Noah Carl’s recent article in the Daily Sceptic “Vaccinating the Elderly Saved Lives” and Will Jones’s piece “Excess Non-Covid Deaths Surge to 30,000 Since April as Deaths in Week Before Christmas Hit 20% Above Average” both highlighted the failure of the ONS or the medical authorities to update the dataset, last published July 6th 2022, that shows deaths by vaccine status. In addition, we’ve had both Neville Hodgkinson and Amanuensis referencing the ONS dataset that includes deaths from January 1st 2021 to May 31st 2022 by vaccine status. Finally, a recent Substack post by El Gato Malo analysed these same U.K. data on all-cause deaths by vaccine status.
But do these data tell us what we think they tell us? We thought Daily Sceptic readers might find it useful to see the data presented as interactive charts so you can see for yourself. Here are the links to each age-group specific chart: 18-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90+. By clicking on the legend line colour by vaccine status you remove it from the chart, making the chart less busy for ease of comparing the various groups. This article pulls out some of the more interesting points from the data but we would recommend you exploring the charts yourself – once you’ve read the article!
Our view is that the data will confirm whatever prejudice you have. If you want to show that vaccination is pointless the charts can do that, conversely, if you want validation that vaccination saved the nation, well, they can do that too. Let us illustrate.
The ONS data show us:
Monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for all cause deaths, deaths involving COVID-19 and deaths not involving COVID-19, per 100,000 person-years, England, deaths occurring between January 1st 2021 and May 31st 2022.
Comparing the red line (deaths of unvaccinated) with the blue line (deaths of people at least 21 days after their booster) we can see that the two lines are in lockstep. Conclusion? Vaccination was pointless.
Hold your horses! Look at figure 2. Exactly the same dataset for 18-39 year-olds, but this time comparing all-cause mortality of the unvaccinated with those dying at least 21 days after their first vaccination. The death rate in the vaccinated shoots up from 68 in February 2021 to 115 in April. While in the unvaccinated the fatality rate drops from 70 in January 2021 to 38 in May. From comparable rates in January and February, the vaccinated appear to be dying at three times the rate by April and May. Conclusion? The vaccines kill you!
However, as can be seen in Figure 3, if we look at the relative fatality rate of the unvaccinated with those who died at least 21 days after their second vaccination we see that by December 2021, the fatality rate of the unvaccinated was up to 69, while the rate for the double vaccinated plummeted to 29. Conclusion? The vaccines save lives.
Are these huge swings in fatality rate unique to the 18-39 age-cohort? No. Figure 4 is a rather busy chart showing fatality rates for the 80-89 year-olds. Again, we get these huge swings. The unvaccinated’s fatality rate plummets from February 2021 five-fold in three months, while for those with just one shot of vaccine it increases five-fold! However, those having had a second shot (the light green line) stays below the unvaccinated’s rate until October 2021, when it increases four-fold.
Perhaps, though, the most telling line is the dark blue one showing the fatality rate of people at least 21 days after their booster. By May 2022 it was no better than the fatality rate of the unvaccinated.
Now, let us add two caveats that you should bear in mind when looking at these charts:
- The volatility in the numbers isn’t much down to Covid. Nor, is it much down to vaccines. Covid, even at its peak, only accounted for a relatively small proportion of deaths. Likewise, even if the most apocalyptic soothsayers of vaccine deaths were correct, as overall deaths aren’t up multiple times then the huge swings can’t be ascribed to vaccines either. Rather, it’s down to the condition of the people of vaccinated.
- Those of you who take a keen interest in the data will recall the ongoing debate about how many people are unvaccinated. The table in Figure 5 comes from a piece by one of us (NR) published in the Daily Sceptic back in June 2022, though for people wanting greater authority on this matter can I suggest you look at Professor Norman Fenton’s extensive work on this issue. The point is that the ONS has knowingly, though consistently, understated the unvaccinated amongst us. Alternative population data from ‘NIMS’ put the U.K. population far higher – too high, according to the ONS. No one knows what the U.K. population is and so no one knows how many people are unvaccinated. The ONS data should be treated as a ‘worst case’ scenario. So, looking at the red line in each of these charts you can be sure that it’s overstating the fatality rate of the unvaccinated.
Coming back to the ONS data, Figure 6 summarises the relative fatality rate of the unvaccinated with the boosted at the end of May 2022. The percentage figures in red show the age cohorts where vaccination seems to have reduced fatalities.
Take your pick. If you’re under 50 or over 90 it would appear that the unvaccinated are less likely to die than the ‘boosted’. If you’re aged 50 to 89 then you would appear to be safer if you’ve had a pile of vaccinations. However, how can this be? If Covid accounts for, say 5% of deaths across these age groups and these months, even if vaccines were 100% effective, we’d only expect to see a 5% variance in all-cause mortality. How could a Covid vaccine produce a swing five or 10 times greater than the background rate of Covid deaths?
We suspect the answer is that the all-cause mortality tells us something about the profile of people being vaccinated but next-to-nothing about the efficacy of the vaccines themselves. One final chart to illustrate our point using data for the 70-79 age-cohort where we can see fatality rates swing 10-fold between various groups.
The grey line appears to show the single vaccinated starting to die at an alarmingly high rate, possibly as those well enough to get jabbed a second time move into a different category leaving the vulnerable and close to death behind. Later on, from about October 2021, we see the light green line shoot up; again, this may be as those well enough to receive a booster leave the vulnerable behind. Alternatively, it may be owing to misclassification issues around vaccinated deaths, as Professor Norman Fenton has discussed.
If the ONS does ever issue an update to the May data, as it has said it intends to (we’ll believe it when we see it), our advice is: treat all conclusions and analysis with caution, as they may just be reinforcing the prejudices of the author.
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.
What was needed from the initial roll-out of the vaccines was a well designed prospective matched cohort study into outcomes after vaccination. It is very strange that this wasn’t done.
They could undertake a retrospective study now, but choose not to.
Perhaps it is useful for those in charge to have uncertainty in this matter.
We can be confident Pfizer and Moderna are collecting studies retrospectively, surely they are, what use would their novel approach be if they didn’t at the very least collect data on how good (or crap and by extension.. dangerous) their new tech actually is, for any plans in adapting it for other ailments – I gather the mRNA platform can potentially be used for a multitude of illnesses (rather convenient and timed recent press release suggesting it now has a platform for correcting heart problems). If we, the unsuspecting plebs, get to see any of this data is unlikely but the information and lessons are certainly out there.
For the moment though we’re to try and pick through any third party publicly released datasets, whether they’re poorly designed and or policed for efficacy or safety signals is a good question (the main bone of contention atm, what constitutes a valid sigma warning signal).
I would think Pfizer and Moderna would rather not know. You’re sort of implying they care about whether they products actually work and are safe, as opposed to whether they can be made to appear to work and be safe.
Given all what we’re witnessing and this apparent disregard for human life in the process I guess that’s true to an extent. Still, an effective product, and in this case the mRNA platform co-invented by Malone is potentially a game-changer (if its administered and policed correctly by pharmacovigilance – Malone thought so and I think he’s one of the good guys), so isn’t it still good practice to create a good product? The free market generally works well in that regard.
The problem being the skulduggery and obfuscation in its delivery, unless of course we’re suggesting anything and everything from the pharmaceutical world is actually a poison chalice of some sort? Not sure that’s true, even if it is likely true this time around. Perhaps you’re correct, this latest round of corruption exposes big pharma and all what it stands for, all this death and destruction is purposeful and exposes the whole charade? I hope we’re wrong but the cynic and sceptic in me is being counterbalanced by optimism and faith (to some extent).
They got away with it for the covid “vaccines” so why would they not want to repeat it for any other product?
I’m not sure they’ve gotten away with it yet. Is that the optimist coming out?
Again, perhaps mRNA, if administered and stored correctly isn’t dangerous, we don’t know because no one wants to investigate (but again, I bet you Pfizer and Moderna are). A decent theory on why some are injured is poor storage and perhaps administration (no aspiration of the syringe? Is that the correct terminology to make sure you’re not hitting the blood vessels?). If we’re not receiving the correct rna sequence due to poor storage and breakdown, anything is possible, why there were reportedly “special” batches with specific instructions for ‘certain’ people.
“I’m not sure they’ve gotten away with it yet. “
Indeed – good point.
mRNA maybe.
Spike Proteins. No. Extremely dangerous once in the blood stream. As we are witnessing,
Right, but why are some not affected? (unless it’s just a matter of time). Who knows the ultimate concoction if some lipids are breaking down, leaving a completely altered RNA sequence. (I’m no expert but I think that makes sense)
A Midwestern Doctor goes into this and puts forward some hypotheses in this very thorough article;
“One of the early observations with the COVID-19 vaccines is that the response to them was much more variable than what we typically associated with a pharmaceutical product. Many felt awful for a prolonged period, some people had severe reactions, far too many died, but many others had no reaction at all. This suggested to me that at least one of the following was true (none of these are mutually exclusive):
There are certain predisposing factors to having severe reactions to the vaccine.
Hot lots (lots that are significantly more toxic) are being deliberately tested on the population.”
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/we-now-have-definitive-proof-pfizer
Appreciate the link and research Mogwai. And as JaneDoe suggests, there is no doubt they’re doing this research for some future purpose. Of which I don’t necessarily disagree in principle if it were open and transparent, I only vehemently disagree with their methods of rolling out an experiment on the unsuspecting public – and when that experiment goes wrong, obfuscate and deny their true intentions.
I’m with you, I think pfisser and murderna have most certainly been studying the toxicity of their garbage product. I also believe they have known from the beginning it was highly problematic and that they have data that shows that, which they are keeping well hidden. Naturally this is just an opinion.
They are unscrupulous and whatever research they have done is not for the sake of safety, but to be prepared for fall-out in the future and to front-run it.
Pfisser and Moderna will be collecting mortality figures on behalf of Billy and Klaus. There is little point in launching a depopulation campaign and not keeping an eye on its progress. And if Billy didn’t know how well the current kill shots were performing he would struggle to refine his next “vaccine” for the upcoming ‘catastrophic contagion’ campaign.
“It is very strange that this wasn’t done.”
Only strange if you think those involved have good intentions. But it’s entirely consistent with everything about the covid scam.
The uncertainty is certainly useful for those who took the decision to absolve the ‘vaccine’ suppliers from any liability.
On the topic of excess deaths, this new 23min video put together by Joel Smalley, based on his extensive research, is well worth a watch;
“The study shows, based on detailed empirical evidence, that post-vaccination Covid deaths have been 75% higher in the year since C19 vaccine roll-out across the globe. All but a handful of nations have suffered with higher Covid death rates post-vaccination. But the countries that have suffered the most are those that have had the highest rates of vaccination – and associated, draconian mandates.”
https://metatron.substack.com/p/whats-the-story-of-the-covid-19-vaccines
I think most agree that Sweden suffered less than most, and didn’t push vaccination!
So as for all gov official data.. I say the proof is in the pudding 🍮
Sadly the Swedes are as vaxxed as we are in the UK.
They didn’t have to push the jabs in Sweden because Swedes are probably amongst the most socially conditioned people in the world, with such enormous faith in their authorities and technocrats that their authorities don’t need to be heavy handed.
They all went out and got jabbed anyway, on a par with Germany where the unjabbed were really badly discriminated and abused.
You might want to do a comparison of unvaccinated vs vaccinated (any dose). That is all vaccinated groups combined. That will give you a much clearer picture.
I think you can do this by working from the death numbers (as opposed to the ASMs) by age group and by month, and sum the different vaccination categories together. It’s age banded data so shouldn’t be too confounded by age. You have to approximate some of the <3 death figure numbers, and you can use the aggregate number of deaths across all age groups combined to help with guessing those, but I think that it’s possible to come up with something sensible.
But you are still hit as previously with the unexplained differences between ONS and NIMS unvaccinated percentages and all the data inconsistencies pointed out by Norman Fenton etal.
As proof of concept, I tried doing this with the 90+ age group.
The attempt if correct (big if) suggests that unvaccinated 90+ have a lower all cause mortality than the vaccinated (any dose) 90+ from March 2022 to May 2022 (remember the data covers January 2021 to May 2022 inclusive of both so this is the last three months of data). And that’s using the ONS percentage vaccinated figures rather than NIMS. Using NIMS makes things much worse for the vaccinated.
Until I’m sure of the figures I’m not posting up a chart at this stage, and don’t rely on this being accurate, but it’s worth looking at.
The important thing to say is that the vaxed vs unvaxed (any dose) all cause analysis is possible at least in some age groups
We all know data can be manipulated to show what the person using it wants. Particularly when using things like relative rates – in NL the RIVM has long been presenting graphs with absolute rates and relative rates – the absolute rates make it quite clear the unvaxxed are no worse off and in most cases do better than the multiple boosted. Only when applying a relative rate can they change that, and even then only in the higher age groups, where less than 10% is unvaxxed. Those same relative rate graphs show a significant increase in hospital/ICU admission of the multiple-boosted for the younger cohorts, with those with the greatest number of boosts leading the way. That in itself surely indicates a relationship to the vaxx.
The above article also seems to not take account of the fact that any vaxx advantage (if it exists) can only be found in people stabbed within the last 3 or 4 months. People whose last stab was more than 9 months ago seem to fall back into a type of ‘unvaxxed’ status. Considering vaxx manufacturers and public health authorites themselves bang on about the lack of protection if you’re not boosted every 3 months, perhaps the better comparison is people vaxxed within the last 5-10 months compared to people who do not fall into that category.
Regardless, the excess mortality is not explained. An excess mortality that, for example, seems to be running at similar levels in both the UK and NL. I said last week, NL saw a more than 10% increase in mortality in 2020, before vaxx, attributed to corona. Both 2021 and 2022 saw a slight increase in excess mortality over 2020. Either this was due to corona, which suggests the vaxx is next to useless – otherwise we should have seen the excess mortality trending down, not up. We know the virus has been less deadly since omicron. If the deaths are not due to corona, because the vaxx really does work, then what is causing the substantial excess mortality? The primary focus should obviously be the novel, never-before used vaxx as the temporal correlation is undeniable, as is the fact that there are many now acknowledged serious side effects. It should be assumed to be the vaxx unless and until it can be excluded.
The bottom line: either this crappy vaxx works against corona, but the actual vaxx is just as deadly as the virus, or this crappy vaxx doesn’t work at all. Either way, stop wasting taxpayer money on it, stop forcing it on people, be honest about the established serious side effects and the fact that there is zero knowledge of possible long term effects of the vaxx, particularly when someone gets 20 doses of it over 5 years.
In your analysis you left out the important data pointed out by el gato, that which is less than 21 days post-vax, which consistently shows that vaxxed did poorly compared to unvaxxed and according to number of doses received.
el gato opines that perhaps it is why ONS left out of its analysis outcome less than 21 days post injection.
Another ”died suddenly” tragedy from the ‘Coincidence Pandemic’ that’s not showing signs of going anywhere. Only 18yrs old.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/21018583/logan-holgate-dead-salford-england-rugby-league-player/
What an utter and absolute waste.
“Died suddenly.”
Bastards.