The age distribution of non-Covid excess deaths in the U.K. and Denmark in 2021 was skewed heavily towards the elderly – the very group, of course, that all the Covid restrictions and vaccinations were meant to protect. Importantly, this means that any calculation of vaccine mortality rate needs to allow for the concentration of excess deaths in older people. Once this is taken into account, the estimated vaccine mortality rate in the over-75s exceeds one in 1,000 doses or 0.1%.
Following on from my recent article, which examined the correlation between cumulative vaccine doses and cumulative non-Covid excess mortality (NCEM), I further examined the age distribution of those fatalities.
One reader of my earlier article pointed out that in the Danish data there was no excess mortality in 2021 for any age group below 60. This seemed significant, so I examined the U.K. data to see if there was a similar trend, and found there was, albeit not quite so marked as in the Danish data
Below you can see the 2021 non-Covid excess mortality data from both countries, presented as percentages of the population for ease of comparison.
The Danish and U.K. mortality data here are the same as those used in my previous article, i.e., adjusted to account for mortality displacement, the absence of flu and the overcounting of Covid deaths. The ONS publishes the age distribution of Covid deaths in England and Wales and in calculating non-Covid excess mortality I have assumed that the same approximate age distribution holds for the U.K. as a whole and for Denmark.
When we look at the U.K. data, it can be seen that the proportion of non-Covid excess mortality in an age cohort is approximately inversely proportional to the proportion of the population in that age cohort, so that as the size of the age cohort reduces with advancing years the proportion of excess deaths in the cohort does not reduce. A reason for this may be that in the younger age groups vaccine injuries may be much less likely to be fatal. The age breakdown of death reports to VAERS, with a preponderance in older people, supports this suggestion. Note there is a particular spike in the 70-79 age bracket above which has not yet been explained.
The U.K.’s current spring booster campaign, targeted at the over 75s, provides us with an opportunity to test the hypothesis that vaccines are largely responsible for non-Covid excess mortality by predicting the NCEM rate from the vaccine dose rate.
The analysis in my previous article implied there were around 37,000 excess non-Covid deaths in the U.K. from the start of the vaccination campaign to April 2022, during which about 140 million doses of vaccine had been delivered. This produced a headline rate of one death per 4,000 doses or 0.025%.
However, now we see that the over-70s, who represent just 13.7% of the U.K. population, accounted for 66.3% of the non-Covid excess mortality in the period. According to NHS vaccination data, this cohort received around 22.7 million vaccinations in 2021, meaning the vaccine mortality rate for this age cohort is estimated as one death per 925 doses or 0.108%
This allows us to predict that the 3 million fourth doses administered so far in the spring booster campaign would produce 3,250 non-Covid excess deaths for England alone.
The latest ONS data show over 4,000 non-Covid excess deaths in England and Wales in the last four weeks, meaning this prediction seems to be easily on target so far.
While we do not have mortality data by vaccination status to check the hypothesis (and the data from the ONS on this are not reliable), there is clear evidence that many more non-Covid hospitalisations are occurring in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated.
The Government needs to release the full anonymised data on all deaths since the vaccine rollout began so these concerns can be properly investigated, including by people not invested in the Government narrative.
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.
Amen..
Answer: because the BBC are a bunch of scaredy cats and wouldn’t know journalism if it hit them square in the face.
Isn’t the answer obvious: Because enraged Muslims kill people? Not most Muslims certainly, but there is recent history of some Muslims striking back violently and on a large scale. And often the victims themselves are blamed, despite an occassional “Je suis Charlie Hebdo!!”
If “Muslims kill people”, then that might, perhaps, be even more reason to do journalism about Islam.
Courage, mes amis, n’ayez pas peur.
They might say: We can’t afford the security that might be necessary, so money says no.
That last paragraph is shocking. I’m surprised that Prince A hasn’t converted to Islam.
Underage according to the laws of the state of Florida is something very much different from six or nine years old (specifically, it means less than 18).
Superb letter: Well done. Can you keep us informed as to the response?
Oh that’s easy.
Because they are the BBC.
Next?
As long as the majority of people keep paying their propaganda tax the BBC will continue with its politically correct output.
Rome is burning daily sceptic. You are not the daily mail. Please do not even be tempted to go in that direction. You will lose readers.
Because unlike some other “peaceful” religions, Christians, Hindus and Jews (who the BBC goes out of its way to mendaciously denigrate on every possible occasion), when even mildly offended don’t suicide bomb concerts full of kids. fly airliners into skyscrapers or machine gun dozens of people in publishing companies?