The UK government’s COVID vaccine data is unusable

Written by Steve Kirsch on October 30, 2023. Posted in Current News

There were problems with the UK data that Professor Fenton pointed out that have not been fully addressed. There is huge selection bias which results in significantly different NCACM

The UK ONS official government health data is still not reliable for assessing health outcomes. This implies that the same is likely true of other government data sources of other countries.

However, this is impossible to assess because all the governments hide the public health data from the public so we can’t do an assessment like we could with the UK data.

Honest health authorities should be calling for public transparency of public health data. The reason they aren’t is to protect the drug companies.

The data we have from independent sources, such as polls of households, consistently shows that the COVID vaccines have killed more people than the virus. The cure was literally worse than the disease.

Yet, the UK numbers show that, for example, for 60-69 year olds in Dec 2021, there was a 26X COVID mortality benefit for boosted vs. unvaccinated and there was a 2.6X mortality benefit for non-COVID all-cause mortality (NCACM) in the two groups.

That large a disparity for NCACM is possible if all the sick people chose not to be vaccinated, but the opposite was true: it was the sick who got priority. And the COVID death benefit dropped by nearly a factor of 10X just 6 months later.

Also, the average all-cause mortality rate for 60-69 year olds in the UK in 2022 was 798.2 deaths per 100,000 population. This rate is never reached the entire time for non-COVID all-cause mortality for the unvaccinated.

It only approaches it at the very end, dropping by 2.7X even though the cohort size remained roughly stable at 20,000 person years.

Introduction

Recently, I tweeted a link to an Expose news story showing the official UK ONS shows that boosted 18-39 year olds were 4X more likely to die than their unvaccinated peers.

What the UK data shows

• Download it here (the first spreadsheet listed on the page): Deaths by Vaccination Status
• Go to tab “Table 2”
• Scroll to line 1580
• Compare H1580 with H1588. The unvaxxed are dying at a standardized rate of 22.9, the vaxxed at 84.7. 84.7/22.9=3.7! Which means you’re dying at 4X the rate of the unvaxxed.
• Double check by look at column J and K for the two rows. The confidence intervals do not overlap!

Fully vaccinated young people in the UK are dying at a rate that is 3.7X higher than the unvaccinated.

But the problem here is you can’t tell how much is due to the vaccine and how much from selection bias since only immune compromise people were allowed to get the fourth shot. How much of the higher mortality is due to the group selection vs. the vaccine?

Hard to tell because the COVID death benefit is too small to measure reliably.

Why I am not promoting the Expose story

In general, my opinion is that the UK ONS data is unreliable. UK Professor Norman Fenton has pointed this out in the past (and the UK ONS even agreed with him). After May 2023, they gave up and stopped reporting data entirely.

While they should be applauded for their methodology (time series cohort analysis) which is the way every honest government should report this data, they are not willing to be transparent with the underlying data after it was clearly pointed out that their data is flawed.

Other governments don’t have this problem because they hide this level of data from the public so it is impossible to do any consistency checks on the data. The UK ONS provided more data than other governments, but less data than we really wanted, so it was easy to show that their data was not self-consistent and couldn’t be right.

What this means

1. The UK government is, thus far, the most transparent government with respect to health info about the COVID vaccines. We applaud the UK government for sharing the data with the public in a useful form. They’ve done more than any government in the entire world to share meaningful data. Bravo.
2. The UK government is the only government in the world which has shared the data in a form where the reliability of the data can be assessed. The UK ONS has shared the data in a usable form. The time-series cohort analysis is simply awesome. It can easily show whether the intervention is working or not, and it can be used to assess the quality of the data itself.
3. UK data is unusable for making any assessments. They should publish the record level data.
4. There is no call for data transparency from any health authority. If the UK ONS really wants to be transparent about the public health data, they need to be the champions of data transparency. They are not. They should be urging Parliament to pass a law enabling them to release the record level data (for each person, give their age, vaccination dates, and whether they died or not; no personal identifying information of course). No government in the world has done this and nobody wants the public to learn the truth. Nobody wants to talk about this either. I’ve tried. The conversation starts and then abruptly you stop hearing from them. No health authority on planet earth wants transparency of public health data. This is not because they want to protect your privacy (that’s the gaslighting they use as their excuse for inaction). Their job is to protect the drug companies and to hide public health data from the public so only controlled snippets that make the drugs look safe are released to the public. After all, if the public found out the truth, heads would roll.
5. If RFK Jr. gets elected President of the US, we’ll see health data transparency for the first time in our nation’s history. There are some honest people in government. Senator Ron Johnson would be a powerful voice for data transparency, but he’s in the minority party in the Senate, so he’s not able to make any changes. Biden’s not interested in transparency and prefers to censor doctors, scientists, and journalists who disagree with his administration on health issues. Trump hasn’t spoken a word about the need for data transparency of public health data. The reason is simple: it would reveal the vaccine that he championed killed hundreds of thousands of Americans. Won’t look good. So he will avoid the issue. RFK Jr, on the other hand, would be 500% supportive of data transparency. That tells you something, doesn’t it?
6. In the meantime, there are telling data points that reveal the truth, e.g., that the COVID vaccine has killed more Americans than COVID has. See this article on Mark Skidmore’s paper and the Rasmussen surveys for more information. In short, the UK data shows that these large government databases can be very unreliable which is why it is important to validate the data with data sources that are INDEPENDENT from the official government data. And they are all telling you this is a crime scene. No doubt about it. None whatsoever.

Three honest members of the UK Parliament

Andrew Bridgen, Sir Christopher Chope, and Danny Kruger.

The others don’t want to hear the truth. They run from it. That’s why the chamber is empty.

They don’t want data transparency. They do not want the people of the UK to learn the truth.

Summary

The UK government needs to acknowledge that their government data is crap and they are telling people to get a vaccine which is more likely to kill them than to save their life.

The UK ONS and the UK NHS should jointly be advocating in Parliament for a public health data transparency law.

The fact that they are not doing this is a crystal clear signal that they do not want the public to learn the truth about these vaccines and every other health intervention.

Finally, as far as I can tell, there are only three honest members of the UK Parliament.

See more here substack.com

Some bold emphasis added

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.