Recently, the Daily Sceptic published a piece by Professor Martin Neil, Professor Norman Fenton and Dr. Clare Craig exploring inconsistencies in ONS death data by vaccination status. It argued these inconsistencies point to a worrying trend in mortality in the vaccinated in the period following vaccination, concealed by the miscategorisation of deaths as unvaccinated. In particular, a strange spike in non-Covid deaths in the unvaccinated appeared following the vaccination rollout in each age group (see below). Such a spike must be an artefact of some kind because there is no mechanism by which a vaccination programme can cause all-cause mortality to spike in those not being vaccinated.
In its December report, the ONS offered an explanation for these strange spikes. It is a healthy vaccinee effect, it claimed, i.e., it results from the less healthy and those close to death (the moribund) foregoing vaccination or subsequent doses, meaning the more vaccinated are a healthier group than the less vaccinated. The ONS explains:
The all-cause ASMRs [age-standardised mortality rates] for the year-to-date were lower in the first three weeks after a vaccine dose than in subsequent weeks after that dose. This could be because of a ‘healthy vaccinee effect’ where people who are ill (either due to COVID-19 or another relevant illness) are likely to delay vaccination. Therefore, the people who have been recently vaccinated are, in the short term, in better health than the general population.
In light of this explanation from the ONS, Prof. Neil, Prof. Fenton and colleagues have updated their full-length paper to address it in detail. They point out that in the same December report the ONS makes a contradictory claim, namely that the clinically vulnerable, far from foregoing vaccination, were in fact prioritised for it:
The vaccination roll-out was also prioritised by health status of individuals, with the extremely clinically vulnerable and those with underlying health conditions being vaccinated earlier.
Indeed, Prof. Neil and colleagues note that “there is very little indication that terminally or critically ill patients in the U.K. were less likely to be vaccinated. On the contrary, the NHS Guidelines explicitly state that the most critically ill people are the ones who must be prioritised for vaccination in each age group. Moreover, feedback from palliative care doctors known to the authors confirm that terminally ill patients were indeed prioritised to receive the vaccination.”
Fortunately, we don’t need to remain in the dark on this, as the ONS has published data on people in their 70s in very poor health and their mortality rates by vaccination status over time. Using this data, we are able to check whether the claimed ‘healthy vaccinee’ effect in fact occurs. Prof. Neil and colleagues explain:
[The ONS] presents percentages from January to October 2021, of people in very poor health, defined as having experienced 12 or more recorded hospital episodes since January 1st 2020 or having two or more comorbidities – but do so only for 70-79 year olds. 13% of 70-79 year-olds were in this very poor health group in January 2021.
It seems reasonable to assume the size of this very poor health group is strongly correlated with the size of any moribund (near-death) group and would therefore serve as a good proxy. If very poor health alone explains the non-Covid mortality rate, we should expect to see a more or less constant non-Covid mortality within this very poor health group regardless of vaccination status.
In other words, when we look only at those in very poor health, the spike in mortality around the vaccine rollout should disappear, as it was hypothesised to occur due to those in very poor health being in different and changing proportions in the two groups. But now we are looking at two groups in which all are in very poor health, so the proportion in each group in very poor health remains at 100% throughout.
What do we find? First of all, let us look at the proportions of people in very poor health in each vaccination category over time, which Prof. Neil and colleagues have calculated from the available data.
The key thing to notice here is that the percentage of people in very poor health in the unvaccinated category (the blue line) is consistently lower than in the overall population (the black line), and steadily decreases. This means that the unvaccinated are in fact a healthier group than the vaccinated, not less healthy – exactly what we’d expect given the stated policy of prioritising the clinically vulnerable. This contradicts, of course, the notion of a healthy vaccinee effect. As Prof. Neil and colleagues write:
This suggests that not only were those in very poor health not excluded from the dose one rollout, but that they were prioritised: hence the reduced percentage remaining. The decrease rather than increase in the percentage of unvaccinated in very poor health around the time of dose one rollout offers, therefore, a direct refutation of the hypothesis that the increase in non-Covid mortality observed in the unvaccinated at that time was due to them being moribund.
What about the other vaccination categories? There’s a clear rise in people in very poor health in the greater-than-21-days-after-first-dose group (grey line above) around the time of the second dose rollout, with the percentage doubling between April and June. However, the non-Covid mortality rate in that group goes up by a factor of 10 in the same period (yellow line below), so the doubling of the proportion in very poor health could only account for a small part of the apparent increase in mortality observed.
In addition, Prof. Neil and colleagues argue, there’s no reason to think the policy of prioritising the clinically vulnerable for vaccination was abandoned for the second dose.
There’s more. We can compare the non-Covid mortality rate in those who are unvaccinated and in very poor health to the rate in unvaccinated 70-79 year-olds generally. We would expect non-Covid mortality to remain broadly constant in both these groups throughout the vaccine rollout, as there is no reason why it should change. However, we already know there is an unexpected spike in the general unvaccinated group – it is what we are trying to explain. The ONS explanation, of course, is a healthy vaccinee effect, i.e., it’s because the proportion in very poor health in the group increases as they forego vaccination. However, we can see below that the same spike also appears just in those in very poor health (orange line, weeks 6-8). This cannot be caused by the healthy vaccinee effect, as the whole group is in very poor health, so the proportion in very poor health does not change. This means it must have a different cause.
A final piece of evidence comes from comparing the non-Covid mortality rate in the unvaccinated in very poor health (orange line below) to that in the vaccinated in very poor health (blue line). These lines should be the same, as both show the non-Covid mortality rates of people in very poor health, and this should not be affected by vaccination status or a healthy vaccinee effect as we are looking only at those in very poor health. Yet they’re different: the unvaccinated line has spikes around the time of the vaccine rollout while the vaccinated is smooth, flat and consistently lower. As this cannot be explained by a healthy vaccinee effect, Prof. Neil and colleagues argue it is consistent with the miscategorisation of deaths as unvaccinated, with the spike in deaths really being in the recently vaccinated.
The work of Professor Neil, Professor Fenton, Dr. Craig and colleagues appears to demolish any claim that the strange and worrying spikes in non-Covid deaths in the unvaccinated in ONS data can be put down to a healthy vaccinee effect. To the contrary, it appears that the vaccinated group was less healthy – as would be expected from a policy of prioritising the clinically vulnerable for vaccination. It is also in line with the claims made by the UKHSA in its Vaccine Surveillance reports, which state vaccination “has been prioritised in individuals who are more susceptible or more at risk of severe disease” and therefore are also “more at risk of hospitalisation or death due to non-COVID-19 causes”.
Time for the ONS to investigate these spikes in deaths properly and stop claiming a healthy vaccinee effect that is contradicted by its own data.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
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.
Will Neil Ferguson and his team be sacked and prosecuted…..NO
will Neil Ferguson and his team be in place for the next pandemic model ….YES
Will the politicians with vested interest be sacked….NO
Will the politicians with vested interests still be close to power in the next pandemic…..YES
Nothing changes. Look at Brexit. Not one true Brexiteer given a position of authority. Not one true Brexiteer became PM. All chosen by the Remainer Central Party residing in Remainer London.
Big pharma and NIH push Remdesivir as treatment while killing patients with this drug. Dr Harvy Risch stated HCQ and Ivermectin have similar results and government and corporate corruption illegitimately cut it off from treament protocols. Dr Richard Urso also stated that even if HCQ and Ivermectin are blocked from doctors to use these medicines as treatment for Covid. Get your Ivermectin today while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
The work of Fenton and Friends has impressed me; I’m glad to see that they have found evidence-based arguments to deploy against criticisms (which are themselves rational but turn out to be wrong).
P.S. “foregoing vaccination”: nah, you mean ‘forgoing vaccination’. (Advice to a journalist whose work I admire.)
Literacy is no longer ‘pc’ and probably even ‘racist’.
I am having trouble reconciling these particular facts:
1. Lockdown was primarily meant to prevent exposure of vulnerable groups to the covid virus
And
2. The covid ‘vaccine’ is not a weakened or dead form of the virus, but is directly based on the pathogenic spike protein, ergo, receiving the ‘vaccine’ is more closely equivalent to being exposed to the pathogenic part of the virus (than receiving a non pathogenic version to ‘train’ the immune system).
So why did we lockdown three times, only to put the spike protein directly into almost every willing soul?
Let’s hope that Toby and his team can persuade enough MSM outlets, especially the ‘broadsheet’ ones and TV outlets to run this well-thought-out rebuttal. I’m not putting any money on it happeneing though, given past ‘form’ on their side.
Professors Neil and Fenton are serious mathematicians and risk assessors. They are at the top of their game. You don’t get to handle Bayesian statistics without being seriously good (I know because a relative was one). They would not put their reputations on the line without being sure of their ground. ONS being called out…again.
Colds vs Cancer, which keeps which in check with some degree of regulatory and at no cost. Naturally I have no scientific evidence to support this thought.
I have…
https://www.authorea.com/users/455597/articles/552937-innate-immune-suppression-by-sars-cov-2-mrna-vaccinations-the-role-of-g-quadruplexes-exosomes-and-micrornas
Me too. Someone kindly pointed me to it yesterday, and this :-
https://molecular-cancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12943-021-01339-1#Abs1
Someone ought to send it to Pfizer et al, BBC, Guardian – as well as to every MP.
Fat chance anyone of that lot will publicise it but I believe the Police are aware.
And still the jab mandates roll on. Informed consent. Lol.
If they carry on with this in wilful disregard of these discoveries everyone directly and indirectly involved could be guilty of murder – never mind manslaughter.
And, for what it’s worth even in Clown World, ignorance is no defence.
So, for any teachers out there promoting jabs, be warned.
Yeah but, no but, yeah but… those unvaccinated that died within 7 days of taking the Covid-19 vaccination may have from future energy bill price hikes or flipping the duvet.
It’s unintentionally just like a Babylon Bee article. I had to search to confirm it was real
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/energy-bill-price-rise-cause-22971008
Comments are good, someone is going to get a reprimand for opening comments on that article.
Whoever did this may think the reprimand is worth it.
Every now and again I get the feeling some media persons are getting just as fed up as we are and try to get around ‘the narrative’ in little ways like this. The article itself may not say anything out of line, but allows comments which they know full well will give this nonsense short shrift.
I remember seeing (online) the front page of the DT when the NHS jab mandate was reversed – the title was front and centre, right next to it was Rafa Nadal raising his arms in victory – for his win at the AO (to forever be questioned, as his greatest rival was prohibited from participating). There was only the Nadal picture with a small caption, so strikingly next to the NHS story that at first glance it looked like that’s what the victory dance was about. I like to think that was intentional.
Good explanation from the guy on this blog. His posts are very revealing and concise:
https://www.rintrah.nl/albertas-new-data-reveals-the-vaccines-are-causing-you-to-get-infected/
Quote:
“I’ve explained a few times now that the COVID vaccine efficacy stats are deceiving. You’re faced with two big problems. To start with they generally don’t adjust for confounders. Vaccinated elderly tend to be healthier than the small group who remain unvaccinated. When you don’t account for this difference, you’ll imagine we would have faced a black death type scenario if it hadn’t been for the vaccines, based off the high death rate among the unvaccinated.
But the other big issue you run into, is that the manufacturers of these vaccines got away with pulling off a big trick hidden in plain sight. Whenever you’re injected with these vaccines in your arm and the white blood cells capable of mopping up the Spike protein migrate to the location of the injection, the rest of your body is left at increased risk of infection.
So what happens is that during the first few weeks, you’re actually at increased risk of getting infected. Your soldiers are busy shooting at decoys, while the enemy marches in from the back. The vaccine efficacy stats however are presented… Read more »
My partner has been fighting tooth and nail to protect her job in the NHS (non-patient-facing role), and the extent of the lies that has been used to protect the narrative is jaw-dropping.
She’s fighting for an exemption on the basis the jab will make her seriously ill but both our GP and her occupational health board have fabricated lies to play down her case.
I can’t go into the specifics for fear it would expose her, but we have a solicitor who is bringing criminal charges against her employer and potentially the GP.
Given that they are so brazen with their lies, it wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if the ONS are also meddling with their stats. They’ll say it’s an interpretation of the truth, not their fault if we can’t figure it out ourselves. Take for example the freedom of information request I made about a local hospital convid stats – I wanted very specific stats about that hospital, but all they did was point me towards the national stats and said ‘figure it out’.
I have a friend in the NHS who was being bullied by her line manager to get the jab, she took a week off with stress during which time she was offered another job and sent in her notice. They have refused to let her return to work, have terminated her contract immediately but are paying her notice period, they have refused to let her return to say goodbye to colleagues and have so far failed to provide the reference requested but not given any reason for doing so, potentially just dragging their feet on it.
The NHS has many tinpot dictators and amoral subhumans working in it.
It’s a moot point as to whether an organisation that treats its employees so badly is then inevitably going to do the same to a significant number of its patients, or whether the reverse applies.
We know this spike in deaths was due to the vaccines because the same thing happened in many different countries around the world as they started their own vaccine rollouts, as shown by this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSrc_s2Gqfw
But, mightn’t someone lose his/her job if that were done? It’s the opposite of Following the Narrative.
The most critical statement from the linked report is ……
“vaccines do not reduce all-cause mortality, but rather produce genuine
spikes in all-cause mortality shortly after vaccination.”
If the vaccines are eliminating the same frail people who would have gone on to die of covid, could this at least partially explain the good vaccine effectiveness data published by the HSA?
Very likely as anyone who dies within 14 days of their first vaccination is regarded as “unvaccinated” which skews the figures towards a false position of the “vaccines” being effective.
plus a near certain significant underestimation of number of unvaccinated, and probably over estimation of who is, will further bias the effectiveness data.
Back in November the ONS demonstrated it was now a politically motivated propaganda outfit by publishing a report which claimed an unvaccinated person is 32x more likely to die of COVID.
Those familiar with the infamous report will recall ONS used deaths from the big wave early in 2021. The problem with that is the vast majority of the population still wasn’t fully vaccinated at the time. So the inclusion of such data in an analysis which set out to estimate vaccine effectiveness in reducing covid deaths was illegitimate.
Therefore it’s very doubtful the ONS will be doing any analysis with could throw the benefits of the jabs into question.
If the ONS claim that the non-covid spike in one category is simply due to the biased transfer of cases from category to the other without any increase in underlying background mortality, shouldn’t there be a corresponding dip in the mortality observed in the other category? In other words when the blue line climbs, wouldn’t the orange line fall?
There is a confounder in that the graphs are for rates, so the relative sizes of the two groups change as the vaccination programme progresses. However the time period is such that many 70-79 and 60-69 will have received dose(s), so at least some deflection should be seen.
Alternatively, it could be argued that the vaccinated group had excess covid mortality around the same time that masked non-covid effects. I doubt ONS will want to argue that point, though!
Not looking good for them.
Every day more people wake up and suddenly realise what the real purpose of the injections must be – I know four this week – all with odd side -effects (unreported of course) or a feeling of being generally unwell and listless and who have suddenly become very worried about what they have been cajoled and coerced into doing by our Government Ministers and formerly trusted Institutions .
Out for lunch with triple jabbed friends yesterday. She was a nurse in her younger days. We discussed the jabs and I asked her how she thought they worked. She talked about a live virus stimulating the immune system. I had to point out that here was no virus, living or otherwise in the jabs and explained about the spike protein.
Her jaw dropped.
And she is a nurse??? Even someone fed on a diet of MSM propaganda can learn roughly how the gene therapy works.
I questioned a Nurse Practitioner about the jabs
” They are just ordinary injections, like the flu ” she asserted .”No they are not!” says I and explained the mRNA Gene Therapies the absence of safety data and how they worked ( including on the ferrets) in some detail.
“Is that what you have been telling people?” I said.
Her jaw dropped and she clammed up.
This was just weeks after the jabbing had begun .
I can’t doublethink what on earth would explain this apparent (but obviously non-existent) contradiction.
If you read ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ by Robert F. Kennedy and witness just how far his and Gates’ poisonous tentacles stretch, this makes perfect sense.
People who keep asking the same pointless questions really must just read this book- it is has all the un-welcome answers they will be able to handle!
I understand it is difficult to get copies now – for obvious reasons!
Used copies are around £30
I usually search using https://www.bookfinder.com/search
then order from a bookseller other than A*****.
£30 suggests a buoyant demand for copies because there aren’t enough new ones.
https://www.magnetdl.com/file/5047094/the-real-anthony-fauci-bill-gates-big-pharma-and-the-global-war-on-democracy-and-public-health-by-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.-epub/
Good news then it has to get out there – I got my copy from the US soon after it came out before Christmas it transforms the narrative by confirming everything we have suspected in our most pessimistic moments.
I cannot understand how Fauci is still in Office or walking free but then the Devil protects his own.
Housatonic live goes though the book in multiple long streams (~23 hrs all together), scroll down to find them, it’s a very active channel… ep 125.1-125.6
https://odysee.com/@Housatonic:0
https://www.magnetdl.com/file/5047094/the-real-anthony-fauci-bill-gates-big-pharma-and-the-global-war-on-democracy-and-public-health-by-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.-epub/
https://www.magnetdl.com/file/5047094/the-real-anthony-fauci-bill-gates-big-pharma-and-the-global-war-on-democracy-and-public-health-by-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.-epub/
Rule #1
When you’re in a very deep hole, stop digging.
ONS – Office for National Stupidity
As soon as someone has the experimental jab they become less healthy.
“As soon as someone has the experimental jab they”…have capitulated.
Occam’s razor says:
Yup. But Occam’s razor doesn’t apply to covid, or to any other lying bullshit that the establishment and their lackeys spout. Instead, Occam’s butterknife must be used. Cf. increase in heart problems caused by climate change, paracetamol…
Shaking your duvet too vigorously whilst changing your bed linen can increase the risk of heart attacks, according to Twitter.
FFS.
Especially if you’re jabbed.
Shovelling Snow too…Who’d have thought!
Surely Whitty has a view on this latest cause for concern about our health and the heart attack “pandemic ?
Perhaps he will tell us that an extra Booster can probably sort it all out?
In the meantime “duvet shaking” can probably spread the condition and should only be done wearing a mask with of course the ‘appropriate ‘social distancing’ from relatives and bedroom companions in place.
The new danger of the likely ‘asymptomatic spreading’ of heart attacks must surely now be another major cause for his concern – you might have have had one and it has killed you ..but just imagine… you didn’t even know!
(On the tricky subject of maintaining “social distancing” I’m sure it is not a problem Whitty suffers from.)
Which is of course exactly why the 21 day rule was’ invented’ .
Who are the dark, shadowy individuals behind all this who know exactly what is going on?
The “vaccine” catastrophe is only just begging. The numbers of deaths and injuries from autoimmune disease, cardiac disease and cancers etc will increase to such an extent over the coming months and years in the vaccinated population, that the common denominator will be obvious too even the most myopic!
“Can one assume that having come so far along the road to ultimate fulfilment, whatever that may be, we are to be abandoned by the authority we have selected for ourselves”
James Saunders.
The Pedagogue…
Gates suggested 15% as the ideal reduction in world population.
There is something called the ‘Vaccine Control Group’ – a sort of ‘citizens’ control group, of which I and hundreds of thousands of others worldwide are members (Toby is, I think – they give you a little card for your wallet). We pay £6 a quarter. I suspect we might simply be making a couple of people billionaires. They did talk of the possibility of mounting scientific studies, but said they would need more funding. I said I’d need to know more about the founders before committing, as I imagine most others would have! Didn’t see a reply to that… I think the person in charge is South African. I’d be interested in other people’s opinions of this organisation. Control Group (vaxcontrolgroup.com)
I concur.
I’ve been a member since early last summer. It was recommended, or at least publicised, on The Conservative Woman – that was enough recommendation for me. At the time there were a couple of snide comments on here about it, but they made no sense to me whatsoever. Every month, when I go on the site, they ask if I’ve suffered any discrimination at work; I haven’t, but you never know what might happen in the future – things could get really bad for the non-Covid vaxxed, and they’ll be there to help, or at least give advice, hopefully. Or maybe not, but it’s only £6 every 3 months anyway, nothing much to lose. I think all the non-vaxxed need to band together in serious organisations; if not this one, some other.
Email I got to my request as to what the control group is actually doing. I subbed initially, but cancelled my sub (retained membership) to await action. Response seems reasonable, but I will wait before I sub again.
Hi Jeremy
The Control Group study is a citizen-led, independent study of the health outcomes of the voluntarily SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-free. It is not a clinical trial and not registered with the NIH and therefore does not qualify for exemption under the government scheme. Please check in your own country for exemption rules. That said, some organisations have chosen to accept Control Group participation ID as evidence of clinical exemption.
We have spoken about making our study more formal and have been working with another organisation to facilitate this. We understand that it has taken longer than expected and that we haven’t been able to give you any details about it, but this is because we have been asked not to so as not to jeopardize what they and we are doing. We have made great progress in the last few weeks and the very moment we are allowed to, we will give you more information. It will still not be a… Read more »
I think Ivor Cummings does a much better job in this article as breaks it down by ages.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/update-correlation-between-increased
Cummings convincingly trashed the ‘scampandemic’ 18 months ago.
The problem is that there is a difference between those that have chronic illness or are unwell, and those that are close to death.
The ones proposed to have not been given the vaccine are those deemed to be so very ill that they are expected to die within weeks. This isn’t ‘13%’ of the 70+ population, but probably something in the order of 0.3% of the older population. It will be a tiny proportion of younger populations, but their death rates are lower and thus the effect will remain — the important bit is that around 1/3rd or so of those that die of natural causes will be in the group where their death is telegraphed ahead of time by their condition (cancer, etc). In younger age groups the effect of this is diminished because the proportion of deaths due to accidents is much higher in the young, and these ‘accidental deaths’ are clearly not telegraphed ahead of time.
It is quite possible for there to be a ‘healthiness distribution’ that has the unvaccinated being more healthy on average, but also containing these very low numbers of extremely ill individuals. We do have some information that this has been… Read more »
let me help you with that
“But the problem remains that the data we have is
rather poorfraudulent given the situation.”It’s a bit of both – some of the data is fraudulent, but a big part of the approach is to deliberately not collect anything of interest, in case it makes them look bad.
They simply cannot grasp the extent of the diabolic fraud and evil propaganda we have been subjected to!
You are wasting your time looking for rationality – the agenda is far bigger and darker than you imagine.
Total and deliberate PCR Fraud fro the outset ( sample magnification cycles pushed up to 45 rather than 20-25 to create more false positives and generates explosion of fake ‘Case; Numbers). “Covid” death numbers are deliberately falsified -all designed to push the fear and push the mRNA experimental ‘injections – look at it that way for starters.
Can the PRC tell the difference between other coronaviruses? We know if can collect dead virus etc.
No. It only detects traces of virtually any dead virus you may have hanging around – 52 virus traces in the range – including other corona viruses are included in those picked up by the test . But it cannot tell the difference between them.
No PVR test can identify any live infection with anything. The 97% False positives are not ‘cases’ of Covid-19 as the BBC and SKY and all the MSM continue to assert it seems to deliberately mislead the public and exaggerate the number of serious Covid infections
No.
A stat that may interest you.
Between 8 December 2020 and 11 June 2021, a total of 5,522 people died within 28 days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine in Scotland. That figure was released in Public Health Scotland’s ‘Covid-19 Statistical Report’ issued on 23rd June 2021. (see pages 27-30 of full report). Part of the official explanation of this figure contains the following:
“…As the vaccination programme is being rolled out to the entire adult population, many people will experience an illness or death in the days following their vaccination by coincidence. This is particularly the case for those vaccinated early in the programme, when the programme prioritised the very elderly population and those with pre-existing underlying health conditions….”
So it would seem that in Scotland, it didn’t matter how frail you were when it came to jabbing.
https://www.publichealthscotland.scot/publications/covid-19-statistical-report/covid-19-statistical-report-23-june-2021/
Absolutely disgusting.
they lied, then used data to back up their lies.
if someone was classed as vaccinated from the moment of vaccination instead of a 2 week delay it would have made obvious the link between the vaccine and an increase in deaths.
It is increasingly obviously that We have been fed nothing but lies by the MSM the NHS Management and Politicians since January 2020
We really needed large matched cohort studies to be done at the time the vaccines were given.
Maybe not in Dec 2020 (’emergency’), but there was time to sort this out before the younger age groups were vaccinated. They should also have done this for the second dose, third dose, vaccination of children etc etc.
Instead of that the government insisted on not collecting proper data, leaving us with insufficient information on the impact of the vaccines.
This is complete madness from a medical or scientific point of view — of course you should measure the impact of the vaccines.
But it makes perfect sense from a political point of view — if you’re doing something that might be dangerous (or might not be), then if you don’t collect any new data no-one will know about the problem. Even better if you can recruit the internet and media companies to suppress any talk of there being a problem.
Anyway, we have to resort to analysing the broader data in this way, rather than actually having targeted data that could tell us what is going on.
I struggle somewhat with the emergency excuse too, as we saw in 2020 the illness generally is seasonal, it was only after the 2020 jabs and subsequent rollout that we saw seasonality disappear in the Northern Hemisphere (can’t say I have followed it too much in the global South).
We should essentially seek to eliminate EUAs, they bypass too much procedure, too many useful aspects of data gathering and testing, we know that Big Pharma is not some global philanthropist, they’re out only to benefit their shareholders (no problem with this) the problem comes when we forget this, award them 0 liability and encourage them to rollout faster than ever.
I may be wrong but I can’t remember an instance where utilising an EUA was of more benefit than disbenefit.
It’s almost as if there should be long term safety data, collected over several years, for a novel therapeutic where the pharmaceutical companies planning to commercialise the novel entity should by law make available the raw data for review by, let’s say government scientists, the regulatory bodies, other scientists, before approval for large scale administration is given.
Consider the possibility that a much larger and darker agenda is in play and yo may find some resolution.
I think many of us now understand exactly what is going on.
Yep, the government knew all along it was doing something potentially dangerous.
And now they know for sure it is dangerous.
The first is bad. The second…
So “ongoing conspiracy to cause great harm to the population” What else ?
You know what causes the spikes in Deaths at vaccine rollout?
The Vaccine, here’s the blood tests that explain it.
https://rumble.com/vnbrwx-my-jaw-dropped-when-i-tested-someones-immune-system-after-the-2nd-jab..html
Crimes against humanity have been committed. I know it, you know it, they know it. But what is to be done about it? Whatever the answer is ‘they’ should not be allowed to get away with it and must be held accountable.
” ‘they’ should not be allowed to get away with it and must be held accountable.”
Seem to have heard this before – about a thousand times! It’s like saying ‘Tony Blair is a war criminal and should be in prison.’ – hasn’t happened, not going to happen.
What will happen in 2022 in the UK? Still in face masks by Christmas? As the Vaxx Pass requires jabs to stay valid, it does look like jabs 4 and 5 will have to be introduced. Many will take the jabs and get to have a valid Vaxx Pass for travel, others who don’t want to travel won’t have the jabs and won’t get a valid Vaxx Pass. That’s about it, really.
So, as usual, Foxy’s action plan is ‘sneer, denigrate, do buggerall’.
Yes, it’s all getting a bit “Agent Resistance is Useless”
Do something then. Get off your lazy backside and encourage people to email their GP with the police crime reference number they may be investigated under if they do not desist with their ‘vaccination’ activities.
https://www.notonthebeeb.co.uk/post/vaccinationer-warning
If you are asking for information, England has no mask mandate and no vaxx pass requirement. A decreasing number of propaganda victims continue to wear face nappies. There may be venues that try on the vaxx pass scam but I myself don’t know of any. The Celtic nations are different, though,
And I can’t see a massive uptake in any new boosters at this stage. There was a large decrease over Christmas.
I appreciate the sentiment, which I’m sure many if not most of us battle with often.
Some wars are won and some are lost. If a war is worth fighting, it’s worth fighting regardless of the outcome. And you never know….
(Jacob Riis)
Nice quotation!
https://www.notonthebeeb.co.uk/post/vaccinationer-warning
Complete with police crime reference number.
If the “vaccinated” had been honestly labeled as “vaccinated” from the moment they received the injection, rather than being dishonestly labeled “unvaccinated” for the two weeks following the injections, the data would have shown immediately, that the injections were causing deaths.
Is this the gist?
Glad to see this point made on DS ATL. Learned it a long time ago from DS comments BTL.
Labelling the vaccinated as unvaccinated for two weeks after they have received an injection of some purportedly medicinal substance makes my inner scientist want to punch someone on the nose for propagating this bovine excrement.
I mean, there’s a great big glow-the-dark pachyderm tap-dancing across the room, and all they can come up with is oh, look, a squirrel.
For all their cleverness, though, it has caught them out.
They are 40 years ahead of us with their planning …but we are catching up fast!
This data which is hidden should be the most critical one to know.
Data should be clearly delivered:
-unvaccinated
-vaccinated within 14 days
-vaccinated beyond 14 days
Any scientist who doesn’t demand this way is a collaborator of mass murder!
So that makes a significant % then!
In my summary of the events for the last two years, I struggle to decide between this being the top fraud committed vs. PCR testing and CT thresholds etc vs. 28/60 days vs. with/of covid.
My memoirs are at a brick wall haha!
Don’t forget “masks reduce spread” as well! There have been so many auacious lies that it’s difficult to decide which is the most blatant,
They form a web of mass deception of the public.
And don’t forget the asymptomatic transmission lie!
If you have a typhoid vaccination then you are considered vaccinated. However, you are probably not immune for maybe a few weeks.
This is why you shouldn’t have any vaccinations required for overseas less than 4 weeks prior to travelling.
The adaptive response takes a good while to start and produce antibodies and memory T cells and B cells.
Its the old story of conflating two situations as being the same.
You can be vaccinated (against anything) on day 1 but are not presumed immune until day 14; but it doesn’t mean you’re unvaccinated.
I was vaccinated against hepatitis B in the mid 90’s, and was found to be immune following an antibody blood test 6 weeks later. When I was tested again in 2015, I was not immune (I think they’d changed the threshold) and so required a booster. Some people need multiple vaccinations of hepatitis B vaccine to achieve immunity, but they are still considered vaccinated.
this is not about the technical definition of being “vaccinated” (hint, they aren’t vaccines) it’s about the hiding in plain sight of all-mortality data under the guise of the exact time and date the gunk is introduced into your body which should start the “death of vaxx” clock right there and then.
Or are you saying that the huge increase in all-mortality deaths within 14 days of poisoning (currently 90% under-reported in the MHRA system) are all co-incidences?
I had that to go to Madagascar. Don’t remember them ever asking for evidence of it at the Airport. I would only bring something unusual back but catch something that is already there, yellow fever, Hep A, B, etc. They use this obscure argument for the C19 jab, not sure if it’s even true in my experience. Just seemed to be advisory that’s all.
all vaccine are not the same, get some biology FFS
So that explains very obviously why this was not done perfectly!
They are so transparent in their methods because they are so contemptuous of the population’s ‘, intelligence and are simply exploiting the basic level of trust and assumption of honesty we used to have wit regard to our politicians and Institutions – not any more
There is a correlation between an increase in all cause mortality among young and middle-aged age cohorts and the rollout of the ‘vaccines’.
For example, average weekly deaths, ages 15-44 years: 2015-2019, range from 279.1 to 291.2. 2020 (the year of Covid) 294.8. 2021 (the year of the ‘vaccines’) 323.8.
Average weekly deaths, ages 45-64 years: 2015-19, range from 1,179.9 to 1,229.1. 2020 (the year of Covid) 1,378.6. 2021 (the year of the ‘vaccines’) 1,440.7.
(All figures England and Wales, Office for National Statistics website.)
That nobody in the MSM seems to have the least interest in this information, which is ‘hiding in plain sight’, is what I find most disturbing of all.