There follows a guest post by Dr. Clare Craig, a Diagnostic Pathologist and Co-Chair of HART.
After offering the Judicial Review every excuse to not release the data on deaths in 15-19 males, the ONS has produced a report and a paper detailing deaths of the young after vaccination. The conclusion of both is simply that: “There is no evidence of an association between COVID-19 vaccination and an increased risk of death in young people.” Taking a closer look, it is very hard to agree with that conclusion.
An increase in deaths cannot be shown without having a number to compare it to, namely the number of deaths that would be expected to occur in the same time period normally. Comparing deaths in the vaccinated to the unvaccinated population introduces bias and the ONS avoided this. Hypothetically, comparing the period before and after vaccination would be ideal. However, no one is vaccinated after dying and you would need to know which people who died would have been vaccinated if they had survived, which is impossible to know. The ONS opted to compare the six week period after vaccination with the period seven to 12 weeks after vaccination for 12-29 year-olds. The idea being that after a period of time has passed the number of deaths will settle back to baseline levels. They did not justify this choice of time frame. It appears to have been entirely arbitrary.
In the supplementary material they published how many deaths occurred each week from the week of vaccination (see figure 1 below). The vertical dotted line shows 12 weeks after vaccination. It is striking that weekly reported deaths halve between week 12 and week 13 after vaccination. The ONS ignored the period after 12 weeks.
There is a clear falling off of deaths over time. Part of this is a reporting lag. The ONS only has data on registered deaths. In the 15-29 year-old age group, 57% of deaths are not from natural causes and a proportion of those that are natural will also be unexpected. All such deaths are referred to the coroner for investigation. Such investigation may take only weeks but can take months or even years. Referrals to the coroner would result in under-reporting of the total deaths for more recent weeks. It is also likely that the lower rates of death in the week after vaccination are due to deaths being referred to the coroner as they occurred within a week of vaccination and all deaths where a drug is suspected to have contributed must be referred. Ultimately, any conclusions about deaths from the registered death data must come with the enormous caveat that all deaths where there was a concern of a vaccine effect will not be included in the data. No-one knows how many deaths there are that have been referred to the coroner.
The ONS argues that the reason death numbers in the first week after vaccination are half the expected levels is due to a ‘healthy vaccinee’ effect. By this they mean that people who are about to die would have chosen not to be vaccinated, resulting in the vaccinated population having a lower than expected mortality rate. Trying to defend that position really stretches credulity. The number of deaths in the second week after vaccination is much closer to expected levels. Why did those who were destined to die in two weeks still take the vaccine but those with only a week left did not? If they were sick how did they know how long they had left? If the majority of deaths in this age group are unnatural or unexpected how could they be predicted?
The problematic lag period after 12 weeks has been made even worse by lumping together all three vaccine doses. For this age group, first doses peaked at the end of June 2021, second doses in mid-August 2021 and third doses in December. Given eight months have passed since the first doses were given, the death registration lag following the first dose is likely to be minimal by now. Why didn’t the ONS show the data for the first dose alone?
The ONS agreed in court that there was a statistically significant increase in registered deaths of 15-19 year old males since May 2021, yet it provided no breakdown by age or sex in this study. Why not?
Why were the data to answer these questions not provided? What was the reason for the 12 week arbitrary cut off? Was the ONS asked to produce evidence of vaccine safety rather than asked to provide a dispassionate analysis? Despite the authors declaring no conflicts of interests, one of the authors, Kamlesh Khunti, a member of SAGE, has previously declared that he “acted as a consultant, speaker or received grants for investigator-initiated studies for AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Lilly and Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Berlin-Chemie AG/Menarini Group, Janssen and Napp”. Another author, Amitava Banerjee, has written about the importance of declaring conflicts of interest but failed to declare, on this paper, that his research is funded by AstraZeneca. Did these conflict create a bias in how this data was presented?
Given the known risk of myocarditis after Covid vaccination, the ONS did present data on deaths from a cardiac cause. Their paper on excess deaths in this age group showed that cardiac deaths represent 7% of all deaths. In the 12 week period after testing positive for Covid this rises to 10% of deaths, indicating how Covid spike protein pathology can induce cardiac death. Vaccine induced spike protein appears to have a strong relationship with cardiac death which worsens with each dose, with 16% of deaths being cardiac within 12 weeks of a first dose, 19% within 12 weeks of a second dose and 27% within 12 weeks of a third dose (see table 1).
The population who have had a third dose may be biased towards people who have existing health issues. Therefore, the deaths in the population who have had three doses may have more deaths from natural causes and, consequently, a higher proportion of cardiac deaths. However, it is worth remembering that a quarter of the 12-29 yr old population had a third dose by February 2022 and the vast majority of them will have been perfectly healthy. Also, of all deaths from natural causes, only 16% fall into the ‘circulatory death’ category in this population. For 25 to 29 year-olds they were more than twice as likely to have had a cardiac death if they died after vaccination than if they died after a positive PCR test.
There is a marked signal here of an increase in cardiac deaths due to vaccination that must not be ignored.
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.
When will these people be brought to book?
Dr Clare, you are a hero. Keep going.
Never!
When we aren’t even going to be allowed to hear their critics and the brave whistle blowers who expose them.
‘A marked signal here’ will be ignored, indeed the very idea will be supressed, sorry I mean is being supressed. Big thanks to Clare for continuing to speak out.
How much longer will we be able to read the truth Johnson and his Cabal do not want us to see?
Pharma will kill anyone if they turn a profit in the process and as pharma slipss fat wads of cash into the pockets of corrupt scientists that lie for them and corrupt politicians that will mandate their products we are all in trouble.
Add in the corrupt MSM bought and paid for with fat handouts by pharma crooks like Bill Gates and most people only hear the pro pharma progaganda.
I found Clare Craig about 18 months ago. Been a strength to me and no doubt many others since.
What a lady, thank you. I can only imagine the stick she must get.
God knows how and what gives her the strength to do what she does – and to keep on some of the MSM and defeat the lovely “fact checkers”.
I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before her services to the public are recognised appropriately by the government.
And….if only we still had a properly functioning criminal and civil legal system, she’d help destroy the propaganda.
“I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before her services to the public are recognised appropriately by the government.” I take it you mean cancelled, smeared, license revoked, fired? Isn’t that what they do to healthcare professionals who swim against the tide of their prevailing nudge narrative.
Yes cancelation of all dissent is coming down the line in the “On LIne Harms Bill”!
Dorries – a woman of no apparent intelligence or intellect – who is happy to follow the narrative of her hero Johnson and do exactly as she is told – will be censoring Craig a woman of great education and intelligence, who has passion for truth.
When she says the country will be the the safest place to be on-line in the (Western) world she really means the most politically censored – always beware when they want to “keep you safe”
And this is the latest from USA VAERS: 6 deaths under 5 years old – including 2 under 6 months! What on earth are these people thinking?
In England and Wales, just 1 child under 5 (in a population of 3.4 million) died of covid alone up to the end of 2021.
Is this data purely for the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination?
I think you need to be a little careful when looking at infants in the first year of life, this is recognised as the most dangerous period in the first 55 years of life as seen in this quote by Dr Richard Shepherd, forensic pathologist:
“A baby’s safe arrival in this world does not mark the end of a very hazardous journey. Those who survive birth still have what may well be the most dangerous year of their life directly ahead of them. The risk of death then drops significantly and we don’t come close again to the hazards of that first year until we are fifty-five.”
(Shepherd R. (2021), “The seven ages of death”, Penguin, London)
The infants under 6 months will also have had other inoculations, therefore it is not possible to presume cause and effect. Also there’s no indication whether the infants were full term, premature or had any other congenital issues.
I am not dismissing any possibility of causation out of hand, just being a lot more careful when considering cause of death in infants.
‘A baby’s safe arrival in this world does not mark the end of a very hazardous journey. Those who survive birth still have what may well be the most dangerous year of their life directly ahead of them.’
As soon as those kindly Doctors start injecting those little ones with their magic vaccines the chance of death/injury goes up.
Surviving birth is one thing- surviving the Johnson Government’s “mandates” and directives is entirely another matter!
Point taken. However, the very fact that babies have been injected with this toxin at all beggars belief.
I am not disagreeing with you, the ethical, moral and medical justification for administering the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to neonates is non existent. Also, infants are dependent on their innate immune system, which the mRNA products circumvent completely, so from an immunological viewpoint they are a waste of time and money.
The injection of babies makes a very good case for the immediate return of the death penalty for Crimes Against Humanity!
“Thinking”?
Those in charge are thinking “That’s a good start”!
No, it’s probably the stress of getting back to school, team sports and the blast of the referees’ whistles after a couple of years of distance learning online.
“New follow-up study 3-8 months after myocarditis shows the MRI heart abnormality of late gadolinium enhancement [is]seen in 63% of children.”
Persistent Cardiac MRI Findings in a Cohort of Adolescents with post COVID-19 mRNA vaccine myopericarditis
https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(22)00282-7/fulltext#%20
Does this mean shortening life – at the very least?
Whenever you see a ‘self controlled’ type methodology always demand to see a sensitivity analysis — ie, the impact of shifting the time periods to either side. If this has a material impact on the outcome then it strongly suggests that self-control has been applied incorrectly and is giving misleading results.
An interesting point is circulating on Twitter. Given that the Coronavirus has now lapsed what is the legal basis for the continued roll out of emergency vaccines?
Since when has Johnson bothered about “legality” – remember his attempt to illegally prorogue Parliament to suit his personal agenda?
When did he tell us he was handing NI over to the EU in perpetuity?
When did he adhere to the legal requirement to have many days Parliamentary debate before the imposition of his personal ‘Emergency Rule’?
Wait until he tears up the Freedom of the Internet, the Right to Protest,and the Human Rights act and gives himself personal powers to judge what is in the ‘national interest’ and ‘for the public good’.
Did he take a vote on his CIA required absurd Economic War declared on Russia, which will ruin our economy and then he told us we would all have to pay for it in ridiculously, unaffordable higher, energy, food and fuel costs?
Johnson claims to be part Turkish and rules and behaves like a Sultan – he is out of control of all but his ‘Globalist minders’.
“Legality” is his last concern. It is more what can I get away with !
Are deaths being properly reported to the Coroner and being fully investigated? This is not what I have been hearing and the Coronavirus Act may have modded it.
…may have impeded it.
There is a headline on BBC news at present claiming that the Foo Fighters drummer had drugs in his body. It’s only if you bother to read down the article that you find that it was traces of drugs and…
Hmm, why does that sound familiar?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-60890202
I think we all know the drill – “nothing to do with the vaccines”.
If the Global Covid Elite were not so brazen they would be embarrassed – but then we are only the worthless, expendable plebs, aren’t we ? .
Well, yes, but this was a guy with a serious drug habit, in the Capital of Cocaine.
“The Truth that the Craven Media dare not speak and debate for fear of Ofcom”
What is the definition of ‘tyranny’?
What is the definition of “Crimes against Humanity”?
What was the punishment at Nuremberg for those who said they were “only obeying orders”?
We comment freely on here with many posts going against the official propaganda narrative as we search for truth.
How will the on line Harm’s Bill being forced through by Dorries affect our freedom to comment? Will comments be ‘ghosted ‘ like they are on the Telegraph, where we can see them but no-one else can- the most insidious from of censorship?
The Bill appears, according to Iain Davis, to end free speech on the internet of any kind of comment which the Government censors or their algorithms disapprove
So – repression of political opinion and free speech will be coming to the UK under Johnson!
Another step on his ‘ Road to the Reset’ !
How does everyone feel about only being allowed to access the Internet with a QR Code? Oh, you didn’t know?
See Dorries’ Online Harms Bill – only 40,000 bothered to sign a petition objecting to the nailing down censorship and identity checking.
How far are we from Jabbed before being allowed Internet access – never mind going on holiday – will this be Johnson’s or Carries’ idea I wonder ?
Don’t ‘Cancel Culture’ – just people!
This must be similar to Facebook’s new “Protect” feature which I have now been “required” to complete if I hope to stay on Facebook.
Scary. I’m pretty sure Facebook is only trying to “protect” its members from fellow members who have contrarian thoughts or question the narrative.
Only one word for this – HORRIFIC.
Haven’t read the ONS paper yet, so can’t comment on that.
But do need to thank Clare for all her information and analyses. She’s been an essential go to resource while all this nonsense has been going on. I’m full of admiration for her and the way she has conducted herself and the way she has stood up for the right as she knows it. She has helped many of us with our understanding of the issues.
Aseem Malhotra, another courageous person with great integrity has tweeted
https://twitter.com/DrAseemMalhotra/status/1508109527056584710?cxt=HHwWjMC4qfzn8O0pAAAA
This is very disturbing especially as written by an extremely credible scientist with high scientific integrity. Remember that word ? Integrity
Killing off our kids; what a great way for government to support the UN population reduction objective. Time we had a government that would tell those people to take a hike, not support them in their evil plans.
I’m so glad most of my family have not succumbed to the relentless propaganda, and remain unjabbed. Indeed, one of the few who did was paralysed after the booster.
If I had been vaccinated I know I’d never have a minute’s rest – every little ache or pain would make me fearful. I have a number of ailments which blight my life, but at least I know what they are.
And it’s very much early days as far as vax-induced diseases and conditions are concerned. We’re still very much in the early-medium time frame.
As always a pleasure to read anything Dr Clare Craig authors.
The question intelligent people should be asking, is what will it be like to live in a world where egregious Nazi war crimes against people, including pregnant women and children, are totally ignored because of the regime’s totalitarian control of media, and what comes next?
Because this is the world we now live in.