Vaccinated people categorised as unvaccinated: This shows how studies and statistics were falsified
Source: TKP.at, Dr. Peter F. Mayer, 24 May 2024
We were right – say scientists Norman Fenton, Martin Neil, Clare Craig and four others. The UK Statistics Office (ONS) now admits that deaths among vaccinated people in 2021 were incorrectly categorised as unvaccinated. The ONS denied it at the time but now admits it.
When the UK ONS (Office for National Statistics) began publishing its post-vaccine mortality reports in 2021, Fenton and Neil found that there were large spikes in deaths among the “unvaccinated.” These spikes in mortality coincided with the first major rollout of the vaccine, for every age group (see this report, for example), the scientists write in a blog post.
The fraud is based on the fact that vaccinated people were only categorised as vaccinated after having received several injections and after a period of five weeks. People that failed these two criteria were counted as unvaccinated. With this trick you can prove the effectiveness of a saline vaccination against any disease, as Norman Fenton proved with mathematical precision back in spring of 2023.
The method grossly falsifies the results because there was a significant increase in infections among vaccinated and especially during the flu season, when respiratory diseases are common. It was shown for the first time in a Danish study at the beginning of March 2021 that the infection frequencies were increased by 40% after vaccinating around 39,000 nursing home residents and by 104% in 330,000 health care workers, both compared to those who were unvaccinated. This sheds light on why Covid-19 vaccine trials did not produce statistics for the first 14 days.
Fenton and Co show a chart for non-Covid mortality rates in weeks 1-38 of 2021 for ages 60-69:
We see that there was a sharp increase in deaths among the supposedly “unvaccinated” just immediately after the massive vaccination campaign began, while mortality among those officially vaccinated remained the same. The graphs for the other age groups looked almost the same.
Fenton and Co have explained that these apparent anomalies are due to the ONS’ standard procedure of categorising all people who died within 20 days of their first vaccination as “unvaccinated”. However, the ONS claimed that while this method was used for their effectiveness calculation, it was not used for mortality rates. However, this shows that the effectiveness calculations were also wrong and continue to be so. They said clearly that a person who died at any time after vaccination was correctly classified as a vaccinated death in the regularly published mortality data that forms the basis of a massive public communications campaign to promote vaccination.
Fenton and Co continue:
To “explain” the spikes, the ONS implicitly assumed a phenomenon called the “healthy vaccine effect”, claiming that people who were close to death were not vaccinated. This bold claim was made without any data to back it up.
Apart from the fact that this would have contradicted NHS policy at the time, we have shown that while a healthy vaccine effect could partly explain the longer-term lower mortality rates among the unvaccinated, it does not explain these spikes in mortality rates.
They could only be explained by the fact that the deaths were classified as unvaccinated shortly after vaccination. Nevertheless, the ONS, like many of the staunch vaccination advocates, insisted that no such miscategorization had taken place. For them, all anomalies in the ONS data could only be explained by the holy effect of “healthy vaccinated people”.
Later the ONS actually claimed there was an “unhealthy vaccine effect”, but only to explain other anomalies in the data. Clearly the ONS was so self-serving that it failed to recognize the contradictions between these claims and simply wanted to have its cake and eat it.”
Forensic pathologist Craig had submitted a request for access to the data to the ONS, which clearly confirmed the accuracy of the authors’ statement.
Craig posted an internal ONS email in this Twitter/X thread confirming that the NIMS database of vaccinated people, on which the ONS relies, has excluded people who died before the vaccination data was sent back to the central system.
Why is that so important? Because the ONS data – perhaps more than any other data source in the world – has been used to support claims that the vaccines are highly effective and safe.
So, as is now clear, any claims of efficacy and safety based on this data were completely illusory and subject to the cheap trick of miscategorisation, whereby even a placebo – or something even worse – could be “shown” to be safe and effective.
So they lied and intentionally created and spread misinformation. The serious scientists were accused of conspiracy thinking and their reputations were damaged as a result.
Suggest a correction
