UK government won't tell public about excess deaths related to COVID shots — but they told Pharma

All those deaths? They weren't so excessive after all…

How many excess deaths were there in the UK during 2023? How many can be linked to the COVID shots?

The second question is hard to answer, but, perhaps surprisingly, the first question is also not easy to address. Until a few weeks ago, the official number of excess deaths in 2023 in the UK was 31,442. Then, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revised its method of calculating excess deaths, resulting in a figure for 2023 that was two-thirds lower, 10,994.

If the ONS thought that the revised figures would put to rest concerns regarding the adverse effects of the COVID shots, they were mistaken. 21 MPs have written a letter to the Health Secretary, asking for data linking the shots to excess deaths and condemning what they call a “wall of silence” on this issue.

If those data do indeed exist, please share them; if thorough investigations have already ruled out such a link, please share the relevant reports … There is no place here for blind faith … Questions about these trends … have been met with a … wall of silence.

'Let me be unequivocal: COVID vaccines are safe'

On the general question of “safe and effective,” the government, far from being silent, continues to stress, emphatically, that the shots are not dangerous:

It's only when pressed for the proof that the shots are safe that they suddenly clam up, as one MP found during a session of the Health and Social Care Committee of Parliament that was held on March 4, 2024 (see the exchange in the above video from 17:16 onward).

Professor Dame Jenny Harries, Chief Executive of the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), had been called as a witness before the committee and one MP (Chris Green, Conservative) took the opportunity to ask her whether anything had happened since she had been asked by a member of another parliamentary committee to release data related to excess deaths.

The essence of her answer was: No, nothing has changed. We have the data, and we have even released them to the pharmaceutical companies, but the general public may not receive this information, because it is “commercially sensitive.”

MP Chris Green: Last week at the Science and Technology Select Committee, you were asked a question about the data around excess deaths and you were quite cautious about supporting the release of that data but you said you'd look into it. Have you?

Prof. Harries: There were a couple of key points about that. One was about the data that had been shared, and there was a suggestion that UKHSA had shared mortality data sets with pharmaceutical companies ... We don't retain the record-level mortality level data sets that include vaccination dates, doses, and/or comorbidities, with any of the pharmaecutical agencies and that was the main point of the question. We have received a Freedom of Information request on that information and we're trying to understand what we can and we can't release. We have released anonymized aggregate data to manufacturers — this is for their own vaccines, to support their obligation to report to MHRA [the UK's version of VAERS] as part of routine safety surveillance, but these data are commercially sensitive [emphases added].

‘We can’t calculate excess deaths for COVID, because it's a new disease'

Prof. Harries then attempted to cast doubt on the possibility of determining excess mortality, by “explaining” that in order to calculate excess deaths, one has to know how many deaths a disease would normally cause. Since influenza is not a new disease, she said, one can calculate how many excess deaths there were from influenza in a given year whereas the same cannot be done with COVID, as there is no history to refer to:

Prof. Harries: The other thing is, the conversation about excess all-cause mortality which is based on aggregated data … To report an excess you have to have a base line. For flu we know it goes in waves so we have an idea of baseline so we can give assessment, but for COVID, that hasn't established in the same way [emphases added].

Prof. Harries' statement was, however, misleading. The base line that has traditionally been used without any questions raised is the five-year average, which is exactly what the government used when calculating excess deaths from COVID-19 itself, coming up with a staggering figure that caused public alarm (as many believe it was intended to).

'The vaccine isn't just safe—it's beneficial!'

While Prof. Harries remains unwilling to release any evidence to back up her assertions regarding the COVID shots, she claimed that they're not just safe — they actually protect you.

Prof. Harries: Since the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced, my organization, UKHSA has worked with MHRA and other academic groups on vaccine safety. There are very large data sets on things like safety as well. Vaccine mortality has been looked at and vaccines have been shown to have protective effects for all-cause mortality when restricted to non-COVID mortality; that is to say, with people who didn't have COVID, the vaccine did not present any increased risk.

Countries which have had higher vaccine uptake have lower excess all-cause mortality [emphases added].

It's understandable that she didn't attempt to back up her claims, given that the data available tend to contradict her quite substantially (see here, here, here, and here, just by way of introduction).

To summarize the UK government's position:

• There are no excess deaths from the COVID shots. In fact, the shots protect you from other diseases (take our word for it).
• Even if there were excess deaths, we wouldn't tell you about them, because the pharmaceutical companies who made the shots don't want us to.
• More people are dying, but the reasons are influenza, cold weather, COVID itself, and other things such as heart disease and diabetes (which, of course, have nothing to do with the shots).
• Don't worry (about the shots)!