Public health responses are most effective when they are grounded in reality. This is particularly important if the response is intended to address an ‘emergency’ and involves the transfer of large amounts of public money. When we reallocate resources, there is a cost, as the funds are taken from some other programme. If the response involves buying lots of products from a manufacturer, there will also be a gain for the company and its investors.
So, clearly, there are three obvious requirements here to ensure good practice:
- Accurate information is required, in context.
- Those gaining financially can have no role at all in decision-making.
- The organisation tasked with coordinating any response would have to act with transparency, publicly weighing costs and benefits.
The World Health Organisation (WHO), tasked by countries to help coordinate international public health, has just proclaimed Mpox (monkeypox) an international emergency. It considered a new outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and nearby Central African countries to be a global threat, requiring an urgent global response. In declaring its emergency, the WHO stated there were 537 deaths among 15,600 suspected cases this year. In its August 19th Emergency Meeting on Mpox, the WHO clarified its figures:
During the first six months of 2024, the 1,854 confirmed cases of Mpox reported by States Parties in the WHO African Region account for 36% (1,854 of 5,199) of the cases observed worldwide.
The WHO reiterated that there had been 15,000 “clinically compatible” cases, and about 500 suspected deaths. The implications of these 500 unconfirmed deaths, equaling just 1.5% of the malaria deaths in DRC over the same period, are discussed in a previous article.
Journals such as the Lancet have dutifully toed the WHO’s ‘emergency’ line, though intriguingly noting that the mortality could be far lower if “adequate care” had been provided. Africa CDC agrees, with more than 17,000 cases (2,863 confirmed) and 517 (presumably suspected) deaths of Mpox reported across the continent.
Mpox is endemic to central and west Africa, being present in species of squirrels, rats and other rodents. While it was identified in monkeys in a Danish lab in 1958 (hence the misnomer ‘monkeypox’), it has probably been around for thousands of years, causing intermittent infections in humans between whom it is spread by close physical contact.
Small outbreaks in Africa mostly went unnoticed by the rest of the world, mainly because they were (as now) small and confined. Mass Smallpox vaccination may also have suppressed numbers still further a few decades ago, as Smallpox is in the same Orthopoxvirus genus of viruses. So, we may be seeing an upward trend of this generally milder illness (fever, chills, and a vesicular rash) over recent decades since Smallpox vaccination ceased. The Smithsonian Magazine put an informative summary together in 2022, after the first out-of-Africa outbreak which was spread by sexual contacts within a limited demographic group.
So, here we are in 2024, on the tail of a massively profit-driving (and impoverishing) outbreak called COVID-19 that enabled the largest transfer of wealth from the many to the few in human history. WHO’s announcement that 5,000 (or fewer) suspected Mpox cases is a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) allows it to fast-track vaccines thought its Emergency Use Listing (EUL) programme, bypassing the normal rigour required to approve such pharmaceuticals, and is suggesting pharmaceutical companies start lining up. At least one drug-maker is already discussing supply of 10 million doses before year end. The business case for this approach, from the corporate viewpoint, is well proven. So are the harms in countries like DRC, as a mass vaccination programme of this nature requires redirection of millions of dollars and thousands of health workers who would otherwise be addressing diseases of far larger burden.
The WHO is a large organisation, and while some at the WHO have been on the hustings asking for money, others have been working hard to accurately inform the public (a core responsibility of the WHO, which retains some dedicated people). Like much of the WHO’s work in the past, this is thorough and commendable. Some of this information is summarised in the following graphics:
These charts provide data on confirmed cases, where someone with somewhat non-specific symptoms has been tested and shown to have evidence of Mpox virus in blood or secretions. Clearly, not everyone suspected can be tested, as Mpox is a very small issue for people facing civil wars, mass poverty and vastly more dangerous diseases. However, the WHO has absorbed a lot of money for outbreak investigation, and so have partner organisations, so we can assume there is a fairly good effort going on to detect and confirm numbers (or where has this money gone?)
In the past two and a half years, the WHO has confirmed 223 deaths in the whole world, with just six in July 2024 (the time when the WHO Director General warned the world of a rapidly increasing threat). Note here that 223 deaths is just 0.2% of the 102,997 confirmed cases. In Africa, just 26 deaths have been confirmed in 2024 among 3,562 cases (0.7%), spread across five countries (and 12 countries with cases). These are influenza-like mortality rates, not Ebola-like. As severe cases are more likely to be tested than mild cases, the infection fatality rate may be far lower. We also don’t know (though someone does and should tell us) what the characteristics of those dying are. Most in Africa are reported to be children, so it is likely they are malnourished, otherwise immunocompromised (e.g. HIV) and have susceptibilities that could be addressed.
As is obvious from the third graphic below, nearly all the global deaths listed above were from the previous outbreak in 2022. This was a different clade (variant) and mostly occurred outside of Africa.
It is important to note a few things here. It is difficult to confirm all cases in areas with poor infrastructure and security. Mpox symptoms and signs are also frequently mild and overlap other diseases (e.g. chickenpox or even flu) so many cases may go unnoticed. Notification of results can also lag, so some recent results may not appear yet. However, the 19 confirmed DRC Mpox deaths set against roughly 40,000 DRC malaria deaths so far this year is about one versus 2,000. Whichever way you count it, it is not going to become much more significant. That is what the new international emergency looks like in actual data. Even if you are among the population of DRC at Mpox ground zero, it is likely you would not notice anything at all.
Why has WHO declared an international emergency? Some claim it helps mobilise resources, which is a bit pathetic. Firstly, grown-ups should be able to discuss a situation that has persisted for two years in a rational manner and decide what might be needed, without banging a drum. Secondly, an outbreak that is killing a tiny fraction of malaria (or tuberculosis, or HIV) deaths, and far less than those currently dying in war, is a dubious ‘international emergency’.
And what should be done? Diverting resources from DRC’s major priorities would undoubtedly kill far more than are currently dying from Mpox. It is quite probable that direct adverse events from vaccination alone will kill more than the 19 DRC Mpox victims confirmed this year. We likely undercount Mpox deaths, but we also undercount pharmaceutical deaths. Perhaps a useful response would be to improve immune competence through nutrition, providing very broad benefits (but completely failing in terms of Pharma profit). Gavi’s half a billion dollars would provide vast and broad-based benefit if applied to sanitation. Perhaps limited, well-targeted vaccination may also help some communities, but there is no business case for such approaches.
What is clear, as noted above, is the following:
- The data on Mpox and other competing priorities must continue to be shown in context, along with costs and opportunity costs of the response.
- Those who will gain financially from vaccinating millions of people must not be part of the decision-making process (whether or not such a huge resource transfer can possibly be supported for such a small disease burden).
- The WHO should continue to act with transparency, as the public have an absolute right to know what they are paying for, and the harm (and perhaps benefit) they can expect from it.
The number of Mpox deaths will rise as more are infected, and perhaps as some suspected cases are confirmed. However, we are facing a small problem in an area with far larger ones. It is posing low local risk, and minimal global risk. It is not a global emergency, by any sane, rational, public health-based definition.
The rest of the world will respond by sending vaccines and lots of foreigners whose needs have to be looked after, diverting local health and security personnel and almost certainly killing more DRC residents overall. Or, we can recognise a local problem, support local responses when local populations ask, and concentrate, as the WHO once did, on addressing the underlying causes of endemic disease. They are the things that make the lives of people in DRC so difficult.
Dr David Bell is a clinical and public health physician with a PhD in population health and background in internal medicine, modelling and epidemiology of infectious disease. Previously, he was Director of the Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in the USA, Programme Head for Malaria and Acute Febrile Disease at FIND in Geneva and coordinating malaria diagnostics strategy with the World Health Organisation. He is a Senior Scholar at the Brownstone Institute.
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.
The scepticism on vaccine death numbers from Toby Young has become almost vanishingly small.
The only way you can compare deaths for vaccines with Covid to get a risk/benefit metric is with the same standards for vaccines as for deaths attributed to Covid.
How many deaths occur within 28 days of a Covid vaccine? The government have flat out refused to provide this data, saying that all vaccine related deaths are recorded under the MHRA’s Yellow Card system. Furthermore, there is no way of knowing what the effects of this experimental treatment are at least until the clinical trials have concluded.
The resistance to this incoming tyranny is starting to look infinitesimally small.
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/03/30/f-o-i-request-shows-2207-died-within-28-days-of-having-the-covid-vaccine-in-scotland-during-february/
F.O.I Request shows 2,207 died within 28 days of having the Covid Vaccine in Scotland during February
It’s not quite correct WRT just during Feb… But I think it IS over 500 a month dying WITH experimental COVID jab in just Scotland alone..
I took that FOI to mean since the beginning of vaccination. I then went to the governments coronavirus website
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
and from there used 9th December as the start of vaccination and found that approximately 3,300 had died in Scotland within 28 days of a positve test over the same period. This was a while ago I did this though so may require double checking.
The above link was sent in reply to a comment I made earlier in the week.
Others looked and it seemed the timeframe (just one month) was off but the numbers weren’t
I’m guessing we still need the numbers for dying without COVID and without being jabbed.
Thanks for posting the Daily Expose article, I was going to do so myself. I posted it yesterday as well.
I want to add the caveat again that there is no way of verifying if that document is real or not. The only way to be certain would be to submit a FOI request yourself.
I don’t know if Daily Expose is a reputable website either, so we need to be careful with things like this before making any claims.
With that said:
Extrapolating the quoted Scottish numbers across the whole of the UK would give 25,524 deaths.
63,182,000 – UK population
5,463,300 – Scottish population
Death rate in Scotland for the entire population = 0.00040397 (2,207/5,463,300)
0.00040397*63,182,000 = 25,524
If anyone has a better way of doing it, let me know.
The problem with this is the age breakdown.
This is an issue that gets rapidly bigger the younger people get so using an all-age average isn’t going to be that accurate.
I agree, it’s a mess.
Also, I feel extremely bad even talking about this. I hope no-one thinks I’m ever being callous. This BS is breaking my heart, which is why I’m doing all I can to warn people.
But it’s not just deaths. As Sucharit Bhakdi has pointed out – less severe outcomes can also be associated with a thrombosi(e)s.
Govt .Yellow Card Vaccine deaths and Adverse Reactions can be found in The Light newspaper monthly.
The best alternative is to avoid a jab.
Yup: that’s my strategy!
The more newspaper headlines containing the words Vaccine and Risk the better.
It just gets worse doesn’t it ?
I mean we’ve gone from complete denial that there was any risk to the vaccines – to admitting that there maybe a tiny risk – to now offering a completely different vaccine to under 40’s because of a potential risk of blood clots from the previous vaccine that was being given to all the over 40’s.
Anyone out there still eager to roll-up there sleeves for this vaccine must be completely insane. I wouldn’t take an asprin from these people if it was offered to me nevermind an experimental jab that appears to have so many question marks hanging over it.
Nobody has started on the more “normal” thrombosis associated with all the spike protein producing vaccines yet. Obviously COVID can also cause these….but it’s quite hard to catch COVID right now. You can’t avoid them in the vaccines though.
“I wouldn’t take an asprin from these people”
In the end – detail apart – this is the sane position, given the stack of reasons not to trust the political and financial issues involved and the sheer lies that have been told.
I mean – buying ‘guaranteed’ snake oil from the producers who have been given immunity against harms on the recommendation of a PR firm that has spent billions on shares in it?
You’d have to be mad.
To Toby: I think they meant when they say the risks outweigh the benefits in the under 40s is that VIPIT is more likely (death or not….even if not death, a debilitating stroke that leaves you long term disabled aged under 40 has to be included as a major harm) than a healthy under 40 dying of COVID.
Of course, healthy doesn’t mean low risk. The obese are at far greater risk, so the younger, slimmer and fitter you are, the greater the relative risk of the vaccine. If you are a fit 40, 50 or 60 something, the vaccine may still not make any sense.
And then of course there are all the other risks of the vaccine, that nobody mentions. The people spending a week or more in bed. That’s not normal! And that’s at the mild end of the spectrum.
Its not just deaths. You don’t want to end up in hospital for a vaccine you don’t really need even if it doesn’t kill you.
“This might not kill you but you might need 2 weeks in hospital to fix it” isn’t appealing.
The 2 people i know of that have had clotting issues weren’t killed. One ended up in hospital for tests, the other was there over a week until it resolved.
And all of this for a vaccine thats far less effective than the others.
“resolved” – If you’ve small blood clots in the brain, do they not invariably do irreparable damage? Perhaps the impact is not readily discernable, but you’re less of the person you were, and the specific damage may take its toll years later.
Wrong. The Az and JJ vaccines may have an immediate effect because of their delivery system. But in the medium and longer term the mRNA vaccines are far more pernicious. The immune system can eventually identify the problem with the AZ and JJ vaccines. But the gel surrounding the mRNA vaccines disguises the effect and the problem may well appear much later in say the brain before the immune system attacks with potentially deadly consequences.
Yes and people will probably end up on lifelong medication for problems they didn’t have before taking the vaccine.
If I was still under 40 I’d be demanding my freedom, not an alternative jab.
My group of sheep (friends) are in the 40 bracket, boy will they be glad they took the AZ poison these last two weeks….
That’s OK; I’m in my 60s and I have a great alternative to AZ – nada!
Me too – absolutely no chance of me having any of the so-called vaccines.
The more I read the more I disagree with them.
Why anyone who is otherwise healthy wish to have these is beyond my comprehension.
i agree. What is also baffling is how little it’s mentioned that the Jabz are being rolled out in spring and summer for a winter seasonal disease!
Could this be the amazing reason why they are so ‘effective’.?
Funny that this news didn’t come out just before “Super Thursday”, when it might have slightly flattened the wave of “vaccine” “success” Boris’s party was riding.
Funny too, that the bad news is being broken on results day, when so many people are distracted by the theatre of party politics.
What an excellent opportunity to ‘help’ those in a particular populous country where the media say there is a crisis by giving them all the dodgy AZ jabs that would have been given to under 40s… and when I say giving, I mean not challenging them to fulfil the UK’s order and agreeing that they can keep the stuff for themselves…
‘If we assume that at least a half of the 35 million Britons who’ve been inoculated got an AZ jab…’ – Why don’t you look it up? It’s 22.6M AZ jabs (twice the amount of Pfizer). There are a ‘reported’ 49 blood clots biut it’s not just blood clots when calculating risk vs. reward of the vaccines. There’s anaphylaxis, Bell’s Palsy, blindness, Guillain-Barre Syndrome and capillary leak syndrome to consider. The Yellow Card currently shows 1102 deaths immediately following vaccination – that’s 6.3/day for AZ and 2.6/day for Pfizer (longer rollout). There were 9,942 (with multiple AEs) single Yellow Card reports in the week April 21-29th alone – which represents only 0.3-0.6% of reporting. For a 0-19 year old, the chances of dying of COVID is 0.00015%. Chances of dying from the vaccine – 0.2%. While the true number of deaths from vaccines (and this won’t include those who developed and died ‘from’ COVID as a result of a weakened immune system following the vaccine – which will go down as COVID deaths) won’t be known until it’s too late for the majority – anyone can look at the ONS and Yellow Card data and judge for themselves. What you will find is that the death toll from COVID for a healthy under 65 year old for the whole of 2020 (Eng & Wales) was 1,549 – once you factor in the 33% over reporting and the under reporting of the Yellow Card, only the highly innumerate would conclude that the rewards of a vaccine outweigh the risks. A healthy under 65 year old is statistically more likely to die from the vaccine than COVID.