Gov confirms jab negative efficacy for deaths, jab-related excess deaths, then lies about it?

Photo by Martin Sanchez on Unsplash

It was only last month that we reported on a BBC article that indicated the unjabbed were driving the mysterious excess in mortality, when the government data they linked to showed that the unjabbed were actually outperforming regarding COVID deaths (jab negative efficacy?) and non-COVID deaths (other jab adverse effects?), and now a similar situation arises with the latest batch of data from the English government.

We shall again focus on the most complete data set (source), and then further on Table 1, seemingly the most helpful and juiciest table of them all (the preferred table, 5, now shows ages 18 and up instead of 10 and up, as if they don’t want you knowing how many children are dying, and seems to have an error for the last few months of the year), again further zooming in on the last month available, December 2022. There were 71 COVID deaths in the unjabbed (4.86%). There were 1,390 COVID deaths in the jabbed (95.14%). Again utilising UK government data to estimate the equivalent population’s unjabbed share at 10% (source), it appears that the unjabbed are doing about twice as well as you’d expect (if the jabs had zero effect - they’re supposed to be life-saving), a clear indicator of the jab’s negative efficacy, even for deaths. Continuing on, we find 1,156 non-COVID deaths in the unjabbed (3.16%). There were 35,475 non-COVID deaths in the jabbed (96.84%). Once again, the unjabbed are doing brilliantly. With roughly 10% of the population (perhaps more?) contributing to only 3% of non-COVID deaths and 5% of COVID deaths, it does look like further confirmation that the jabs are not safe and effective; but unsafe and negatively effective. Instead of risks vs benefits, we should be talking about risks plus risks.

Okay then.

And despite their own data showing the unjabbed doing brilliantly, the government continues to make outstanding claims like: “Risk of death involving COVID-19 in England has been consistently lower for people who had at least a third vaccine dose or booster 21 days or more ago, compared with unvaccinated people and those with only a first or second dose.” Source.

Okay then.

Extra: With their own data completely at odds with their divisive claims, would the BBC and the UK government like to recant? Or shall we just wait for the lawsuits? Also, you might wonder why we chose to focus on the unjabbed rather than the jabbed. The simple answer is that since there are so many jabbed, a few % points difference from what should be expected might not seem impressive (another way to look at it: 100% jabbed yielding 100% of deaths might not seem compelling, but it will be the same 100% whether it’s a mere 20 deaths or a catastrophic 20 million deaths). Given the unjabbed are in a clear minority, a few % points shows you just how huge the discrepancies really are. The unjabbed are doing amazingly, and the jabbed look to be in a world of hurt.