Unprecedented July 2021 Mortality Signal in Young Brits “Missed” by Officials

Written by Joel Smalley on September 20, 2023. Posted in Current News

More evidence why deaths by registration date is a completely useless metric

Thanks to the efforts (and expense) of a subscriber, the ONS have released a dataset of deaths by date of occurrence and age for England and Wales, complementing the dataset I sponsored for England only.

This allows us to make a direct comparison between the deaths that actually occurred with the deaths the ONS report in their weekly bulletins, which rather inconveniently do not separate the data between the two countries.

If you plot the two data series for all ages, you see what the lazy ONS management sees.

Notwithstanding the obvious delays around Christmas and some in Easter and summer, you fool yourself into thinking, meh, there’s about a 1-week delay in the majority of cases so, we’ll just keep churning out crap analyses based on this data, no matter what that upstart, armchair analyst keeps telling us.

But, by now, we all know that you can’t just lump all the ages together and jump to such conclusions, don’t we?! Not that we should… it’s their job, if only they would do it properly.

When you break it down by age, even aggregating 15 to 44 year olds (ONS age bucket from the 2018 report), the picture is somewhat different:

For sure, the tail off in the recent months is pretty damned obvious, right? In fact, the two series start to deviate from around April 2022. Yes, more than a year of artefact in the registration-data data and evidently a whole load of death that has indeed occurred but is yet to be reported.

It’s easy to quantify this. Between 01-Apr-22 and 28-Jul-23, there were 22,389 deaths registered but only 17,148 of them occurred in the same period. In other words, almost a quarter of those deaths relate to a prior period.

Not exactly “most deaths are reported with a week” type of hand-wave scenario, is it?

There are still many people using this data to make erroneous claims, even presenting them to investigative agencies so I apologise but I have to shout this again:

The current registration-date data anomalies represent nothing more than catching up with deaths that occurred a long time ago, possibly over a year. Any analysis using this dataset is erroneous at best.

Indeed, there are loads of data points over the 3-sigma level in the recent period. But, also look at the stochasticity of this data. This is noise. And registrations are high because the backlog of occurrences is being filled.

It’s a signal but if you focus on it, you’re looking in the wrong place.

Moving on…

Not only does the registration-date data create the illusion of something happening now that actually occurred some time in the past 1, inevitably, it misses that “thing” when it actually happened – in the past!

Take a look at week ending 23-Jul-21, highlighted in the chart. The ONS reported 313 deaths for that week. On average in 2018 and 2019, 293 15 to 44 year olds died each week in England & Wales, with a standard deviation of 18.

So, 313 deaths would be just over 1-sigma (fancy Greek letter used instead of standard deviation). Typical “expectation” bounds are 2 to 3 sigma, so this would not register as a signal in any analysis.

However, the actual number of deaths that occurred that week was 405 (at least, because this silly registration process can be somewhat indefinite).

This is a 6-sigma event

This is “unprecedented” 2. The chance of this happening without something causing it would be 2* 10^(-9) or 2 in a billion or 500 million-to-1 if it were fair betting odds.

Worse still, there are two subsequent periods where weekly deaths touch the 3-sigma mark (10-Sep-21 and 31-Dec-21). These are rare events for this cohort, and to follow each other so closely makes things even worse.

Moreover, it is also clear that deaths do not trend below mean thereafter (the pull-forward effect). We can see exactly how much excess or unexpected death there is looking at the cumulative series:

Evidently, there were 679 excess deaths for “epidemic” COVID (and associated iatrogenesis) for spring to autumn 2020; 803 for the same for autumn 2020 to spring 2021; and a prolonged period of 1,023 cumulative excess deaths in the “post-jab” era between summer 2021 and mid-winter 2022.

In six months, we can revisit this when the few thousand missing deaths are finally reported and see where the post-jab era really tallies – much higher.

So, if the mortality event of summer 2021 was not possibly (probably!) due to random chance, what did cause it?

Here’s a clue: it wasn’t COVID 3.

There is little COVID death at that time, even by the most liberal of determination – “COVID-19 mentioned on the death certificate”.

Here’s another clue: it was the “vaccine”4.

How do we know? Or, rather, why do we suspect under the logical guide of Occam’s razor? Well, temporal proximity for one.

The new cumulative excess mortality series starts on 02-Jul-21, two weeks after the peak of of the jab campaign. That’s when “they” said deaths would fall precipitously. Oh?

And deaths peak on 23-Jul-21, right as the campaign stops. Oh?

And finally, why won’t this question be answered by the ONS? Because they never asked the question. If you don’t look (properly), there’s never anything to see.

However, the coroner knows something about it because the registration of those deaths were severely delayed. I guess the “investigative journalists” will cover this when they’ve finished salivating over Russell Brand’s salacious past life?

Oh, and how about that 23-Dec-22 spike? When we revisit this in about six months when the data might be almost complete, where do you think that is going to settle? I’m thinking every bit as high as the April 2020, Jan 2021 and July 2021 peaks.

Unfortunately, by the time we know, it will be waaaaay too late to do anything about it. Not that the “authorities” would, even if they simply collected the data on time. We know they won’t be honest with their analysis of it, otherwise they would have reported on July 2021 by now.

And if you think this is just some cherry-picked data point with no scientific or medical rationale, I’m afraid I’ve got more bad news for your narrative:

Three False Narratives from Captured Governments and Unelected Agencies Around the World

The first false narrative was the virus is unassailable, we have to stay in lockdown and be fearful.

The second false narrative is take a vaccine, it’s safe and effective.

The third false narrative is it’s not the vaccines causing these problems, it’s the virus.

See more here substack.com

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.