5 Filters

So what did the ONS do with the Covid jab numbers, new paper from Expose?

Hi folks, The Daily Expose is still poking the bear “facts” which appear to conveniently support the policy:

“In summary, three new key pieces of evidence suggest that the ONS failed to accurately report deaths and omitted deaths that occurred within two weeks of vaccination:

So through simply comparing the ONS dataset expected historical mortality rate, as published by the ONS, with the mortality rates published in the ONS dataset for 2021, for non-covid deaths”, it appeared to be clear that the ONS data reported that deaths of both non- covid and covid deaths respectively for the “within 21 days of first dose vaccination” category tally almost perfectly with the number of deaths that would be expected should they have occurred in the third week alone? Hmm, strange that…

Even stranger when considering that the ONS also seem to have completely omitted two weeks of post-first vaccination deaths from their dataset.“

I could not access the 3/3/22 report for some reason.

Again, I find this stuff difficult to get my head around. That the ONS numbers have been somehow fixed around the policy is not hard to believe of course given current levels of both incompetence and corruption throughout governments and advisers worldwide. They seem to have done several things at the same time and this has only recently been exposed through delays in providing detailed age related covid data.

The original claim was restricted to challenging ONS data as weird results emerged relating to the unjabbed having higher mortality than the jabbed due to non covid reasons specifically in the peak period of jabbing.
The ONS and others claimed this was due to something called “healthy vaccinee effect” claiming jabbees were a healthier bunch to start with. This claim had no science behind it. A CDC / pharma backed paper tried to claim the same with an observational study but they were just making assumptions from the stats, no-one questioned the stats:

and the latest study says the facts don’t support this “convenient” theory.

The 3/3/22 report goes further and shows missing data in the peak jabbing periods and also overall missing deaths and peculiarities in relation to basic population datasets used by ONS.

Maybe @Evvy_dense or others can shed some light? :slight_smile:

cheers

Hi CJ1. The paper is here:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin-Neil-2/publication/358979921_Official_mortality_data_for_England_reveal_systematic_undercounting_of_deaths_occurring_within_first_two_weeks_of_Covid-19_vaccination/links/6220b299c4c4fa27cd25201a/Official-mortality-data-for-England-reveal-systematic-undercounting-of-deaths-occurring-within-first-two-weeks-of-Covid-19-vaccination.pdf?origin=publication_detail

The link supplied has been somehow invalidated by some GoogleCrome nonsense at the beginning.

I find the Expose analyses are getting less easy to follow. Reading the Craig/Fenton paper might make it simpler. They are an essential reading companion to ONS data ‘finessing’ - I’ll try to get through this at some point over the week.
Cheers
ED

1 Like

Great, thanks @Evvy_dense .

cheers