought I’d share my experiences of approaching the c word with a zealot.
As we’ve never bothered about any coronavirus before, doubtful ‘effectiveness’ of jabs is worth looking at.
Doing so seems to cause forgetfulness of natural immunity and of assessment of risk from virus itself.
Thence unquestioning acceptance panic re virus was and still is justified.
Thence continuance of tyranny by the World’s government.
Unless we cut the basic ‘wotsit’, preferably in such a way that it doesn’t hit the fan, we’ll never escape from ever worsening hell-on-earth
Playing devil’s advocate, do the graphs appear to show that for some the effectiveness of the vaccine drops but then starts to improve again?
Sacking carer’s when PPE was ok 2 days ago.
https://theexpose.uk/2021/11/12/covid-vaccines-negative-effectiveness-minus-126-percent/
Nothing particularly to do with methodology, data or interpretation. This is just plain, old-fashioned lying and propaganda.
Because it’s a propaganda piece, not a serious scientific summary.
This is obvious in all the spin in it, For example,
That little word ‘some’ was inserted to take the edge of the facts, and so damage the truth. They could simply have said ‘There is evidence of waning’. In truth, there is abundant evidence of waning, indeed all the evidence supports waning, not merely ‘some’ of it.
Then you have this bias:
Substantially lower? In the 18-29 age group the rate is around 13% lower. That warrants insertion of ‘substantially’, when an unbiassed report would simply have stated “The rate of a positive COVID-19 test is lower in vaccinated individuals”.
But, you see, the hype only works in one direction, because though the rate of a positive test is higher in all age groups above 30, indeed well over 100% higher in many, the ‘substantially’ does not appear and we read the straightforward
So, here are examples of words like ‘some’ and ‘substantially’ being used selectively to ‘sex up’ the report to support the government narrative.
These reports are thus not designed to be informative but propagandistic.
Take that policy into selective use of data, and torturing of the data, for the same ends, and it is not difficult to arrive at estimates of vaccine effectiveness much higher than reality. The people who compile these reports have it off to a fine art.
I have written similar releases in my line of work, and I agree wholeheartedly. I was less bloody obvious than this though, as I had to keep the lawyers happy. The UKHSA clearly has no such qualms. Maybe they should?
Could it be that the UKSHA is lying? Surely not!
Cooking the books…
Does this https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/could-this-jewish-ban-on-covid-vaccines-turn-the-tide/ represent a ‘rock and a hard place’ moment ?
Wow did not know this! Proud of my brethren! Stick that in your ‘Its all a Jewish conspiracy’ pipe (I see far too much of this on the internet).
Yeah, the comments section on Bitchute is the worst. It’s like, every 2nd comment blames them for the world’s ills.
I often wonder whether it’s 77th brigade trying to discredit anything truthful…
The vaccine is already zero effective from week 1. Indeed week 1 and 2 correlates with increases vulnerability vs natural resistance.
This frankenshot is the problem and at no point is it the solution.
The test negative case control method with adjustments to create the efficacy against infection is totally inappropriate here to assess that efficacy. How does the act of testing in the community with some symptoms provide a good control in this scenario?
Given that it isn’t an adequate control, that they don’t provide the unadjusted figures is ridiculous. ‘Trust us’ the adjustments are reasonable isn’t scientific.
The conflict with the raw population data is the key to blowing away the nonsense of this updated study. It tells you this opaque study doesn’t past the smell test.
It’s probably true that those who are unvaccinated are less likely to come forward for testing, so I suspect that does explain away some of the negative raw efficacy in the vaccine surveillance reports. But the point is that you are starting from a position of double the rate in many age groups, so you have to justify a massive reduction just to get you down to the same rate in vaccinated and unvaccinated. And that is in the context that many work based and other tests aren’t optional.
At a ball park level, if you claim say 70% efficacy against infection and you have twice as many positives in some groups in the raw data, than that is suggesting that those who are unvaccinated are perhaps 7 times less likely to be tested to explain it all away. That’s just not plausible.
It is also probably true that when the unvaccinated do get tested their symptoms will be much worse than the hypochondriacal vaccinated. And so the unvaccinated are probably more likely to test positive for covid because they have worse symptoms. But this affect gets allocated to vaccine efficacy instead.
And let’s remember the most sick in any age group couldn’t get vaccinated which was why there was a huge spike in non-covid mortality per 100,000 in the unvaccinated (of the same age) as vaccination got underway. The sick became a higher and higher proportion of the unvaccinated group. There is very clear data analysis to support that coming out of the ONS publication Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 24 September 2021. How has that been adjusted for?
Raw unadjusted data often shows truths before those truths are hidden and twisted by those with their agenda to pursue
If we look at LDL cholesterol, then from the raw data there is a positive association between higher LDL and better health outcomes.
So the raw data is telling you to be suspicious of people telling you high LDL is bad for you, and causal in causing your early death when the overall association with all cause mortality is the other way.
Of course you need to look deeper than the raw data. So when you dig deeper you realise that there are some sub-groups where higher LDL associates with poor health outcomes (e.g. those with familial hypocholesterol) and there are those with high LDL who have better than average health (e.g. those with high HDL and low triglycerides).
But starting from the raw data is important or else you can’t see the wood for the trees.
So here it’s no good UKHSA telling us to ignore the raw data showing positive test rates are significantly higher in the vaccinated in many age groups, because their obscure adjusted test-negative case control study that is consequently hard to evaluate claims otherwise. Perhaps the Swedish study which is much more consistent with the raw data is roughly right? UKHSA need to study the potential confounders that may be present in the raw data. But asserting that the confounders explain it all does nothing to aid understanding.
What’s the reason for the far higher rate of cases per 100k in the under 18s who are unvaccinated. It’s wildly different from all the other age categories.
It’s actually higher in the vaccinated under 18s than the unvaccinated.
Very few under 18s have been double vaccinated, but if you compare the unvaccinated with any dose vaccinated you get this chart.
First vaccination doses seem to associate with higher infection rates although may be too early for that to show up. Plus more testing in the under 18s.
The ONS infection survey (which is a random sample of sorts) has higher positive test rates in children (5 to 7x higher in children than over 80s). So probably less to do with testing.
And most of the double vaccinated under age 18s are aged around 17, whereas the unvaccinated under 18s are a range of ages below 18. So can’t really compare anyway.
Because they are at school.
Because all studies are tarot readings.
The cat’s analysis and verdict on those UK numbers. https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/if-unvaccinated-were-a-drug-to-stop
this is so flat out bad that if “unvaxxed” were a drug to stop covid spread, it would be the most effective one we have seen yet if you actually measure it fairly instead of shifting all the bad outcomes from vaccines both before 14 days after dose 2 and once they start falling apart after day 90.
it beggars belief to see anyone claim there is any basis for a mandate here when the vaccines are literally not just not protective of others, but look to enhance spread.
even the case that “vaccines reduce rates of hospitalization or death” seems pretty ethically fraught in light of this accentuation of case risk and spread.
that’s not selfless, it’s selfish.
you’re putting others at greater risk to protect yourself.
that seems like a pretty lame moral hill to die on…
While the MSM condemns the use of ivermectin, the most populated state in India just declared they are officially COVID free after promoting widespread use of the safe, proven medicine. In addition to this, Ivermectin attaches to covid spikes and prevents them from binding to ACE2. Get your Ivermectin today while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
Because it’s a lying, corrupt arm of a lying, corrupt administration.
You only have to look around you to judge effectiveness. The only people we know are all double vaxxed.
Covid Crusher: Mix one heaped teaspoon of Iodine table or sea salt in a mug of warm clean water, cup a hand and sniff or snort the entire mugful up your nose, spitting out anything which comes down into your mouth. If sore, then you have a virus, so continue morning noon and night, or more often if you want, until the soreness goes away (2-3 minutes) then blow out your nose and flush away, washing your hands afterwards, until when you do my simple cure, you don’t have any soreness at all, when you flush – job done. Also swallow a couple of mouthfuls of salt water and if you have burning in your lungs, salt killing virus and pneumonia there too.
My simple salt water cure, kills all Coronaviruses and viruses, as soon as you think you have an infection, or while self isolating, before the viruses mutate into the disease in your head and body, for which there is no cure.
Richard