The UKHSA’s latest vaccine surveillance report includes this table on page 11:

In essence, it claims ongoing efficacy against death from COVID-19 at about 88% following three vaccinations for the over 50 year-olds. Does this mean that in the absence of the vaccines we would expect deaths of the triple-vaccinated to be 8.3 times higher than it has been? Let’s assemble some data from Government sources and see if this can really be true.
Up until week 13 2022, the UKHSA used to report deaths from Covid by age and vaccine status. Fig 2 reproduces this last data table. The absolute numbers may have changed in the five weeks since then but the relative rates of death in the various groups had been fairly stable for the weeks prior to this and I suspect they still are.

We can see from table 13b, taken from the week 13 vaccine surveillance report, that Covid deaths amongst the unvaccinated over-50s accounted for 289 of the 3,944 over-50 deaths, that’s 7% of the total. How does this compare with the proportion of people in the 50-plus age cohort who have been vaccinated? Well, Fig 3 below shows the rate of vaccination by five year age-cohorts for a single dose of vaccine and Fig 4 shows the vaccination rate for a third dose of vaccine.


About 92% of the over 50s had a first dose and about 85% have gone on to have a first booster. If, as the UKHSA tells us, the vaccines confer about an 88% efficacy against death, you would expect the unvaccinated to die at over eight times the rate that the unvaccinated die. But they don’t. As Fig 2 shows us, the unvaccinated account for only 7% of the deaths. The table also tells us that of the 3,944 deaths of the over-50s, 3,003 of them (76%) were of the triple vaccinated; 562 of the deaths (14%) were of the double vaccinated but unboosted, and 79 (2%) were of those who only ever had one dose of vaccine. Going back to Fig 3 and 4, we can see that the difference between the percentage of people single dosed and triple dosed is about 7% (92%-85%=7%), yet they appear to account for about 16% of all of the deaths in the period covered by the report. It isn’t the unvaccinated who appear to die in disproportionate numbers, but the vaccinated who haven’t had a booster.
Certainly, the UKHSA data don’t seem to support the UKHSA’s own claim of 88% efficacy against death. But, for the sake of argument, I’m prepared to go along with the UKHSA and others who claim that perhaps the unvaccinated are a self-selecting group of fitter people, less susceptible to Covid or that they do a better job of isolating themselves or that they wear military grade gas masks and that consequently, even though it doesn’t look like it, it’s still true that vaccines are incredibly beneficial. Let’s look at it from another direction. Surely it follows that if 90% of the population weren’t vaccinated and if the vaccines had approaching a 90% efficacy against death then in the absence of vaccines the current death rate would be 8.3 times higher than it is? Let’s have a look.

Fig 5 shows the profile of deaths in the U.K. from Covid over the past two years or so. One of the more striking features of the chart is that deaths this May are around 20 times more than they were last May. Should this surprise us? Well, considering that about a further 100 million doses of vaccine have been injected into the arms of the U.K. population since then. And, given that in May 2021 two thirds of the infections were of the Alpha and one third of the Delta variant, both considered far more virulent than today’s 99%-prevalence Omicron. And, that the majority of the population have had Covid thus acquiring natural immunity, then I would argue that yes, it should surprise us! It certainly isn’t a ringing endorsement of 88% efficacy against death.
Let’s now see what happens if we multiply deaths since January 1st 2022 by 8.3 times. Fig 6 shows where we would expect deaths to be in the absence of vaccines. Without vaccines, are we really saying that deaths this month would have reached twice the peak rate ever achieved, back in the days before any vaccines.

Of the under-40s, only about 70% ever got a first dose of the vaccine. Booster take up is below 50% and everyone knows plenty of both the vaccinated and unvaccinated who’ve had Covid and are hard pushed to identify any difference in severity of symptoms or likelihood of infection. The fact that about 25% of the under-40s have opted not to get the booster should alarm the health authorities as it looks all too likely that they’ve overplayed their hand and created a vast group who have become vaccine hesitant. There are a lot of us who believe that we’ve been oversold and coerced into taking a medical intervention that we didn’t need. The consequences look likely to haunt us for a generation.
And just in case you thought British exceptionalism may account for the apparent failure of the vaccines to deliver high levels of protection against death even in the event of a benign variant, high levels of natural immunity and improvements in case management, then just look at the comparative death rates pre- and post- vaccine in Israel, South Africa, the EU and in the USA. Israel has had very high rates of vaccination yet deaths peaked at a higher rate after the vaccine rollout. South Africa has had a relatively low rate of vaccine take-up yet its death rates have been getting ever smaller. In the EU and USA numbers there may be some vaccine impact but it doesn’t look like a game changer, certainly not when we factor in natural immunity and more benign variants.
Hard as I look, I can’t see that the vaccines have delivered the claimed 90% protection against death and I think there’s a lot of people who agree with me.



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.
this partly is nothing but an exercise in futility.
any comparison between number of deaths in time is futile if there is no distinction between death of, and death with.
One can dance around the maypole forever, trying to draw conclusions from dubious “official” stats on the safety and efficacy of the experimental gene therapy treatments masquerading as vaccines.
But why bother?
When COVID made its bow, health experts assured us that the virus had a survival rate of around 99.98 percent for all but the very elderly and chronically unhealthy. Omicron, the same experts now tell us, is far weaker even than its relatively innocuous progenitor.
You don’t surely need to be Einstein to work out, after even a cursory perusal of the latest Yellow Card, Euradura, VAERS adverse effects figures, that compared with the frankenjabs the latest “variant of concern” is a walk in the park.
1,291 Side Effects Pfizer COVID Vaccine Reveals Released Documents March 5, 2022
Link here: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/fda-releases-pfizer-vaccine-documents/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=867161ce-6420-4a7d-8768-345d40947a6c
“Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech, 94% for the Moderna–NIH, 91% for the Gamaleya, 67% for the J&J, and 67% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford vaccines.
“However, RRR should be seen against the background risk of being infected and becoming ill with COVID-19, which varies between populations and over time. Although the RRR considers only participants who could benefit from the vaccine, the absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack rates with and without a vaccine, considers the whole population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH, 1·2% for the J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.”
The Lancet Study
Doctors for COVID Ethics
On The accompanying chart:
Pfizer/BioNtech RRR 95.03% ARR From Jab 0.84%
Moderna (NIH) RRR 94.08% ARR 1.24% From Jab
Janssen RRR 66.62% ARR 1.19% From Jab
Astrazeneca/ Oxford… Read more »
Steve as in Steve Kirsch
on figs 3 & 4, you have the red 50+ cut off lines drawn at the 88% and 74% marks respectively, yet you have them labeled as 92% and 85%. what gives?
The lines are drawn at the age 50 – 55 cohort. The analysis follows the age 50 + group so the average figures is broadly the mid point of the lines above the red line.
Please correct the typo “you would expect the unvaccinated to die at over eight times the rate that the unvaccinated die.”
Pre jabs the average covid fatality was the same age as UK life expectancy…so what does “death protection” even mean?! Clearly people aren’t being given immortality shots.
As much as I am suffering from data fatigue on cases and death counts, this is an excellent analysis. It takes their lies at face value and show how the logical conclusions are simply insane.
I did this back in September when Northern Ireland had seen its second deadliest month of the pandemic. If the vaccines were 95% effective as the rona cult were claiming, without a vax it would have been death levels way beyond total monthly deaths for all causes. Ridiculous stuff.
Their response? Exactly, thank God for the vaccines.
It’s a cult.
Monkeypox is ramping up, apparently it’s in Spain now. Daily Mail is loving it, probably got a contract extension from billy boy.
Damn, and I’m only just done with my teenage acne.
Over 50 year olds is so obviously an inappropriately broad group, that the complete publication can immediately be discarded as yet more Sars-CoV2 ‘vaccine’ marketing. When doing a histogram analysis of the deaths from the week 13 surveillance report, the outcome is
Which means more than half of the deaths occured in the 80+ group and 87.1% in the 70+ group. When going from 50 – 59 to 60 – 69, the death rate grows by 2.26. For the next transition, it’s 2.38. And then, growth jumps to 3.17.
Somehow, I have to keep repeating myself: When trying to observe a phenomenon conjectured to exist, eg, vaccine protection against hospitalisation/ death/ income tax/ flatulence/ WTF, and the relative frequency of the underlying base event keeps changing wildly, chances are that the phenomenon doesn’t exist and that the observed fluctuations are random or have some trivial other explanation. Eg, waning vaccine protection against infection or the rather more mundane given enough time, more and more people get infected?
Joe Allen on Elon, Twitter, and the AI of the Future
https://rumble.com/v154xze-joe-allen-on-elon-twitter-and-the-ai-of-the-future.html
Bannons War Room
Stand for freedom with ourYellow Boards By The Road next events
Thursday 19th May 3pm to 5pm
Yellow Boards LONDON
Junction A4 West Cromwell Road/
A3220 Warwick Road
London W14 8PB
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens
Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Comments:
If like me you never believed in the virus or the test, then all statistics are academic.
….you would expect the unvaccinated to die at over eight times the rate that the unvaccinated die…. I think the second unvaxxed here should be vaxxed.
Yes
The more I think about it the more I’m beginning to realise that without the vaccine and test the position we are now in wouldn’t exist. Not particularly helpful!
There seems to be a – perhaps understandable at this point of the vaccine debate Overton Window – a reluctance above the line to draw the obvious conclusion. It seems, on the face of it, almost certain that the vaccinated are dying in far higher numbers than the unvaccinated.
At some point the discussion will need to move away from the vaccine being ineffective and towards it being dangerous.
Not if the powers that be can keep the Overton Window firmly closed….
Lockdown the Overton window…
93% of the UK population over the age of 12 had at least one stabbing. So how do you prove effectiveness, you nearly removed the control group.This of course is exactly what they wanted to do.Is there any work going into the 7% of purebloods like me that are somehow still alive despite not being stabbed?
93%?
I read it’s 91-92% in my age range (60-70). So I’m one of the 8-9%.
But it’s lower for younger age groups. The way it was rolled out, they had months longer to wake up before they were invited to a vac. centre.
Join http://www.vaxcontrolgroup.com, that helps the cause.
I’ve seen consistently lower estimates for the USA and Switzerland … as little as 65% for the Swiss. That’s despite the US attempts at coercion which were disgusting.
In short, populations of many millions or tens of millions in a few countries will retain proof of harm, even if other countries almost lose their control group.
In the USA, Orthodox Jews and the Amish probably aren’t accepting needles any time soon either.
The jab doesn’t stop people getting the virus, it doesn’t stop people spreading the virus and its overall effectiveness in protecting people from death is practically zero.
So can it still be described as a vaccine then?
I mean what exactly is this potion supposed to actually do thats of any benefit to anyone that is willing to take the chance and have it done?
Incredible.
…what exactly is this potion supposed to actually do thats of any benefit to anyone…
Pfizer made a net profit of nearly $22bn last year, up from $9.1bn in 2020. It has certainly benefitted them. And many entrepreneurs have made personal fortunes…
Johnson & Johnson’s 2021 turnover was not that far below that of Cargill, which typifies ‘US Big Food’ …
https://www.jnj.com/johnson-johnson-reports-q4-and-full-year-2021-results
J&J = the largest of their pharma cos., I think.
“The jab doesn’t stop people getting the virus, “
FAUCI LIED?!?
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/yes-the-vaccines-were-supposed-to
Anecdotal Info.
I have had no Covid vaccinations. My wife has had the initial jab, and two boosters. The first two injections caused her no distress, but the third one left he feeling exhausted and under the weather for a couple of weeks, and she decided to have no more.
A couple of months ago I caught a flu-like illness after I had been to a party, which my wife also picked up (probably from me). The symptoms came on rapidly – flu-like light fever and a chesty cough which disappeared in a day. I felt very exhausted, and retired to bed for a day. Thereafter I felt as if I had a minor winter cold for about a week.
My wife exhibited almost exactly the same symptoms as me – about 1 day later. She tested herself and obtained a positive Covid reading (probably Omicron, at that time). She seemed to be a bit more exhausted than I was, and spent two or three days in bed.
If vaccination made such a difference in condition, we would have to argue that my wife would have been hospitalised if she hadn’t had the vaccine, while I shrugged it off with… Read more »
I know this comment is going to be unpopular but putting the made up covid virus and test to one side, I think the archaic practices in the NHS supposedly full of experts, is the real problem. As far as the vaccine is concerned, treat it with the disdain it deserves.
https://metatron.substack.com/p/covid-requiem-aeternam
The Vaccine HypothesisThe vaccine is claimed to be substantially effective in reducing COVID mortality (by the policy-makers but not the vaccine manufacturers) and also to be safe. If these claims are true, we should expect even fewer deaths than expected above due to significantly lower COVID deaths and insignificant vaccine deaths, i.e. lower all-cause excess mortality over all.
To be certain, we should also expect to see a negative correlation between the vaccination rate and the COVID death rate, i.e. the more a country is vaccinated, the greater the decrease in COVID death rate should be observed.
Empirical ResultsThe COVID death rate is higher after mass vaccinations.
There is a discernible reduction in the rate of COVID deaths in just 38 out of the 202 countries studied (19%). Therefore, in the vast majority of countries, both the rate and the number of COVID deaths after vaccination programs is higher than before.
Our PM, aka Scotty From Upf**king, claims that 40,000 lives were saved as a result of measures taken by governments across Lockdownunder. No number given for the lives lost as a result of the measures taken etc etc.
Not to mention collateral damage in destruction of business large and small.
I have a friend who scored a positive during delta and was ill in bed for a couple of days. Now fully “vaxxed”, he is currently ill and has been bed-bound for the last week, currently having the much milder omicron variant. That would likely finish off an old, frail person. It absolutely screams ADE to me (increased severity with a milder variant), on top of OAS (catching it repeatedly).
When I next see him, I can be sure that the first words out of his mouth will be “imagine how bad it would have been without the vaccines”. It doesn’t make him at all curious that my household has not had any experimental “jabs”, have never worn muzzles, have socialised, travelled and been totally “wreckless” in ignoring the “deadly pandemic”, yet still we cannot see to even catch the batflu once. It also wouldn’t concern him that of my extended “unvaxxinated” family who have had the lurgy, the most serious symptom so far has been a mild headache.
To be fair, between 20% and 40% of us don’t seem to catch it, vacd or unvacd.
Whitty predicted this in 2020, clearly on a day when he was talking sense.
Other people have been less fortunate. A friend’s mother (79) died suddenly on Monday of a massive stroke, having gone downhill at a faster rate since early 2021. Both her parents were fully-jabbed as her father’s a retired dentist and believes all the mumbo-jumbo.
I don’t even know where they got a decent data set to show that people are less likely to die if vaccinated. The vaccine trials showed that in the groups and time period tested,vaccinated individuals were less likely to have symptoms. That’s it! That is the final conclusion of the only study conducted.
All the other data from the UK authorities is from a population which they don’t even know the size of, a variety of different covid testing protocols, those that die with or of covid are counted as the same ( is it possible to go to hospital and not catch covid?) an unmatched unvaccinated/vaccinated population to name but a few. It would be a laughable dataset at GCSE level.
“The vaccine trials showed that in the groups and time period tested,vaccinated individuals were less likely to have symptoms. That’s it! “
They showed you were more likely to die if jabbed. All cause mortality was statistically significantly lower in the placebo group.
Interesting. Are they still tracking these people?
If you mean the placebo group, no, they vaccinated them.
I think they are tracking them rapidly 6 feet under.
“Misleading claims suggesting that more than 1,200 died after suffering adverse reactions to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine have once again been spread on social media..While the report discussed adverse reactions to the vaccine in a 90-day period and the figures are genuine, the pharmaceutical company has said the documents do not link the vaccine as being responsible for the people’s death.”
This week, the first batch of that judge-ordered data was released. Despite predictable media spin disguised as “fact-checking”, the basic and rather shocking revelation that 1233 people died within 90 days of taking the Pfizer jab is true. This is contained within Pfizer’s own adverse events report:
https://maajidnawaz.substack.com/p/the-covid-vaccine-boomerang
Do we really need any more reasons?
What we need is for the dozing sheep to be informed of the dozens of already published reasons not to go near the clot shots, now shown without question to be both dangerous and ineffective – reasons which the Mainstream UK Media, censored by Ofcom, simply refuse to report and which (with the great exception of Mark Steyn on GB News) meekly trots out Official Government propaganda from this increasingly totalitarian and untruthful Johnson Government.
This same Government is now quietly seeking to hand mass Vaccine Mandate power to the Gates/WHO in violation of our national Sovereignty over health policy and our individual Human Rights!
Wake up time is getting short!
The sheep, of course, never go anywhere near the ‘published reasons’, but one has to admire their fortitude (if that’s the word) as they queue for their fourth or fifth jab having had ‘covid’ and knowing other jabbed people who have experienced the same.
Their only ‘out’ is the mantra of ‘how much worse might it have been without my vaccinations?’
Raises hand politely:
This entire article is based on accepting that after a positive test means from the coofs.
Garbage in = garbage out, no matter how much numberwang happens in the middle.
It’s interesting, without being in any way significant. Let’s please not accept this farcical premise selectively, when it happens to lead to a conclusion that we prefer.
It begs the question; If they are using this data to calculate the VE then they are clearly rubbish. On the other hand, if they have some better data set, then why wouldn’t they release it?
Yes, the vaccines are in effect being asked to prevent death from any cause in people who have had a positive test recently, regardless of the severity of their COVID experience.
Anyone who uses the term ‘vaccine hesitant’ at this point is part of the problem. It is a propaganda tool, made up to imply that the person who is ‘hesitant’ is a silly, scared fool who just needs to be informed how wrong they are. At this point, anyone not willing to take the poison is a ‘vaccine rejector’, they know full well that it is useless at best, highly harmful at worst.
As for the figures indicating some vaxx effect in the US and the EU – it is more likely that they’ve simply stopped counting every death going as a covid death. The US in particular was quite gung-ho in that respect, listing victims who died of gunshot wounds or motorcycle accidents as covid victims. The EU numbers are probably even more muddled, as the differences in how someone was counted as a covid death will differ significantly between the countries. Have a look at the covid deaths per million in NL and in Belgium and then explain how 2 very similar countries in terms of standard of living and health care, geography, etc. should have such a huge difference (Belgium is over 100% higher).
You don’t need… Read more »
I term it iatrogenic malpractice hesitant
Was it the politicians who said these ‘jabs’ would prevent death because the pharma companies were saying they wouldn’t even stop transmission just symptoms, something impossible to verify.
We’ll probably never know. Didn’t the PCR tests work well, they could give you a positive diagnosis of covid without any symptoms at all. Another value for money exercise by HMG.
Like all of the elderly removed from hospital with serious conditions to nursing homes where the staff, in the absence of a GP said the death ‘looks like covid’, no postmortem but death cert duly authorised, remotely.
Ahh the NHS, what a wonderful organisation, why would anyone want to travel to Switzerland
“wouldn’t even stop transmission just symptoms,”
Paracetamol does that though, and with fewer risks!
The data about the wonders of the vaccines reminds me of tractor production figures (etc) in the old USSR.
Immune systems are now impaired (not improved) by the vaccine. Why HMG would have difficulty seeing this is beyond me, the evidence is everywhere. You lost nearly all your seats in the local elections, the message is
Get Lostwe’ve had enough.I don’t think vaccines have anything to do with votes cast. If Starmer was in Number Ten the jabs would’ve been going into arms just as fast if not faster.
You’re quite right I got carried away and conflated their overall incompetence with vaccines, an easy mistake, please forgive me
The one thing that truly scares me is the risk of Starmer getting into power — they’d happily have jackboots around the country shoving syringes in people.
The lack of serious opposition to the covid measures is one of the most frightening aspects of this pandemic — the recent WHO moves for a ‘global pandemic response’ puts this on steroids.
What a team they would make
Hearing TY trying to challenge this on his podcast with Delingpole was depressing.
It’s as if he’s oblivious to how policy is set and pushed on a global scale.
His argument that it won’t be legally binding is just so weak. The UK wasn’t legally bound to push for lockdowns, masks, tests or jabs, but the pressure of “everyone is doing it so you should too” was more than enough.
A WHO treaty, or whatever form it takes, takes that level of pressure to a higher level. It formalises that the UK will do whatever all other countries are doing, because it accepts it’s the best approach, even if it isn’t legally binding.
And any country that doesn’t follow suit will become a pariah. That is how they get everyone on board.
In fact, i would go as far as to say that the WHO prefer not to present it as legally binding because it will then get the sort of scrutiny that they don’t necessarily want. They know it’s enough that everyone agrees in principle because they’ll all be rushed into acting “the right way” when the moment comes.
TY, like an idiot, celebrated that it wouldn’t even get… Read more »
TY seems to be adrift in dreamworld with fluffy white clouds, not the dark oppressive ones seen by others on this forum and others.
You might look at little deeper at how these effectiveness numbers are calculated. They are using “test-negative case control” studies. Essentially you look at all PCR tests taken in a period, and then compare the percentage of positive tests in vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects.
It probably doesn’t take much thought to see how this could go horribly wrong. If proportionately more uninfected vaccinated people get tested, it would make the vaccines look more effective than reality. If course this is quite likely as vaccinated people would seem much more likely to be concerned about their covid status, as evidenced by their decision to get vaccinated.
Another convenient choice from our ever-impartial bureaucracy.
PS None of the cited studies appear to cover the effectiveness of the vaccines against death from omicron to support the claims made in the table.
Possibly related to the stupid way they classify a covid death as anyone who has tested positive recently regardless of what they actually died from.
With Omicron being pretty much everywhere they are now being damned by their own fear-inducing methodology that they deliberately selected. They probably can’t change that now without raising uncomfortable questions.