Why UK ONS data shouldn’t be used to justify public policy
Here’s why I believe the UK Government Office of National Statistics data is unreliable and shouldn’t be used by either side. This is a new analysis.
Many people have relied on the UK government data to prove their points.
I show here that if you follow 100,000 people who are vaccinated vs. unvaccinated for an entire year, it results in a completely nonsensical result where the vaccinated people are nearly immortal (can’t die from most diseases).
Introduction
I was inspired by reading this post from Dr. Tim Ellison entitled “I HOPE there is nothing to see here …” The post makes a calculation of what the mortality rate is for each age group and determines that no matter how old you are, you are better off avoiding the jab. In this post, I’m going to do a more detailed calculation showing that the simplistic calculation got the right answer.
Here’s Tim’s calculation:
Basically, the UK data shows no matter how old you are, you are an idiot for taking the jab. You are basically allowing your government to increase your chance of death. Nobody’s life is saved here.
If you believe the numbers, they are basically trying to kill off people of all ages.
Tim’s chart shows that the vaccines make COVID look like rounding error. At most, COVID is a 20 percent bump in the death rate, e.g., 1.2X. The vaccine is a 2.4X multiplier from baseline. So it’s not saving any lives.
Instead, it is almost tripling the death rate for all ages. It is the biggest killer of all time as far as I know.
But not so fast. This is just a point sample of the statistics in a single month so it’s just an estimate. More importantly, the data itself from the UK government can be suspect.
The correct way to do the comparison
The more detailed calculation involves comparing 100,000 people starting at Day 0 and comparing two groups: one that ignores government advice, and the other group obeys the government vaccination directives.
My spreadsheet
I created a spreadsheet to do this in Excel using tables and filtering. The state of the spreadsheet has a filter applied for one of the cases so you have to refilter to get the case you want to look at. I only did the young patients and the 50-59 year olds and by then it was clear it was a waste of time.
Government agencies will not do these calculations
As you all know by now, government agencies never do these calculations to compare how deadly the vaccines are because if they did, nobody would take the vaccine.
So the onus falls on the misinformation superspreaders such as myself to inform the public of the truth about the vaccines using the UK government’s own data
The reason we use the UK government data is because there is no US government data available to do the same calculation.
This is because the US government doesn’t release vaccinated vs. unvaccinated data because they know, if they did that, it would expose the fact that Biden is pushing a kill shot. So they keep the data hidden from public view.
The UK government is more transparent with their data and they’ve been hoping nobody is smart enough to do the calculations required to show how deadly the shots are. So their luck just ran out because I’m going to show you what their data shows.
I’m going to follow 100,000 people for 1 year starting on Jun 1, 2021 and ending on May 31, 2022 which is the latest date that statistics are available. You are welcome to do the computation for any other date range; the result will be roughly the same.
For the vaccinated group, we assume the following vaccination schedule:
- Dose 1 on Jun 1, 2021 (4 week duration)
- Dose 2 on Jul 1, 2021 (24 week duration)
- Dose 3 on Jan 1, 2022 (24 week duration)
The results
I only did this for the 18-39 and 50-59 year olds.
The death results after 1 year (100,000 people) were (unvaxxed, vaxxed):
- 18-39: 45, 31
- 50-59: 626, 337
In short, according to the UK numbers, the vaccine resulted in the greatest decrease in all-cause mortality in history as far as I know.
The numbers show that we should all get three shots and we can avoid dying from almost any disease (since a very large fraction of young deaths are from accidents, if you reduce the ACM this much, it means you don’t die from diseases). It’s the greatest drug ever created!
This is one of the reasons that people who have studied the UK ONS data, such as UK Professor Norman Fenton, call the data complete garbage.
I don’t think I goofed. You can check my work.
Norman wasn’t aware of anyone doing the calculation following people for 1 year as I did. He encouraged me to publish this just to show what happens when you attempt to use their data to do an estimate to compare the all-cause mortality (ACM) of the two groups.
There is an old saying “Garbage in, garbage out.” This appears to be the case here.
So sadly, Tim Ellison wasn’t justified in making his conclusions, even though he’s probably very close to the truth.
Summary
The UK ONS data is too unreliable to use. I’ve used it before to make some calculations and I pointed out at the time I did it how nonsensical the data was which is why I carefully selected a set of rows that passed a simple sanity test. But even that is unreliable. I was trying to do the best estimate possible at the time with crappy data.
Note: I put this out quickly due to time constraints and may have made an error.
As always, I’ll update this article if I made a mistake.
Check back after Aug 25, 2022 to be sure.
See more here: substack.com
Header image: The Voice
Bold emphasis added
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
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.
Wilson Sy
| #
In a strict sense all COVID data (including ONS) are garbage, because of the CDC data reporting convention with a time lag of at least 14 days – totally unscientific.
If someone got their first dose and died in less than 14 days, it was a death of the “unvaccinated”. Many killed by the “vaccines” were reported as “unvaccinated”. This is how you got the “pandemic of the unvaccinated”.
In recent months, when the population of “unvaccinated” has stabilized, with few getting the first dose, erroneous attribution of deaths to the “unvaccinated” has largely ceased.
All recent injections are only killing those already “vaccinated”, e.g., boosters, therefore have only increased the tally of the deaths of the “vaccinated”. This is why on a “vaccinated” versus “unvaccinated” death comparison, only recent data (last few months) are accurate, because “vaccine deaths” are no longer attributed to the “unvaccinated”. So Dr Tim Ellison is closer to the truth.
The further you go back in the data series, the more the data are inaccurate and biased against the “unvaccinated”. Going back to day 0, would capture as much garbage as you possibly can.
I’m about to publish an article referring to my detailed data analysis proving this hypothesis.
Reply
Big John
| #
Anyone with half a brain and actually pays attention can tell the Covid adventure we’ve been on is total malarkey. They changed the criteria for what vaccinated and unvaccinated meant, they changed the definition of vaccine, they changed the definition of immunity, and and don’t forget the best one, making every death known to man a covid death LOL. If you have to manipulate the semantics of terms that have been around for decades to fit their scenarios, and how the data is collected and filtered, you know something funny is afoot.
Reply
Andy Rowlands
| #
Well said John.
Reply
Wilson Sy
| #
All probably very true, but in science, you have to prove it with evidence sufficient to silence your opponents. That is the hard part.
Reply