I recently reported on a Swedish study which looked at all-cause death rates by vaccination status. It purported to show that compared to three doses, a fourth vaccine dose reduced all-cause mortality in the Omicron waves by an absurdly high 71% in the over-80s and 39% in care home residents during the first two months after inoculation. I pointed out this made no sense as we can only expect the vaccine to reduce Covid deaths, not deaths from other causes, and Covid deaths during the Omicron waves only made up around 8% of total deaths among the triple-dosed. Since even on official data a fourth dose would only cut Covid deaths by less than half compared to a third dose, this means we would expect a drop in total deaths of at most 3%, not 70%.
A second study on all-cause mortality by vaccination status has been brought to my attention. (These are currently the only two I am aware of; there may be others but they are yet to cross my radar.) This study, published in Vaccines in July, is from Hungary and focuses on spring and summer 2021 as the vaccines were rolled out and the country experienced its Alpha wave. (The study refers to this as the ‘third wave’, but Hungary’s ‘first wave’ in spring 2020 was largely a non-event and this was the country’s second wave of excess deaths, the first occurring in autumn 2020.) The study estimates vaccine effectiveness against all-cause mortality to be 49-75% during this wave, depending on vaccine type. Such figures are still way beyond what is believable, even allowing for the fact that this is comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated (rather than the single-boosted) and is shortly after vaccination and is pre-Omicron, as it still implies that the vaccine is considerably reducing not just Covid deaths but deaths from other causes (heart attacks, cancer, dementia etc.) as well. So what’s gone wrong this time?
The chart above shows the study period. It is split into two parts, an epidemic period (light grey) during the second half of the Alpha wave, starting at peak deaths, and a non-epidemic period (dark grey) starting shortly afterwards when there were almost zero reported Covid deaths. This sensible split should allow the researchers to calibrate their vaccine effectiveness estimates by taking the mortality rates during the non-epidemic period as a baseline.
Below are two key charts showing the crude (unadjusted) survival rates in each cohort, depending on vaccine status or type. The top chart is for the non-epidemic period, so should show the normal background rate of deaths in each cohort, and the bottom one is for the epidemic period, so should show deaths elevated by the Covid wave.
Note that the study states that it excludes the partially vaccinated, defined as those who have received one dose and are fewer than seven days after their second dose. Unvaccinated here means no doses and vaccinated means ‘fully vaccinated’ i.e., seven days after the second dose. This means any deaths between the first dose and seven days after the second dose will not be included. It appears that individuals change cohorts as they receive doses during the study period, though how the researchers have handled this is not always clear.
A look at these charts reveals some striking inconsistencies. Notice in the non-epidemic chart (top), the red unvaccinated line is the lowest (along with the yellow Moderna line). This means the unvaccinated cohort has the highest death rate (because the lowest survival rate). But if we look at the characteristics of the cohorts in the supplementary appendix (Table S3) we find that the unvaccinated are around eight to nine years younger than the vaccinated, both across all vaccinated (45.5 vs 53.6 years) and among those vaccinated with Moderna (54.5 years) and Pfizer (53.8 years). The rates of comorbidities are also half the level or below in the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated (e.g. heart disease 1.5% vs 3.1%, cancer 1.3% vs 3.5%). Why, then, is the mortality rate higher in a younger, healthier cohort?
The same point can be made in another way by noting that 39% of the deaths in the non-epidemic period (6,548 of 16,853) are attributed to the unvaccinated, who make up 31% of the study population, while 61% of the deaths are attributed to the 69% of the population that is vaccinated (see Table 3). Why is the younger, healthier cohort over-represented in the deaths? Similarly, 0.29% of the unvaccinated cohort died in the non-epidemic period versus 0.21% of the vaccinated. These rates make no sense. We can get a sense of how high the death rate in the unvaccinated is by considering that in Hungary around 1.6% of the adult population typically dies each year (130,000 of 8.2 million), so in this 55 day period you’d expect a maximum of 0.24% of the population to die – and since this is during summer it should be lower still (deaths are around 20% lower in summer than winter). Yet 0.29% of the unvaccinated died – at least 20% more than would be expected. Remember, this is a non-epidemic period when Covid deaths were near zero. Why is the death rate in the unvaccinated at least 20% higher than the expected background rate, while the vaccinated death rate is below it (0.21% vs 0.24%), when the unvaccinated are the younger and healthier portion of the population?
The authors briefly acknowledge this issue in the conclusion, referring to the “huge variability of survival across cohorts by COVID-19 vaccination status during a period when the COVID-19 epidemic was not active, meaning the vaccine could not exert a protective effect”, and accepting that the observed differences “were not attributable to the sociodemographic characteristics of patients, the presence of the most prevalent underlying diseases, or the structural characteristics of [general practitioners] providing care for patients”. They do not attempt to explain the discrepancies however or properly address the huge impact these will have on their results. Indeed, they adjust their results for a ‘healthy vaccinee effect’, which on their data is the opposite of the reality, making the problem even worse. Since the unvaccinated are used as the baseline to estimate vaccine effectiveness, and the mortality rate in the unvaccinated is inexplicably high, this problem obviously nullifies any VE estimates in the study.
Further problems can be seen by superimposing the two charts on top of each other (noting the different scale on the axes) to allow easy comparison by eye of the mortality rates in the epidemic and non-epidemic periods.
It can be a little tricky to see what’s going on in this composite image, but focusing on the blue Pfizer lines (the lower pair of blue lines), you can see that the two lines coincide for about 25 days before the death rate in the epidemic period deviates. This implies that the Pfizer cohort during the first 25 days of the epidemic period had the same death rate as in the first 25 days of the non-epidemic period. Yet as we have seen, the epidemic period begins with the peak of Covid deaths, meaning the Pfizer death rate should begin high and then ease off. Instead it begins at a ‘normal’ rate and then increases – the opposite. In addition, note that the epidemic-period Pfizer cohort is older (57.9 years vs 53.8 years) and has more comorbidities than the non-epidemic-period Pfizer cohort (this v is because more younger people are vaccinated by the later, non-epidemic period), so the crude death rate in the epidemic period should be higher still. Yet the death rates are the same for 25 days, during the peak of the Covid wave.
Likewise, look at the yellow Moderna lines: the death rate starts out lower in the epidemic period than the non-epidemic period and only goes above it after 50 days, despite it beginning at the peak of a Covid wave (the epidemic line is the slightly thicker, fainter line). With AstraZeneca too (the brown lines), the death rate in the epidemic period is much lower throughout than in the non-epidemic period. It’s also unclear why the non-epidemic death rate in the AstraZeneca cohort is so much lower than for Pfizer or Moderna when it has a very similar average age and rate of comorbidities.
None of these death rates makes sense: the unvaccinated rate in the non-epidemic period is much too high and the vaccinated rates in the epidemic period appear much too low. No wonder the study comes up with such crazy high estimates of vaccine effectiveness.
One of the findings that might be worth taking note of is that the curves for both Pfizer and Moderna in the epidemic period bend sharply downwards in the second half, indicating an accelerating death rate. This is despite the period beginning at peak Covid deaths, which then ease off. Given all the other unexplained anomalies in these data this may well be just one more. However, if there is any validity to the underlying data, it may indicate an alarmingly accelerating mortality rate among the mRNA vaccinated cohorts, even as Covid deaths ease.
Once again, I am left disappointed. I had hoped that studies of all-cause mortality by vaccination status would be key to evaluating the overall risks and benefits of the vaccines. However, both this study and the Swedish one have produced nonsensical results with data that have no clear correspondence to reality.
The current study claims at one point that “there are 15 countries using routine all-cause mortality by vaccination monitoring”. This intrigued me – I was not aware of any countries doing this, except for the U.K. ONS, whose data have serious issues that make them unreliable. However, following the reference to the webpage brought up an “Our World in Data” page which did not in fact list any countries providing these data. Another disappointment.
All-cause deaths data by vaccination status should provide us with crucial insights into the benefits and harms of the vaccines. Yet, so far, very few researchers have looked at these data at all, and where they have, the results have not passed the reality test and have failed to live up to the promise. The wait continues.
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.
Remember all those NHS numpties who twattered about how horrified they were by the antilockdown demonstrators supposedly risking undoing all their noble hard work. All the vile insults they slung at dissenters?
Did we ever get an apology from any of them?
Doubt it. Presumably they’ve transitioned smoothly to scapegoating vaccine dissenters, fomenting hatred of them, and violence and discrimination against them.
Incredible isn’t it, all those unmasked, unsocially distanced mass protests in the uk, and not a single one linked to a “surge in cases”. Anyone would think there wasn’t a pandemic going on.
That’s the thing – there isn’t.
Guess I should have put (sarc) after my comment
I can’t square the fact that the very people who are so obstinate in their misguided belief on what is right work in the provision of healthcare. Unbelievable.
All the “scientists” who do NOT practice the “scientific method.” All the “scientists” who are unwilling to state that the predicted results from their hypothesis did NOT happen.
Not at all unbelievable; they’ve all bought in to the ‘NHS is the envy of the world’ fantasy.
I remember after the Super Bowl in February the MSM were all over the NFL after large crowds celebrated with headlines about how this or that will shame the NFL, untold thousands will die because of this, etc.- well, nothing happened, so now we wait for all the apologies and corrections…
DeSantis – what a hero! (And I don’t use that term lightly)
He is a hero. It takes a brave person to pioneer the pre-pandemic way of thinking, but that is what needs to be done. Especially heroic given the barrage of abuse he must know is coming from the tantruming pro-lockdowners of the world, who will no doubt twist figures to show how these events are “super-spreaders”!
State the truth and be proven right when the truth becomes better known. It’s an easy political philosophy. I’m surprised more politicians don’t follow it. Anyway, this one easy stand will probably ensure that DeSantis is the next president of the USA. This said, the entire establishment is now gunning for him. They don’t like being proven wrong.
I’ve always said it doesn’t take much to stand out from the “crowd,” when everyone in the crowd is so obviously wrong. By simply refusing to believe a false narrative, this man is now considered a hero. Which is good. Now if more politicians will glean this important lesson.
The government just need to stop taking advice from SAGE. End of. By definition (the clue’s in the last letter of the acronym) their purpose is to advise in times of emergency / national crisis so as long as SAGE advice remains the predominant guidance for running the country, they will never green-light fully opening up again, for fear of being scapegoated for the inevitable winter resurgence of Covid.
Well done Florida! I will continue to buy your orange juice!
DeSantis deserves the presidency next election. Sad thing is, too many Republicans cant get over Trump, even though he’s not very electable.
75 million people voted for Trump. No other presidential candidate has ever got anywhere near that — apart from Biden.
That figure is kind of meaningless as America is still growing.
“That figure is kind of meaningless as America is still growing.“
Funny that, because the US pop was growing (rather faster) back in 2008-12 as well, but Obama lost 4m votes whereas Trump gained 12m.
And Obama had the old style US media that was part biased for him and part against, and a less powerful and less arrogantly interventionist big tech that was unwilling to be too open in its politics.
“No other presidential candidate has ever got anywhere near that — apart from Biden.”
Something to do with the fact that no other candidate has ever had the kind of massive media and big tech social media manipulation to protect his own campaign and smear and demonise his opponent….
No other way such an obviously senile and corrupt man could get elected. A less systematically biased media and social media would have torn his campaign to shreds.
-apart from Biden, helped to that by post office and election workers and supervisors, and by a certain vote count machine company and its executives.
Hallelujah Freedom
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dXkv-mNTAq4
Tears of joy from me, how uplifting. Remembering the human spirit and how we belong together.
The NHL play offs are well attended in the US – a recent match was attended by 19,000 people. The number of people wearing masks was pretty small, and ‘social distancing’ (I call it anti-social distancing) is impossible. The situation in Canada is quite different, where the play offs are still being carried out in virtually empty arenas.
Trudeau is the problem there
Any Americans reading this. You can either win convingly with DeSantis or repeat 2020 witb Trump, your choice.
DeSantis or Kristi Noem.
President Captain Underpants is a huge loser.
DeSantis Noem is the ideal ticket for me.
Are you comparing Trump to Captain Underpants? I’m intrigued to know why.
No, I am saying Trump actually is Captain Underpants, right down to the ridiculous toupee.
American reading. I’ve donated to DeSantis’ gubernatorial campaign, and I don’t even live in Florida. This Democrat-for-50-years will leap at the chance to vote DeSantis for President in 2024.
Awesome.
What – you think the demo-rats wouldn’t steal votes from DeSantis?
Freedom over Faucism (Drostenism, Whittyism etc.)- love it!
Imagine Doris taking the stage, but then, the likely still muzzled British sheep will probably applaud him or rattle with their jewelry…
We can only hope that he is much better protected than equally beloved and dangerous to the deep state and to our current real rulers JFK, RFK and Magufuli.
rowing across the pond as we speak in a a small boat
American here (South Carolina). We just cancelled a two-week hike in Switzerland (with an air transfer at Heathrow). Instead, we’re doing three weeks in Georgia, Florida, and Texas, hiking, paddling, fine-dining, and gun-shooting. We’re trying to accept this new reality where the free world is a hell of a lot smaller than we thought. Hang tough, UK cousins!
If you read the story, you’ll see the last quote predicts X number of concert-goers will die because DeSantis allowed an outdoor concert. Nobody will die. In fact, albeit little reported, Americans have been attending outdoor events with no resulting “super spreader” even since the end of last August. These events were high school football games. True, capacity at some of these local games was limited, but I can report that many of these stadiums were at least 50 percent full. And the fans at these games were not “socially distancing” – before the games, during the games or after the games. Student sections were jam-packed at many of them. For some reason, the press never ran stories on the outbreaks that NEVER occurred in these communities. This would be “evidence” that did NOT support the narrative.
This man is a f**king hero in my opinion. When I saw this yesterday, it really gave me hope for the first time in ages.
Flights booked 9 months ago, due there on 6 October. NOTHING will stop this, even if it means going via Mexico or Bulgaria. Beat the bastards!!!
Clever Ron, ‘Faucism’ not ‘fascism’ , but we all know what you mean!
Can we claim asylum in Florida?