Infection Rates More than Twice as High in the Vaccinated, New UKHSA Data Shows, as Agency Dismisses Own Data as ‘Biased’. But Why No New VE Estimate Since May?
The latest UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance report was released Thursday, and its authors are now bending over backwards to keep their critics happy. Following a telling-off this week from the U.K. Statistics Authority, the UKHSA’s Head of Immunisation, Mary Ramsay (pictured above), published a blog post explaining what they’ve done to appease their detractors, while the report now states no fewer than four times, twice in bold typeface, that “these raw data should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness”. Ramsay grovels:
To make our data less susceptible to misinterpretation, the U.K. Health Security Agency has worked with the UK Statistics Authority to update some of the data tables and descriptions in the report, specifically around rates of infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In our commitment to transparent and clear data, we regularly review our publications to ensure they reflect the current situation within the pandemic, and we will continue to work with our partners at the statistics bodies, to ensure our reporting is as scientifically robust as possible.
As I noted last week, the UKHSA does not accept the criticism of its population estimates levelled by, among others, David Spiegelhalter, who declared that using them was “deeply untrustworthy and completely unacceptable”.
The agency instead takes the view that the problem is systemic biases in the data which mean it “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness. But as I have noted repeatedly, those biases just mean that the estimate will be of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness, which is a perfectly legitimate quantity to estimate and has its uses, particularly when looking at trends or when there is reason to think the biases may be relatively small. (For instance, a recent vaccine effectiveness study in California adjusted its raw data for 22 different factors but in almost all cases the adjustments were tiny.)
The UKHSA report itself correctly gives the definition of vaccine effectiveness: “Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to rates in unvaccinated individuals.” The U.S. CDC, likewise, states the definition as “the proportionate reduction in disease among the vaccinated group”. The CDC distinguishes “vaccine efficacy”, estimated from controlled studies, from “vaccine effectiveness”, which is used “when a study is carried out under typical field (that is, less than perfectly controlled) conditions”. It is therefore not appropriate for the UKHSA, a Government agency, to insist that its data “should not be used” to estimate vaccine effectiveness, which is a false statement and amounts to attempted Government censorship of scientific enquiry.
The report explains that “vaccine effectiveness is measured in other ways as detailed in the ‘Vaccine Effectiveness’ Section.” However, that section is clear that each estimate “typically applies for at least the first three to four months after vaccination”, and “there may be waning of effectiveness beyond this point”. The report discusses this waning, but only for the Alpha variant: “Data (based primarily on the Alpha variant) suggest that in most clinical risk groups, immune response to vaccination is maintained and high levels of VE are seen with both the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines.” What use is data based primarily on the Alpha variant, which went almost extinct around six months ago? There is no attempt to present adjusted estimates of vaccine effectiveness based on the most up-to-date data. Instead, we are just given repeated insistences that the data is not showing what it appears to be showing because it is subject to unquantified biases.
What are those biases? Last week the report claimed that vaccinated people “may engage in more social interactions because of their vaccination status”, which didn’t fit with the more usual idea of unvaccinated people as a less cautious sort. Neither did it fit with the other reason they gave, that the vaccinated “may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19”. This week they kept the latter but changed the former to the entirely ambiguous: “People who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions.”
The other two biases they suggest are that “many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19” and “people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19” previously. (The latter they say gives a person “some natural immunity to the virus for a few months”, which seems a very pessimistic view of natural immunity, particularly seeing how optimistic they are about the effectiveness of the vaccines.)
The report asserts categorically that the unvaccinated have higher previous infection rates, but cites no evidence to support this. Why not? Why, almost a year into the vaccination campaign, are researchers still so often waving their hands when talking about the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups? Where is the published data? Precisely how much more likely are the unvaccinated to have had a previous infection? This is a simple data comparison. Why hasn’t it been done? The study in California mentioned earlier found that 2% of the vaccinated had recovered from Covid against 2.3% of the unvaccinated, so not a large difference. Is England similar? Why don’t we know? Likewise, how much more likely are vaccinated people to be tested? This is just a comparison of the testing rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Why hasn’t it been done? This is not good enough. We want more data from UKHSA, not lectures on how not to use the meagre amounts of data they release.
In her blog post, Mary Ramsay points to studies PHE (UKHSA’s predecessor) has published in the past:
These factors are all accounted for in our published analyses of vaccine effectiveness which uses the test-negative case control approach. This is a recommended method of assessing vaccine effectiveness that compares the vaccination status of people who test positive for COVID-19, with those who test negative.
This method helps to control for different propensity to have a test and we are able to exclude those known to have been previously infected with COVID-19. We also control for important factors including geography, time period, ethnicity, clinical risk group, living in a care home and being a health or social care worker.
While PHE did publish such studies earlier in the year (I analyse them here and here), they have not published anything based on data more recent than May, over five months ago. This was just as Delta arrived, and before infections surged over the summer and the raw data started showing infections in the vaccinated eclipsing those in the unvaccinated.
So where is the update? It’s all very well writing pages at the behest of the U.K. Statistics Authority policing how people use your data, but where are the studies setting the picture straight? We’ve had studies from California, Sweden and Israel using data from over the summer, all showing sharp decline in vaccine effectiveness. Where is the U.K.’s contribution to this emerging understanding of the vaccines?
Yes, we had that dubious study in August from Oxford University based on the ONS Infection Survey. But there’s been no update from UKHSA to its studies based on Government testing data.
Here’s a suggestion. Why don’t Daily Sceptic readers write a (polite!) email to the UKHSA’s Mary Ramsay (address here, Twitter here) asking for an update on their very useful test-negative case control study with data from the summer and autumn. You might say you have been concerned about the data in their Vaccine Surveillance reports showing high infection rates in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated, but note they say vaccine effectiveness can only be properly estimated in a study, so would be grateful for an update on this.
Here’s this week’s table of unadjusted vaccine effectiveness and the updated graphs showing how it is changing over time. It shows infection rates currently twice as high in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated for those aged 40-79, corresponding to an unadjusted vaccine effectiveness of minus-100% or more. Vaccine effectiveness is negative for all over-30s, and almost zero for those aged 18-29 (and still declining). It remains high for under-18s, and effectiveness against hospital admission and death is holding up. This week the decline appears to have stopped, or at least paused, in most age groups.
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.
Serial liars and deceivers always tie themselves up in knots in the end. When UKHSA try to dismiss their own data and findings, you know they are up to two things, a) They are lying to you, and b) They have some rather inconvenient information that they would rather you did not know…
Or alternatively, they don’t know what they are doing. Either way it doesn’t exactly fill you with confidence, does it.
Bone marrow and the control of immunity (nih.gov)
“Research obtained by a group of scientists shows the COVID vaccine spike protein can travel from the injection site and accumulate in organs and tissues including the spleen, bone marrow, the liver, adrenal glands and in “quite high concentrations” in the ovaries.”
‘We Made a Big Mistake’ — COVID Vaccine Spike Protein Travels From Injection Site, Can Cause Organ Damage • Children’s Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)
So the jab may be interfering with the immune system?
But they don’t dismiss their own data and findings. They just point out what it is useful for and what it is not useful for.
Data, according to government bodies:
Does that sum it up accurately?
Spot on. We need to stop making excuses for these inexcusable minions of a treacherous administration, suddenly and gratifyingly hoist with their own petard.
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/ukhsa-efficacy-stats-death-watch
How do I know it is the weekend – because you trot our more specious bollox. “useful” to whom? Just as the Pfizer booster jab – using the S1 spike protein of the Alpha variant – that died out many many months ago – but ignores the impact of the Delta variant – is a meaningless exercise, the continued refusal to publish the incidence of infection between jabbed and unjabbed is indefensible. The availability of data from around the world that does show a distinct pattern of infection following “two jabs” makes Ramsey/UKHSA ex pHE a laughing stock.
It is a very serious demonstration of the abandonment of professional ethics for these alleged professionals to promote the narrative dictated by politicians where it demonstrably involves the use of partial data – something that has been shown to be the case time and time again since Downing Street “press briefings” started ; presumably you are happy with that level of bias? As you have a gullible and blinkered excuse for the swathe of wrong headed policies which characterise the UK’s government’s “official response” to SARS COV2/CV19, I think you should change your blog name to Captain Queeg.
Nope, it does not. But it also means that any person employed by the UKHSA who is a member of an accredited professional body, meaning they have signed up to a professional code of conduct/ethics, who conducts the direction of research OR, more meaningfully, suborns their professional ethics because of pressure applied from ANY external or internal source and then publicly presents incomplete data in the manner of Ms Ramsey above, to deny independent scrutiny, that person is potentially in a whole world of trouble.
Ramsey is a Doctor and Consultant Epidemiologist, meaning that she may well have agreed to the standards of professional conduct for non clinical Doctors, eg the Royal Society of Medicine; it would be great to see her reaction to a proper journalist putting this point to her, Whitty, Vallance, van Tamm, Harries the whole rotten cabal.
“People who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions.”
Ah, see there’s the problem right there. What needs to be done is obvious. We need to control the behaviour of the vaccinated, that will fix it.
Do you know, I thought exactly the same thing. And I also thought that would be the easy thing to do because the jabbed are ripe for control.
They are starting to mandate testing them again in Germany…
In any case, the actual behaviour is likely to be the opposite of what they imply – bedwetting Covidians who are terrified of the deadly virus will almost certainly have been spiked each time they were “offered” it, and follow all the other rituals of the cult, plus hiding behind the sofa as much as possible.
In contrast, people who thing it’s all a ridiculous over-reaction (like most of us on here) are far more likely to be unspiked,to ignore all the cult rituals, and to try to carry on as normally as is possible.
“The agency instead takes the view that the problem is systemic biases in the data which mean it “should not be used””
But if the data was favourable you can bet your house they would be promoting it as gold standard and the fact-checkers would be onto anybody daring to question it. These pathetic, mealy-mouthed bastards disgust me.
How long before the UKHSA denounces the UKHSA as heretics, and demands its replacement with a more Correct body (run by the same people of course, on more pay and expenses)?
This starts to remind me of Stalin and Kondratieff.
Maybe they made the same observation?
So, Steiner isn’t coming to relieve the Fuhrerbunker after all.
ooooh someone needs to make the video with UKHSA….
Watched “Dark Waters’ last week with Mark Ruffalo, lawyer, digging in to the Due Pont poisoning the people of West Virginia with their production of Teflon. It’s a classic example of the corruption of government bodies working for a big corporate company. Du Pont knew all along they were poisoning people, but carried on nonetheless. Government agencies assisted in trying to stifle the truth, and if it hadn’t been for that lawyer, they’d have succeeded. This feels like the same plot, only on a much, much, larger scale. But we already have enough data to know the vaccine drive has been an unmitigated disaster, but like in Dark Waters it may be a generation before anything is done. Issues are: The vaccine effectiveness wanes quickly. Young (and old)lpeople are dying by being injected with something that they don’t need. There are signs already they may affect the natural immune system in the long term. In light of the above, it can be reasonably inferred that the only reason for their introduction is social control. People watch films like Dark Waters and say “Isn’t it crazy they did that?” “Wow.” “I can’t believe they got away with it for so long.”… Read more »
Excellent post. I had forgotten that film, it’s a good while since I saw it., but you are spot on. I wonder whether Robert Bilott would take this one on… We could do with some legal types with the cojones to really go for this lot. Though they appear to be stymied at every turn.
Someone like this fine fellow…
I watched Dark Waters last week too, and its emotional impact on me was far greater than the last time I viewed it, some years ago. I thought of Union Carbide, and Bhopal, and wondered that there was seemingly no one to fight for the victims of that disaster, the legacy of which remains today.
Scientists get away with an awful lot, their propensity for evil seems limitless. They will kill us all in the end, one way or another.
Surely they should be rebranded again as The Ministry of Truth?
“the UKHSA has worked with the UK Statistics Authority to. . .”
There is a phrase that describes the practice of Police Officers ensuring that their notebooks all say the same when giving evidence in Court but I can’t recall it offhand.
The upshot is the vaccines are pointless – jabber woke y
What does it matter if they lie? They have been getting away with it since March 2020 – that’s 20 months already. If you go to Heathrow Airport’s departures & arrivals boards you’ll see planes coming and going with passengers who have more than likely been ‘fully vaccinated’ as no-one wants to arrive and have to be in quarantine for 10 days with Mitie marshalls (Serco) checking up on them, and also having to pre-pay for two expensive PCR tests for Day 2 and Day 8. Much easier to get the ‘vaccines’ and only have to pre-purchase an LFT kit from one of the Government’s ‘approved’ companies that flog them at huge profit. There are people who say they’re not going to take the ‘vaccines’ and don’t want to travel abroad. A lot of these people are old people who weren’t going to go abroad anyway. Which is OK, as there are lots of nice things to see and do in the UK. But these old people will be replaced by younger generations used to wearing face masks and getting ‘booster shots’ regularly. A child of 20 months of age is already used to seeing face masks on everyone in… Read more »
I think you may be overly pessimistic, perhaps based on the situation in your local area? Around me there is maybe 10% at most mask wearing indoors and those are mostly either elderly or single women in their 30’s (not sure why they feel particularly vulnerable).
Mask wearing percentages vary from place to place – where I live it’s around 100% in shops and on public transport.
I don’t think people wearing face masks at 10% in some supermarket near you is a ‘victory’ – we all know they’ll slap them back on in a jiffy when told to do so. As they did before.
What I do wonder about is we never hear how many school children have been ‘Covid vaccinated’ – some say this, some say that, but what is the truth? Most of them, or just a few?
Face mask wearing is still 100% inside airports and on planes.
We’ll have to see what happens with the 3rd ‘booster’ – how many have had that already, and how many will take it? When will the jabbing of the 5-11 year olds take place, and will anybody be stopping that from happening? Nobody stopped the 12-18 year olds being ‘vaccinated for Covid’.
I think I am more realistic than pessimistic. Based on what I have seen happen.
‘Face mask wearing is still 100% inside airports and on planes’.
Sadly, that is here to stay unless the air industry suffers in a severely financial way and even then they will probably not buckle. I doubt I’ll ever board a plane again.
Not in Norway, Swedn & Denmark.
Outside of healthcare the few people around here still wearing facemasks, welders shields even, would in normal times be regarded as social misfits or weirdos for the other ways they behave.
From my observations on mask wearing round me:
I was out and about as a key worker during lockdown proper (last spring/early summer).
As lockdown was partly lifted at the cost of wearing masks indoors it was the manual working men, many of whom had been also been working throughout, that were least likely to be wearing masks in Tesco Metro or the Co-op even though it was supposed to be compulsory; dunno about Waitrose or Sainsbury’s.
Same goes for the cafe I used to frequent, once it reopened, even Police Officers would come in for a cuppa unmasked.
Yep. How can you spot a Remain voter? They’re wearing a mask.
Not a good look – broadcasting your stupidity on the net.
Time was we had many Remainer readers here, more of a left/right balance and some self identified BAME people too.
In the States, same applies to the Dems! The die-hards are masked alone in the cars. Total idiots.
Yes indeed. All following the climate change scam too, and pro-mass-immigration. All liberals.
When I drive past my local M&S it looks like a scene from Contagion. A lot of other places I’ve been lately.. hotels, bars, cinemas, I’d say were below 10% now.
My 5cts:
SW London Waitrose 20% from the start.
Chichester Waitrose up to 75% again.
Sainsbury’s 50/50.
I’ve only been in M&S and Tesco recently, but during the normal working day they seem to support your ranking above.
Interestingly, in both cases the number of face-nappies in evidence seems to go down in both cases later in the day (after about 5) – presumably those who are most terrified / compliant don’t go out as much in the evenings!
Very likely to be true, same was the case during lockdown lite (last summer/early autumn) far more mask rebels in the evening.
Yes, Nick, you seem to have nailed it. Returned from a few days in East Devon yesterday. Sidmouth Waitrose, possibly 90+% maskers. Taunton Masks & Spencer definitely 80%. What broke my heart though was driving through Colyton when schools were emptying out. Virtually every single secondary school child fully face knickered OUTSIDE on their way home, presumably to Karen and Gary.
Sidmouth is bit of a special case, Gods Wating Room along with nearby Budleigh Salterton.
Colyton School is a Grammar where wealthy parents fight tooth and nail to get their offspring enrolled, might have thought they had more sense.
Taunton though is very run of the mill, rundown even, it’s surprising they can support an M&S.
Just like the Soviet Union when Comrades were forever being cajoled into yet more sacrifices for the golden future that was always nearly within their grasp.
Btw – i have travelled and continue to travel without this passport – most countries accept lateral flow tests and i can take a day 5 so called early release back in UK – it’s not what i want but it does not stop me and btw my kid’s teenage friends are dead set (no pun…) against this jab and well up on toxicity etc – take up is almost zero with them. Exceptions can become the rule. Quit the cynicism… whining etc. Resist and Act.
You can only take a 5-day ‘early release’ if you are ‘unvaccinated’ and have agreed to a 10 days quarantine upon your arrival, and have pre-purchased the Day 2 and Day 8 PCR tests.
The Day 5 ‘early release’ is also a PCR test, not LFT.
The ‘passport’ for now is required and must show, proof of being ‘fully vaccinated’, proof of recovering from Covid, proof of a negative test. I don’t know how anyone can be travelling without such ‘proof’.
You don’t say to which countries you have travelled. Would you care to enlighten us?
I certainly wouldn’t turn up at an airport without the required documentation, in the hope there’s a chance they’ll just let me through! And then miss my plane and have to go through the process all over again, buying new plane tickets, pre-purchasing tests, etc. – and where would I be staying in the meantime, sleeping on the airport floor, hoping I can find an electric socket so I can charge my phone?
The passport isn’t required o travel to Spain and back – I just show my test results and passenger locator form
Your ‘test results’ and the ‘passenger locator form’ are ‘the pass’. Anyway, that’s all rather vague. What test(s)? Where? How much time before the flights?
I’d suggest people do their own research rather than just turn up at an airport. For example:
https://www.spth.gob.es/more
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/travel-to-england-from-another-country-during-coronavirus-covid-19
Three minus ticks? Tell me what I have said that is not true! Still waiting for Ruth’s reply as to which countries she’s travelled to without any kind of Covid documentation…
I know for sure my paperwork was looked at when I flew from Helsinki, Heathrow and Amsterdam, and that I wouldn’t have even been allowed through security at those airports if my documents hadn’t been in order. I don’t like this, that you have to have ‘proof’ of Covid/vaccination status, but if you want to fly that’s how it is now.
My son has been travelling extensively this year (Turkey, Russia, Ukraine, Maldives) and has consistently refused vaccination; he did contract Covid last year (incidentally on a plane whilst fully masked) along with his friend who was sat next to him.
From the UK? And what happens upon his return to the UK? You haven’t said. Presumably he is required to pre-pay for PCR tests for Days 2 and 8, and be in quarantine for 10 days when he gets back to the UK.
Here’s the UK Gov site about ‘the rules’:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/travel-to-england-from-another-country-during-coronavirus-covid-19
I agree almost entirely with you.
Air travel isn’t going back to what it was. Ever.
Measures and regulations are hard to turn back as it is. But to make matters worse, they’ve got themselves a climate change win by reducing the amount of air travel so the pressure to keep air travel volume low will remain.
Bureaucracies, airlines and the kind of people that travel a lot are generally the crowd that have swallowed all the covid bullshit whole – masks, jabs, lockdowns, social distancing, the lot. They are like the cool guys making and imposing the rules and will make everyone else jump through their miserable hoops.
Only that we are the kind of people who have been travelling a lot – four or five times/year to the UK – and we certainly didn’t want any of this ‘Covid nonsense’. However, we now have the choice – unvaccinated and 10 days quarantine plus two PCR tests pre-purchased from some cowboy company, or ‘fully vaccinated’ and only an LFT test required at a rip-off price. My partner is ‘double-jabbed’. No noticeable side effects, still alive (I expect that if she were to die at the age of 95 some here would claim it was the ADE!). I remain unjabbed but it is becoming obvious that if I wish to travel to the UK without quarantine then I shall have to get the jabs – remember, they are 8 weeks apart minimum, so if I got the first on, say February 1st, I wouldn’t be able to travel until mid-April (8 weeks plus 2 weeks required for the ‘pass’ to become valid). Even for the ‘fully vaxxed’ the EU certificate lasts only 12 months from the second dose… so it’s clear something must happen. My guess is the 3rd ‘booster’ will be required to keep the ‘pass’ valid. Of… Read more »
I don’t know where you are but the Valneva (dead virus) vaccine, which is a French company, so bound to be available in France (though the UK have cancelled our order for deeply dubious reasons even though it’s going to be manufactured in Scotland; is that still the UK?). I suspect a lot of vaccine-hesitant people would accept this one, even though it still won’t have been through the full testing regime. I suspect, like many, I couldn’t give a toss how effective/ineffective it is, as someone who is ‘recovered’ I don’t feel under any risk & as someone who is in fine health I don’t feel at any risk anyway & totally in no need of any assistance from a vaccine of any sort.
Caution … one of the non-GM jabs causes pre-diabetes, according to recent findings.
So a choice … semi-permanent blood clotting or diabetes. Aaargh.
Well, semi-permanent if it depresses the immune system and you end up needing boosters for life.
I wouldn’t normally touch these ‘Covid vaccines’ with a barge pole either, but the fact is that for those who are deemed ‘fully vaxxed’ there’s no quarantine for them when they arrive in the UK, for the ‘unvaccinated’ 10 days quarantine awaits, plus obligatory pre-purchase of the Day 2 and Day 8 PCR tests.
Downtick all you like, but those aren’t the rules I made.
I don’t know how many arrivals take the chance of receiving a fine and break their quarantine. How do you answer when Serco phones up and says our man called round but you weren’t where you were supposed to be?
It’s no good when you get to the UK Border and they want to see your paperwork and you say “I read on the Daily Sceptics site that you don’t need any of that…” – and there’s a line of 200 people behind you tutting because you haven’t done as you should.
Finland I believe.
Yes. Which is why I’ve been keeping my eye on the international travel situation, especially in regard to the UK. I certainly wouldn’t just turn up at Helsinki airport without the documentation the UK Government demands, as I bet I would get no further than the Finnair check-in desk, or the check-in machine would ask for documentation codes.
I simply find it hard to believe people who come out with things like “I travel to Spain and back a lot and only have to show a negative test” – I mean, what does that mean? What test?
Then there are those who claim a fake screenshot of being ‘fully vaccinated’ will get you through – maybe it will, but who is going to risk all to see if it really works?
Millions of people all over the world unwittingly “risk all to see if it really works.”(The shot, that is.)
Catch covid and recover?
That certificate is good for 6 months. It’s a bit chancy booking a plane ticket and hoping you’re going to catch Covid and be on the path to recovery before the plane departs.
very iffy when recovering from actual COVID is vastly more protective than the clot shots
You have to catch ‘Covid’ first and I don’t seem to be able to find it anywhere!
As for ‘the vaccinated’ shedding ‘spike proteins’, my partner has been doubly-jabbed and I haven’t caught ‘Covid’ from her. Or… maybe I have and just didn’t know it? Asymptomatic like….!
The thing is, for those who want to travel to the UK and don’t want the hassle of 10 days quarantine plus having to pay for two PCR tests sold by shady characters, getting the ‘vaccines’ is the way to go. I’m not recommending this course of action, just saying that this is what people have been doing.
Take your chances and get the injections. I doubt anybody on here could really care less what you do.
Isn’t freedom of choice what we are all concerned and fighting for in our own small ways?
Absolutely, whether someone chooses to get vaccinated or not is entirely up to them, as is the reason they choose to do so.
My reason is not some anti-vaxx principle (although I’m starting to lean towards anti-vaxxing, as profit is clearly becoming more important than health). It never occurred to me I would need the vaxx, it was first supposed to be offered to the elderly and vulnerable and was not going to do much more than the flu shot. I am loathe to take any kind of medication without a genuine need.
Knowing more about the vaxxes now, I definitely do not want one as not only do I not believe there will be any benefit for my health, but worse there may well be some detriment to my health.
But should someone else decide otherwise, they should do what they think right. I have a somewhat more strident view of cooperating with the nassi pass, however.
“some anti-vaxx principle “ It’s a nonsense term, applicable to a small minority who are as religiously blind as any Covid fanatic – and a few who are looking to imitate Big Pharma and make a killing with other snake oil. Jabbing is essentially the same as anything you ingest for your health – some interventions work, and others are a waste of time or even positively dangerous. Whichever – it is an accepted ethical principle in medicine that it is your choice, after being full informed, whether you take the prescription. No ifs, no buts, and certainly not on the basis that the majority of the population are suffering from induced psychosis. In the case of vaccines (in general), a few have undoubtedly had overall beneficial effects. But even those have had beneficial impacts that are historically a minor part of health improvement. What is also true is that ‘vaccines’ as a general category of pharmaceutical intervention have been massively oversold – for reasons thatare not hard to divine for someone with a functioning brain. I tend to stick to the basics re. the snake-oil : simply that a novel experimental jab with little testing provenance is a very stupid… Read more »
I was speaking hypothetically – we’ll have to see how this plays out, but I tend to believe that most people flying now have been ‘fully vaxxed’. There may be some who get a PCR test within 72 hours of the plane departure time, but that is tricky to arrange.
And very few travelling on the ‘recovering from ‘Covid’ certificate.
Not just planes, but ferries across the Channel too, and Eurostar.
9 minus ticks! Bizarre! I must have stepped on some tender toes…
You cannot lawfully be quarantined in then UK. This video may be of interest to you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=hEgezGOeALk&feature=youtu.be
Yes – have bookmarked it and will look at it later, thanks.
Except for those with private jets, for whom it’s business as usual!
“My prediction is that by October 2023 things will be pretty much the same as they are now”
I think you could add 5 or 10 years to that date and still have a good chance of being right, sadly. There are only two things that will save us in the short to medium term. (1) Regime overreach causing a revolt. No sign of that in the UK. (2) People gradually tire of it all and it just fades into the background, and politically governments feel the need to move on because the public are no longer interested. The chances of this are slim I think, but it could happen.
if it turns shooty in the US, as it may well do, the impact will run globally
Alec Baldwin tried that but it didn’t catch on!
Globocap target date is 2030 so one way or the other the shitshow will continue for the next decade. As the C1984 nonsense wanes the planet toasting crap will be revved up. Either way my final year(s) are not going to be pleasant but the real horrors await the generations following.
God help them.
Yet they are going to make me chose between getting the jab or finding a new career which I suspect will involve me having to get a jab anyway, besides I’m not sure I can face another career change yet again. I guess it’s better to comply with these douchebags? I honestly don’t know what to do anymore. I just don’t understand why all my colleagues in the NHS are so compliant. Why do they accept to take orders from some wanker that worked at Goldman and Sacks before he got into politics. It’s not safe and it’s not effective.
Say no. If you say no, if we all say no, it ends.
Nothing is going to change. The New Normal. The New Nonsense. The New Nonscience. Build What Back Better you may ask?… consolidation of control. Why? Because they know the time is short. A controlled demolition is better for them than waiting for it to all fall apart.
This Government has systematically destroyed any belief or faith in politicians, the NHS, Doctors, journalism along with the Pharma Industry has destroyed faith in vaccines and medicines with their system of lies, cover ups, misrepresentation and bullying tactics.
May they reap what they sew
In the end, and for the historical record, the corporate scientists and their media lackeys will simply ‘revise away’ any evidence showing that there was no pandemic, the PCR results were not ‘cases’, the injections didnt work and caused millions of injuries and deaths just like their kindred spirits in the climate hoax are already doing with past temperature records. What we have witnessed over this last 18 months in terms of wholesale lying and blatant data manipulation are the formulative steps of that vast deception taking root.
Vaccine failures – now called breakthrough infections.
Vaccine failing – now called waning effectiveness.
It’s not just the figures/interpretations they massage. “Failures” and “failing” might wake up a few sheep you see.
It would indeed be very interesting to have some reliable data re the “breakthrough infection rate” experienced by never vaccinated people who have had covid, – ie pcr + clinical signs. In all probability though this has been done.
If I were a conspiracy theorist no doubt I’d be thinking there’s some sinister explanation for the figures not being released, like evidence based confirmation of the superiority of natural recovery from infection for example – which would upset the agenda.
Pushed into a corner they will say that even to contemplate such studies would lead to a lack of confidence in their product/vaccine/ultimate objective of digital control, and, that would never do.
There needs to be a study of people who think they had COVID before it was even named or identified. How many of these people (sick pre March 2020) later tested positive for COVID via a PCR test (once they were available)? If a smaller percentage than the population at large, this would be strong evidence of early spread. The evidence? These people apparently had natural immunity. (No such study will ever be done, which is kind of revealing imo).
Apologies for repeating my experience, but it remains relevant: I’m certain I had covid in mid-October 2019 (Chinese students studying here were returning after the summer, and I was told about a mysterious respiratory ‘student virus’ at universities). I was really ill – anti-biotics and steroids didn’t touch it, and in December a scan showed ‘ground glass’ lesions on my right lung, and further examinations showed some damage to my heart. I still have these problems today, though not nearly as severe. Many times in early 2020 I told them at the hospital that I’m sure I’ve had covid and always they were dismissive, saying “oh, everybody thinks that” and ignored me. By August 2020, fed up with these responses, I paid for a blood test at a local pharmacy, where I was found to have a full covid antibody count. I remain undiagnosed, however. My husband and son, who had both been ill at the same time (though not severely, and both recovered in a week or so) decided to get tested too, only to be told that the antibody tests had now been banned, going so far as to threaten pharmacies with closure if they didn’t comply. At… Read more »
They do have an out here and it’s to take the pharma companies to task for a product that doesn’t work and causes huge harms.
Oh, they’ve already made it in the contracts that if anyone takes them to Court over these vaccines the government has to pay for the defence costs of the pharma company.
Ah well.
A few points on this:
I’m going to put my observations to you, as you seem to have real knowledge of the technical side of things (I don’t know if you’ve said in the past that you have a background in this area; I’m going partly on your posts which I think are very informative and the name you’re using). Does it strike you as odd that the colour-coded tables for VE, after having been only coloured green for high confidence as far as symptoms were concerned and pink, low confidence, for everything else for as long back as I can remember seeing this table, that this week all the other columns are now yellow coded, for medium confidence? Is there no need to explain why the change from one week to the next in terms of confidence level for every single column? I appreciate the claim is that there are more studies, greater certainty, but on what basis? Have you seen the (I think) Chinese study regarding the Vero Cell vaccine which indicates immune suppression for at least 28 days after administering of the vaccine and other problems? If they have that study (it covers at least 90 days) for that vaccine, surely Pfizer… Read more »
Jane — thanks for that info on their summary table — I’d not been looking at it because it seems largely made up (and has done from the start). Anyway, I had to laugh at it when I looked, because they’ve changed the colours but still have the same references. Ie, they’re changing their conclusions with the same input data and without explaining why (this is naughty is science/statistics). But, as I say, they appear to be largely made up, so it is no surprise… Re the Vero Cell vaccine study — I saw that too. I find it extraordinary that this research hasn’t been done on all of the vaccines. It is vitally important stuff, but they’re determined to vaccinate children anyway. FWIW, I’d suggest that the problem isn’t the specifics of the vaccines, but what they’re doing — I believe that this is an autoimmune problem caused by anti-covid-spike-protein antibodies (rather than the spike protein itself). Thus I fear that there is a substantial risk of the problems identified in the paper being present for all of the vaccines. I’d also note that the Vero Cell paper’s data was based on rather small numbers of people — ordinarily… Read more »
Thanks for the reply. I know the VC study was on a small group, but even to a layperson (it was very technical), the indication that the vaccine was causing unforeseen negatives seemed pretty clear. It might be extraordinary that the other vaxx makers have not carried out such a study – the cynic/realist in me says they do have precisely such studies, have had them for months and they are tucked away gathering dust. The reason is clear – as you say, the problem is probably the same for ALL the vaccines, because the problem is the antibody response to the spike protein, something I’ve been reading about since February/March. A lot of accessible info was available on that on Childrens Health Defense, an excellent site for people who are not yet familiar with it. Some months ago there was a small article in a Dutch newspaper about research at the University of Amsterdam. I found a very technical article about the research (in English). The researchers had found an existing drug that regulated the immune response to the covid spike protein, without suppressing the entire immune system, as steroids do. The research indicated that the people who had… Read more »
The infection window post infection was demonstrated in care homes infection data way back in March. It’s WHY they have changed the definition of a vaccinated person to cut out the first 21 days post jab.
I’m not necessarily referring to infection risk. The study in question showed other harm in relation to diabetes, kidney, coagulation. I think those things might be what appeared over the 90 day period. It’s worth having a look at the study itself. TheyLiveandWeLockdown posted a link to it in a comment under the Merkel article yesterday.
Nature article I’ve posted elsewhere, the jab harms your immune system (and causes diabetes like symptoms including raised HBA1C which FUBARS healing).
amanuensis do you want to write something about vaccine effectiveness above the line? Seems like you have some mastery of the field. If so, email me at lockdownsceptics@gmail.com. Some goes for other peeps below the line. If you think you have something interesting and original to say, email me at that address.
Good for you Toby.
Nice one.
I run these numbers every week, graph them and make my own conclusions.
Fancy a look?
Continued
Continued
Continued
Continued
Continued
I can’t read them, type too small!
Click on them. Click on the black background to return.
Yes, I understand that! But still too small, fewer charts per page would help.
Magnifies OK on my tablet, sorry you can’t read them.
Try right clicking and “open in new tab”. Then click on the chart to magnify
I’ve struggled to read these & so think I’m not getting all I should from them due to different scales etc. Could you do a little analysis of say, the 60-69 year olds highlighting what’s interesting? Thanks.
Geert Vanden Bosch is calling it folks. Choppy waters ahead?
https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/what-happens-if-israel-fails-the?r=o7iqo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=
This chart shows the week on week change in the likelihood of vaccinated v unvaccinated people testing positive for covid over the past 2 months or so.
In each of the age groups between 40 & 80 the vaccinated are more than 100% as likely to test positive. But, as Will notes above, regardless of the veracity of the population data the trend is clear & all one way.
The only justification Whitty & Co came up with for jabbing healthy kids was to stop onward infection. Well, clearly, it doesn’t do that so where’s the justification.
The only justification for vaccine passports is the conviction that unvaxxed people are more likely to pass the virus on than vaxxed people. Well, clearly, that’s not true.
We live in strange times.
Yes this TREND CLEARLY SHOWS that the jabbed are catching it more than unjabbed. This is proof, not correlation
I’ve posted later to point out that UKHSA have changed how they calculate the rates per 100,000 in the double vaccinated and unvaccinated.
In week 43 they used the NIMS population at week 42 and in this week’s (week 44) report they’ve used the NIMMS population at week 41. That is they’ve jumped back 2 weeks.
You might want to adjust your chart for next week accordingly.
Very sneaky!
I can’t think how I’d do that, as I haven’t got the relative NIMS numbers or the absolute numbers in the vaxxed or unvaxxed categories.
Good find though.
The numbers of ‘cases’ are in the spreadsheet attaching to National Flu and covid surveillance reports.
While I don’t like UKHSA chopping and changing I don’t think their changing of the population distorts things too much having looked at it.
You can get single dose numbers in that spreadsheet too.
We are actually quite close to negative efficacy in every age group when you do a straight comparison between vaccinated (one or more doses) vs unvaccinated.
The under 18 age group is misleading as there are so few double jabbed. When you include single jabbed there’s actually negative efficacy there also according to my calculations.
The surest way to refute the claims is to publish up-to-date figures. The absence of current infection rates being published surely tells us all we need to know.
As far as bias is concerned, one could equally say that it is likely that vaxxed are being significantly undercounted as many vaxxed people will not bother getting tested – as they’re ‘safe’. The nassi pass in NL allows a vaxxed person to get a positive corona test and still go around coughing and sneezing over everyone whenever and wherever they want. They are, of course, being requested not to, but the government has clearly stated it will not modify the nassi pass so that anyone who gets a positive test will not get a QR code, even though virologists and doctors have asked them to do that. I have a vaxxed neighbour who said if he gets symptoms he won’t get tested, because he wouldn’t go out if he knew he had corona – don’t test, don’t know, clear conscience. They’re rerunning an old ad saying to get tested if you have symptoms, with the addition of “even if you’ve been vaccinated”. They have had bulletins on the news imploring people who are double vaxxed to get tested if they have symptoms, which implies they are quite concerned that vaxxed people are not getting tested (understandably, what was the… Read more »
I’ve been working at a site where there are rather a few with persistent hacking coughs. None have put themselves up for testing, because ‘they’re vaccinated and thus it won’t be covid’.
Most people are quite shocked to discover the jabs do nothing to stop you catching or spreading SARS2.
Just wait until it sinks in that it probably does little to nothing to stop you from getting ill or dying…
And then we haven’t even got onto the fact that the vaxx may make you more susceptible to catching corona. And then there are of course the long-term unknowns…
Are any Astra Zeneca jabs still being given?
Only to people they catch posting ‘misinformation’ about the vaccines online.
The Emperor has no clothes!
Everything in the UKHSA blog post is rational, but I note they give no estimates for the magnitude of these differences between the two groups, and like Will i cannot see at this point in the fear cycle that these difference can be major – a percent maybe, not a hundred percent.
But, if UKHSA is happy to tell me I’m healthier, more aware of risk, more likely to have lived my life normally, less likely to have been fearful and mask bound, and more likely to be enjoying the open air rather than hiding in my house, yes, they are right. And it’s great that they acknowledge all of this means I’m less likely to be ill, less likely to be infected at this moment and also less likely to NEED A FUCKING VACCINE.
We see it all around us, it is the vaxxed who are ill, the vaxxed how are cowering, the vaxxed who are infecting others. And they want to assimilate us too? Go fuck yourselves UK Govt.
Because it’s not good for business, is it!
The weekly tables showing cases/hospitalisations/deaths in the vaccinated vs the unvaccinated is useful, but is there data breaking this down further than just vaccinated and unvaccinated?
Presumably the definition of unvaccinated is something along the lines of any person who has not had a second dose more than 14 days ago. That would include people who have had one dose, as well as those who have had their second dose less than 14 days ago – both categories of people for whom the rates are highly relevant. If those groups have a higher rate than those who have’t undergone any gene therapy, then they are artificially bumping up the rate in the unvaccinated, and making the (already bad) effectiveness rates look better than they actually are.
It’s even worse – the 14 day gap wasn’t enough, they have now pushed it to 21 days. You can have been jabbed 20 days ago, get ill, die, and you will go down on the stats as unvaccinated.
This is rolling 4 week data, so after next weeks update, we will be able to explicitly compare case rate data for 3 completely separate 4 week periods running weeks 33-36, 37-40 and 41-44 respectively.
If you look at just the double vacc data and non vacc data standalone purely for trend analysis using the 40-43 week data in the meantime (excluding under 18s), the difference in trends, irrespective of relative case rates between the 2 is striking
Un-Vaccinated
The latest report continues to say Vaccine effectiveness is estimated by comparing rates of disease in vaccinated individuals to rates in unvaccinated individuals. Since the report gives those rates broken down by age, which shows that for most adult age groups the rate in the vaccinated is much higher than in the unvaccinated, it is perfectly reasonable to compare them. The report itself does, for it declares In individuals aged greater than 30, the rate of a positive COVID-19 test is higher in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated That is a comparison: the rate in one cohort is higher than the rate in another cohort. These rates give us a reasonable indication of the rate of infection in groups. If I am among a large group of vaccinated people in their 40s then more people in that group would likely test positive than if they were all unvaccinated. Or to put it another way, the more in the group who are vaccinated, the higher the rate of test positives around me there will be. It also means that if I draw a sample, including an individual, from most adult age groups then the higher the vaccination rate in the group,… Read more »
One continuing problem is the lack of rigour associated with the terms ‘cases’, ‘infections’ ‘disease’ etc.
The elasticity undermines any data that is derived.
This is totally unacceptable. The UK government are clearly intending to mandate vaccination for certain workers while also introducing a vaccine passport.
The only justification for doing this would be if the unvaccinated posed a significantly greater risk to the general population than the vaccinated. Yet – the very metric which would confirm this, i.e. VE against infection, is being withheld and the only data released to the public is claimed to be misleading.
So the VAERS data in the US is misleading, Yellow Card data is misleading, UKHSA data is misleading and, presumably, the data previously released by PHE was misleading.
Is there any data which isn’t misleading?
I do believe that Pfizer’s financial and shareholders’ reports are spot on, if that helps
All cause mortality.
You’re either dead or you aint.
Yes – that’s about it.
But then, you are still ham-strung in defining groups that you may be interested in comparing – even down to the most basic number of all – those dying from Covid.
Also, many of those mortality charts – the so-called baselines – are based on “expected mortality.” Change the expected number, you change everything else.
I imagine there is plenty of data that isn’t misleading but, funnily enough, it hasn’t seen the light of day. One can only speculate as to why that might be the case, but I very much doubt if it is because the data highlights positive vaccine efficacy.