top of page
Search

The ONS data on vaccine mortality is not fit for purpose

Updated: Nov 13, 2022



Following on from our latest report highlighting multiple anomalies in the most recent ONS covid vaccine mortality surveillance report we have written the following self-explanatory letter to the Statistics Regulator (regulation@statistics.gov.uk):


Dear Sir/Madam,


Since the ONS began producing its covid vaccine mortality surveillance reports in 2021, we have been highlighting various anomalies in their datasets. This includes strong evidence that many of those dying shortly after vaccination were being misclassified as unvaccinated (https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12472.42248) and systematic undercounting of deaths occurring within first two weeks of vaccination (http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12472.42248).



We show that, in addition to further definitive evidence of the misclassification and missing deaths, there is: a) gross underestimation of the population proportion unvaccinated, and b) mortality rates that are both nonsensical in various categories and completely incompatible with historical rates.


We believe that there are multiple violations of your code of practice (https://code.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Code-of-Practice-for-Statistics-REVISED.pdf). In particular, the dataset breaches the Quality and Value criteria numbered: Q 1.1, Q1.4 – 1.7, Q 2.4, Q 2.5, Q 3.2 – 3.5, V 1.1, V 3.2 – 3.3.


All of the anomalies in the dataset introduce bias in favour of analyses supporting vaccine ‘safety and efficacy’. The fact that these data are being used as continued justification for the efficacy and safety of the covid vaccines is therefore now a matter of national concern and scandal. We believe that an investigation into how and why the ONS dataset is so flawed and corrupted is required. In the meantime, we call for


1. the public withdrawal of the ONS dataset and

2. the retraction of any claims made by others that are based upon it.


Yours


Norman Fenton, Martin Neil, Clare Craig and Scott McLachlan


A slightly updated version of our report (with more detailed reference citations than the version on ResearchGate) is here.


13 Nov 2022 Update:

Awkward Git’s Newsletter provides e-mail exchanges with the ONS about their vaccine safety u-turn:

4,697 views26 comments

26 Comments



Simon Pickles
Simon Pickles
Nov 13, 2022

I noticed that ONS have not reissued the dataset since end of May. When you look at the April & May 2022 data which coincide with the rise of non-covid UK excess deaths, and where there is no vaccine roll out happening, the numbers are interesting let's say. Their age related mortality calcs seemed to be based on only the 2011 Census population (?) where they still say that all cause mortality for non-vaccinated group is higher than the vaccinated. But looking at the later data sheets which give all deaths (not just 2011 census population) then age 80+ non-vax deaths are 3.0% of all deaths although according to UKHSA this group is 3.6% of population. Doesn't prove anything as…

Like
Replying to

Can you share the link please?

Like

Remdesivir plus ventilators = lethal implements in the wrong hands; I well remember the mad scramble for ventilators as promulgated by the hideous J0hnson/Hancock et al.....?

Like

An article in The Daily Mail by Professor Brendan Wren on Tuesday 11th January 2022. “When this pandemic ends, the dodgy data and flawed forecasts of the doom-mongers may emerge as the greatest scandal of all”. It mentions an unprecedented letter of condemnation from the head of the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR), Ed Humpherson, who criticised the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) for providing statements “Unsupported by the data” and demanded much greater transparency on health data. Problems with the Office for National Statistics (ONS) probably originate from the UKHSA. In fact the Covid rules imposed by the UKHSA were identical to those imposed by the US Centers for Disease Control. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seems to be best…

Like
Replying to

And what entity preceded UKHSA.....?

Like

One other thought has occurred to me while reading this article. Why has the ONS taken on the job of the MHRA for assessing vaccine safety? Is it because the MHRA don't have competent statisticians on their staff and must therefore outsource the data manipulation to the ONS?

Like
Replying to

With the greatest of respect, No, but I understand why you may state that; MHRA has been funded by Big Pharma for some time - as an incidence of its raison d'être - and it is only very recently - mid May 2022 - that the over promoted Ms Raine boasted of the step change in the role of the MHRA - please see the following:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUQfzTqPUm4


However this only applies to medicines; authorisation of "medical devices" is funded by the Department for Health and Social Care aka UK Taxpayers - it is for another time to debate why this egregious dichotomy exists especially when you search for "MHRA" it goes instantly to the gov.uk webpages. This element of t…


Like
bottom of page