PHE Data Confirms That New Infections Peaked and Dropped in the Unvaccinated Before They Did in the Vaccinated
Back in early July I noted that data from the ZOE Covid Symptom Study was showing that new infections in the unvaccinated were peaking and falling while those in the vaccinated were still surging.

This was not a phenomenon noted elsewhere and prompted questions about whether it showed that the vaccines were delaying infection, or whether it was primarily an age-based phenomenon. Unfortunately, before anyone was able to investigate further, within a couple of weeks ZOE had ‘updated‘ their methodology and in their new data the phenomenon had oddly disappeared.

This left questions as to whether it had been entirely an artefact of problems with their previous methodology or whether it had been a real phenomenon.
PHE data from the three most recent technical briefings (18, 19 and 20) allow us now to answer this question. Above (top of page) are the Delta case counts for the period July 6th to July 19th and then July 20th to August 2nd, broken down by vaccination status and age. (Actually, it’s not clear whether the initial date is July 6th or another date around then as briefing 18 appears to have a typo and says its data runs up to June 21st, even though briefing 17 also had data up to June 21st and the figures in briefing 18 are higher. However, for the purpose of this analysis it’s not important exactly what the start date is, and I have used July 6th as that is what it would be assuming briefing 18 has the equivalent date to the other briefings.)
The key lines to look at in the chart are the grey and yellow lines. They show that in the under-50s, Delta cases in the unvaccinated dramatically declined between early July and late July whereas those in the vaccinated (at least 21 days after the first dose) were stable. In the second half of the month there were actually more infections in the vaccinated of all ages than in the unvaccinated (the light blue and orange lines).
This was the period when new infections nationwide peaked (on July 17th, by report date) and dropped quickly. This new analysis allows us to see that this fast drop was entirely in the unvaccinated under-50s (presumably the result of reaching herd immunity for the Delta variant). Infections in the vaccinated of all ages (and the unvaccinated over-50s) did not fall at the same time but remained stable. This helps explain why the drop ended around July 28th (by report date) and new infections have currently plateaued. What we are experiencing now is the ‘wave’ of infections largely in the vaccinated (along with the unvaccinated over-50s).
We can’t be sure that the explanation of the phenomenon is that the vaccines delayed infection. Another possibility is that the early surge was in the younger, less vaccinated portion of the under-50s (i.e., people under-30). What we really need is a finer breakdown by age. Unfortunately, despite all the data published during this crisis, very little of it is properly broken down by both vaccination status and age to allow us to do this kind of analysis.
Nonetheless, this confirms that ‘old ZOE’ was right to show infections in the unvaccinated falling during July while those in the vaccinated did not. The fact that ‘new ZOE’ no longer shows this phenomenon once again leads to questions about what changes were made and why, and whether the new methodology is really more reliable, or just more politically acceptable.
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.
Legal action being taken against the MHRA with regard to vaccination of children. https://www.covid19assembly.org/2021/07/covid19-assembly-take-legal-action-against-mhra-to-halt-child-vaccinations/
unfortunately https://www.covid19assembly.org are not impartial.They claim to be against restriction but are actuall anti-vaxxers.
What do you mean by “anti-vaxxer”?
Not sure why you think they should be “impartial”. They are a group who have looked into the covid business and have formed an opinion on the matter, just like governments round the world, and you and I. They are pushing their opinion, and believe they have a case.
What measures against infection are these? Are there some that actually work, that do more good than harm? If so, I think we must have missed them.
“they come out as merely anti-vaxxers” I ask again, what do you mean by anti-vaxxer and please cite evidence that this group fall into that category.
Not sure any of that matters, all that matters is how effective their legal argument and evidence is against jabbing kids with the toxic experimental shite
How can they be antivaxxers? There is no covid vaccine. They use mRNA technology which are called vaccines, only so they are exempt from responsibility for any harm they cause.
Just when I thought tony fauci was going to jail (due to Senator Rand Paul’ accusations) cnbc announced yesterday that mr fauci is determined to see that Pfizer is approved as a vaccine by the end of august. This means mandating of the experimental biologicals gets one step closer. A horror story for the USA. Will the Uk be far behind?
Our governments are in lockstep with each other. To think we have an individual government acting in the interests of the electorate is laughable! They are minions of the globalists and have become our enemy!
What a well argued, logical and rational point you’ve made. Well done.
thank you for using your head.
sarcasm bypass?
Why on earth would a political pressure group opposing a certain set of policies be impartial? They’re obviously a party in a dispute and never planned to be anything else.
Yes, Dr Robert Malone who is double vaxxed and worked in developing vaccines is an anti-vaxxer. Clown
Being anti-this-vaccine does not make you an anti-vaxxer.
If you can’t see the difference between what is happening right now with this vaccine, the vaccination of children and vaccine passports and question or be opposed to it, then maybe you’re somebody that can’t see the bigger picture or approves of this current tyranny taking place.
It should change its name to Lord Haw Haw
They are not vaccines.
I know – they’re treatments/therapies, but for the sake of argument, semantics and that it’s what everyone is calling them, vaccine’s will do. Get your point though. =)
May I ask to which vaccine you are referring when you state the term “anti-vaxxers”?
As I posted elsewhere, did Spector realise that the “vaccination” process caused a significant increase in infections from the moment of the first stab to two weeks after the second? After two jabs the infection rate seems to be roughly the same in jabbed and unjabbed.
He should have at least suspected that from the spike in deaths in Gibraltar following the administration of jabs and also the same in young Israelis when they started to get the jabs.
Apologies for being off-topic – but does anyone know how to fake a negative lateral flow test without poking the stick up the nose/throat? I can’t give any information about why I’m asking this question I’m afraid!
Fake a negative? Just wave it in the air, no sample = no positive.
It’s not testing to prove a negative it’s testing to prove the absence of a positive.
If you need to prove a positive, coke is good, or a goat, or papaya 🙂
(As I understand it all that is, I’ve not tested it).
Remember to report the negative test result to the NHS – drives them mad that not all the results are positive.
Could you just spit on it? Surely that would look convincing?
Definitely not looking to produce a fake positive – last thing we want is to boost the government’s figures!
Why bother.
If you are testing to see if something doesn’t contain a virus, which only shows up positive if there is a virus, just wave the swab in the air (if you so choose) and add the detecting water (which will only detect air) for your negative?
The only issue is if you are supervised, the whole system is honour based (and so completely useless).
As there is no honour shown about any of this by the government or pharma companies it is wholly appropriate to use the technique you suggest.
You have to mix a bit of sugar and water until sugar dissolves. Then add angostura bitters, ice, some good scotch and a slice of orange. I can’t give any information about why this works I’m afraid, I just know that it’s always worked for me.
I generally omit the sugar, water, angostura bitters & slice of orange. Often I omit the ice too.
And drink to the cabal being condemned to eternal damnation.
Just squish the sachet of water onto the pregnancy test strip – gives you the single line without you having to self-lobotomise.
Could that come back as a failed test though?
Dunno – I only use the self test version. I doubt anyone tests the sample, but if they do I expect soaking it in a dollop of spit would be just as effective – or blow your nose and wipe the sample stick thingy in the used tissue.
This is a self-test version. Have you ever had feedback after doing this?
No. I report it and then bin it.
If I’m seeing any of my brainwashed family I take a picture of the pregnancy test first and send it to them. They seem to find it reassuring. Poor misguided souls.
Thanks for the advice, really appreciated!
Dunno, never done one – I grabbed a handful from work so they don’t get suspicious as I’m required to do them twice weekly… All you do (I believe) is register the result online and throw the “bio hazard” in the bin, if you’re so inclined, you don’t post them off for processing.
Not done one myself so I’ve got no idea what the process is (apart from jabbing it so far up your nose that it could puncture the brain). The test isn’t for me, so I’m trying to pass on the advice.
Thanks for sharing your experience!
No worries, basically the only way to fail the test is to do it with a real sample, but you do not need to provide one for it to be negative, that’s the default.
We had a LFT test when we when to MiL care home. We were given the option of doing it ourselves or the nurse at the care home would do it. We said for the nurse to do it, frankly we were dreading it but we hadn’t seen MiL for a few months so had to bite on the bullet. The nurse was incredibly gentle, I never felt a thing and I’m sure I would have been more forceful if I had done it myself. Both negative.
I wonder what sort of result you’d get if you peed on it?
A wee bit of infection?
Main thing is to hold the test carefully so you don’t splash your hands.
Just saliva will do fine
Are you being watched taking it? Try a good rinse out with corsodyl first. That stuff will kill ANYTHING
We gargled and snorted warm salty water beforehand.
Apparently, if hundreds of school children are to be believed, you can just report you’re negative haven’t not done the test at all!!
This is great:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2021/08/08/texas-city-24m-people-has-just-six-free-intensive-care-beds/
“Florida parents sue governor Ron DeSantis saying ‘children could die’ because of mask mandate ban”
If they are worried, can’t they, oh I don’t know wear a mask, stay home, shop online, exercise personal responsibility?!?!
At least if it goes to court it will be in the states’ interest to have a full and through airing of the “science” around masks. That reminds me I need to get more popcorn.
As Kristi Noem, Governor South Dakota, put it:
“The CDC shifts their position AGAIN.
South Dakota’s cases remain low. If you’re worried about the virus, you’re free to get vaccinated, wear a mask, or stay at home. But we won’t be mandating anything. And the CDC’s inconsistency doesn’t help the American people.”
https://twitter.com/govkristinoem/status/1420148181157957632
Amazing. All that was ever needed from day one
Common Sense is no longer a requirement these days.
let’s play spot the democrat.
Antibody-dependent enhancement? That might explain the failure of the typical Gompertz curve to drop – the vaccinated may not reach herd immunity when the vaccine’s effectiveness is dropping off.
The interesting data would be whether it’s the vaccinated or the unvaccinated getting infections now.
That just means they’ll have the same protection as an unvaccinated person who hasn’t had Covid.
Since there are now more vaccinated than unvaccinated the number of infections in the vaccinated is likely to be higher.
There’s nothing particularly meaningful in the PHE data. It’s pretty much as we’d expect though it does look as though protection from infection is waning. Significant protection from severe illness remains (75%-80%)
“ Significant protection from severe illness remains (75%-80%)” Love to see your workings on that.
Will Jones gave you the UK mortality figures (77% protection for over 50s) yesterday. Israel are reporting 80% protection and the US is similar.
You need to appreciate that the proportion vaccinated is greater than the proportion unvaccinated.
You’re forgetting to correct for ‘interested party’ data bias.
ARR? – known for quite some time.
Meanwhile – as said :
“The death rate is a fact; anything beyond this is an inference.”
I agree that this could be the result of vaccine induced antibodies waning. Swedenborg posted a link yesterday to a paper showing this could be the case, and explains why infection/transmission are initially impacted but only for a matter of weeks as the limited IgA response drops off and IgG stronger response (some of which will find its way to the mucosal membranes at first) starts to wane.
I don’t think we can say protection against severe illness is durable yet though. We don’t definitively know how long those IgG antibodies last, and with Pfizer at least, it looks like they could be effectively gone within 6mo. Hence the boosters,
I meant to write “protection ….currently remains”. You’re right we don’t yet know if this is long lasting.
The first plot is unintelligible as blue is used to represent Unvaccinated (all ) and Unvaccinated(>50). hence your article is meaningless.
Colour blind?
I struggled with that too. Blue and a slightly different blue is not helpful, and the interpretation depends on the screen used to view as well as ones eyesight. I am apalled at all the uncharitable people bothering to down-vote your comment.
I agree that the first plot was confusing at first, but to describe it as unintelligible and meaningless is too snooty for words. The article’s author mentioned light blue and dark blue, which gives a clue. Once I knew there were two different types of blue, I could distinguish them.
There is a bigger problem with the analysis, which I mention later if nobody else has done so already.
…
Wow.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1419653002818990085.html
This is a thread about the Pfizer contract
Full contact:
https://gogo.al/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/LEXO-KONTRATEN-E-PLOTE.pdf
Summary of contract : “Hey sucker! Just bend over!”
Here’s the kicker for any stupid bugger naive enough to believe in the efficacy of the ‘vaccine’ :
“Purchaser acknowledges…the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.”
Did The CDC Director Just Accidentally Admit That Vaccination Passports Are Futile?
The Director of the CDC made an important admission during an interview today on CNN. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky stated the vaccine does not prevent COVID-19 infection, nor does it stop the vaccinated person from transmitting the infection or the delta variant.
According to Director Walensky, the only benefit from the vaccine now is presumably that it reduces the severity of symptoms.
If a vaccinated and non-vaccinated person have the same capacity to carry, shed and transmit the virus – with or without symptoms – then what difference does a vaccination passport or vaccination ID make?
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/did-cdc-director-just-accidentally-admit-vaccination-passports-are-futile
Leaked photos of Barack Obama’s party at his home – no restrictions and celebs flew in on private jets etc
you obviously didn’t get the memo – it’s only the peasants that are catching covid and causing
global warmingthe climate apocalypse.Senior UK Lawyer discusses serving notices of liability on vaccinators and potential criminal trials for Crimes against Humanity
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/08/04/serving-notices-liability-vaccinators-criminal-trials/?fbclid=IwAR0Y549so1IYdKie38CQR7ibqxmTOxvtRCSbgtQA8JOZSV5ONr__lN1lzKo
Share and boycott …
Boycott ..
The most ridiculous thing about it, which is becoming far too common, is proof of double vaccination OR a negative PCR test. Part of me hopes that there is a massive outbreak at one of these events because a vaccinated person who is ill and doesn’t need proof of a negative test turns up not wanting to miss out and infects lots of others.
Yep, we know. The injections are rubbish. They probably aren’t as good as Ivermectin at relieving symptoms, they do nothing the stop infection or transmission, yet produce serious illnesses and deaths, at a rate that any previous injection would have been pulled months ago.
However the psyop continues, the requirement for vaccine passports/health passes grows by the day across the world, or at least in most of the ‘western world’. Its almost as if this was the only aim, the virus and its ‘vaccine’ are subservient, they are just the means to the end.
Control is the aim, and they more or less have it now.
Our world has changed completely, there is no going back. Next the second wave of ‘climate’ inspired deprivations which will keep up the momentum to a disruptive ‘new’ capitalism, the feudal fascist totalitarian world.
There are trillions of dollars backing all of this, BlackRock, Vanguard in cahoots with the BIS and all the CBs. Politicians are paid off with small change.
Its sometimes difficult to stay positive.
‘Its almost as if this was the only aim, the virus and its ‘vaccine’ are subservient, they are just the means to the end’. Digital passports, yes, to control everything, vaccines and fear to get us there.
I am afraid I lost all confidence in the Zoe study at this time and no longer bother to look at the website.
Why they are incapable of publishing unmanipulated data is beyond me – just raw facts and let everyone else draw a conclusion.
ZOE data isn’t fact. They are doing similar things to what polling companies do for political opinions. They take results from a number of self-selected participants and rely on them reporting accurately, they then manipulate the data as well as they can to make it broadly representative for the whole population.
And we all know how accurate pollsters are, don’t we?
Yes. Very accurate in the 2019 election and more accurate than is generally acknowledged most of the time.
These data are rather worrying.
The vaccinated and the unvaccinated live in the same country and interact with one another, thus cases in both groups should track one another in time.
Thus this time delay between vaccinated and unvaccinated shouldn’t occur.
One possible explanation is that the vaccines delay onset of symptomatic disease — in this theory the vaccinated and unvaccinated would become infected at the same time, but the unvaccinated would have symptoms first and as a result get tested first. As PHE and ZOE data are both based on symptoms (leading to testing) this delay in testing in the vaccinated would be seen in the data.
If this is the case it would be rather worrying, because it might suggest that the vaccinated would remain contagious for a longer period than the unvaccinated.
It would be nice to have data that might disprove the above theory, but the authorities are almost pathological in their desire to withhold any data that might provide insight into how the vaccines are performing, so we’ll just have to wait to see what happens.
Not necessarily because the proportion in each group does not remain constant over time, i.e. vaccinated increases while unvaccinated declines.
It might if the vaccine effect declines over time. This is probably what’s happening to some extent which is why there is the need for booster shots.
There is no mystery about why they changed their calculation method. It is fully explained on their web site
https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-estimates-updated-vaccine
Not being a statistician I don’t fully understand their explanation, but it seems to me that their sample sizes in certain categories was too small to be statistically valid, so that means that their old conclusions were not correct, which is why they removed them.
I have to add that I have always been sceptical about ZOE forecasts, but mainly because of the self-selection of the participants and their self-diagnoses. Latterly I feel that they are even more likely to be getting it wrong because of shift of infections to lower age groups, who are less likely to want to participate.
Their prior estimates had error ranges, which would have encompassed things like ‘too small a sample’.
What they actually did is changed their assumptions, which produced results outside their old error estimate. This shows only that their assumptions are pivotal in defining their estimates, and that they change their assumptions ‘on a whim’.
I’d like to say more, but they haven’t published their prior methodology, how it has changed, or their raw data — as far as ‘science’ is concerned they might as well be performing magic.
Thank you for that article. I gave up and deleted the Zoe app a long time ago when I realised a subjective study, online can, without objective data ( such as blood work, PCR tests, physical examination) is useless. As for the person running the Zoe app, well, I will leave that up to the reader.
I was a supporter of ZOE, they seemed to produce unbiased data fast.
I’ve lost faith this last month or two as they seem to have been “gotten to”. Their change in methodology seems to have been less about data and more about The Narrative.
The fact you even have to ask the question “if it is just more politically viable” should tell you everything you need to know.
I’m pleased to see Sceptics using infections as the term for positive test results, even though imported graphics use the incorrect term cases, as encouraged by the government and its advisers. Positive tests without proof of associated symptoms are meaningless, and are not cases. It’s unfortunate that there seems to be no recording of actual cases, which should be positive tests with symptoms that need treatment. If there was, we have a real indication of the impact of Covid-19, which from the infection data is not available or of much use. Even better would be an age and vaccination status breakdown of the proportion of positive tests that do develop into actual cases, i.e. those with symptoms that need treatment. I believe if it were available, it would dampen down the fear generated by this hopeless government and its more hopeless advisers.
I haven’t seen mention of William Farr for some time. His stricture :
“The death rate is a fact; anything beyond this is an inference.”
… seems to have been forgotten as vague assumptions about ill-defined ‘cases’ and ‘infections’ have taken over from clear analysis of reality.
Of course, this suits the government’s mythical narrative. But I think that here we should expect more rooted analysis than that derived from PCR testing and the ZOE measure of hypochondria.
But can we get back to the underlying truths that this was never an epidemic, even at its worst, and that the clear indicator of Farr’s measure now shows nothing untoward.
Farting about with duff data does nothing.
An excellent summary; thank you
As far as child vaccines are concerned, there are some major issues that are most important. Firstly, at what age do you draw the line for child vaccine. Secondly, what is the incidence of children at that age contracting the virus, resulting in serious symptoms. Thirdly, what is the fully tested rate of illness in children of that age getting ill as a result of being vaccinated. I doubt the last two tests have been carried out and until they are, I can’t see how any parent could or should subject their child to this inadequately tested vaccine just to protect their elders.
My vote goes to politically acceptable. Somebody has whispered into Spector’s ear about the possibility of a gong if he toes the party line; which is a shame
Once again – farting about with duff data.
The judgment on the ‘vaccines’ is simple (as is the fundamental basis of the panic) :
BY DEFINITION, THERE IS NO RELIABLE DATA AVAILABLE TO INDICATE THAT THE ‘VACCINES’ ARE SAFE OR EFFECTIVE.
Conclusion : Don’t touch with a barge-pole.
Unfortunately, there is insufficient information in the plots to draw any conclusion. If the number of vaccinations increased over the period, then we should expect the number of positive tests for unvaccinated people to eventually decrease.
If vaccinated people are expected to test positive without necessarily showing symptoms, then as their vaccination numbers increase, so should the number of positive tests. If vaccines limit infection, I would also expect the ‘climb’ in positives for vaccinated people to lag behind the climb and subsequent decline in positives for the vaccinated, since the increase in positives among the vaccinated will only occur when a significant number have been vaccinated.
We need to know how many part- and fully-vaccinated people there are for each count of positive tests, as well as the severity of their symptoms.
ZOE deleted once I figured out they were another bunch of data grifters..
TPTB seem to manipulate the figures to suit their Agenda. You really cannot trust this government or their Communist advisers. Utter vermin!