Four researchers have written to the UK Office of National Statistics (“ONS”) pointing out that ONS’s data on vaccine mortality is not fit for purpose:
“All of the anomalies in the dataset introduce bias in favour of analyses supporting vaccine ‘safety and efficacy’. The fact that these data are being used as continued justification for the efficacy and safety of the covid vaccines is therefore now a matter of national concern and scandal,” they wrote.
The four researchers are Professor Norman Fenton and Professor Martin Neil from Queen Mary University, London, Dr. Clare Craig, an independent researcher, and Scott McLachlan of Kings College, London.
The researchers’ letter is a result of a report they published on 8 November 2022 which detailed the anomalies in ONS data. The report concluded:
The ONS vaccine mortality surveillance reports for England have numerous anomalies which bias its results strongly toward underestimating mortality rates for the vaccinated and overestimating mortality rates for the unvaccinated.
Overall, the ONS dataset is so compromised with inaccuracies, anomalies, and biases that it cannot be used to reliably determine vaccine efficacy and safety.
What the ONS Mortality Covid-19 Surveillance Data can tell us about Vaccine Safety and Efficacy, Fenton N et al, 8 November 2022
Subsequently, the four researchers have written to the ONS calling for the public withdrawal of the ONS ‘Deaths by vaccination status, England’ dataset and the retraction of any claims made by others that are based on it.
Republished from Norman Fenton
Following on from our latest report highlighting multiple anomalies in the most recent ONS covid vaccine mortality surveillance report we have written the following self-explanatory letter to the Statistics Regulator (firstname.lastname@example.org):
Since the ONS began producing its covid vaccine mortality surveillance reports in 2021, we have been highlighting various anomalies in their datasets. This includes strong evidence that many of those dying shortly after vaccination were being misclassified as unvaccinated (https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12472.42248) and systematic undercounting of deaths occurring within first two weeks of vaccination (http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12472.42248).
We are especially concerned about the latest ONS dataset (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland) and have produced a detailed analysis which highlights the multiple glaring anomalies in it.
We show that, in addition to further definitive evidence of the misclassification and missing deaths, there is: a) gross underestimation of the population proportion unvaccinated, and b) mortality rates that are both nonsensical in various categories and completely incompatible with historical rates.
We believe that there are multiple violations of your code of practice (https://code.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Code-of-Practice-for-Statistics-REVISED.pdf). In particular, the dataset breaches the Quality and Value criteria numbered: Q 1.1, Q1.4 – 1.7, Q 2.4, Q 2.5, Q 3.2 – 3.5, V 1.1, V 3.2 – 3.3.
All of the anomalies in the dataset introduce bias in favour of analyses supporting vaccine ‘safety and efficacy’. The fact that these data are being used as continued justification for the efficacy and safety of the covid vaccines is therefore now a matter of national concern and scandal. We believe that an investigation into how and why the ONS dataset is so flawed and corrupted is required. In the meantime, we call for:
1. the public withdrawal of the ONS dataset and
2. the retraction of any claims made by others that are based upon it.
Norman Fenton, Martin Neil, Clare Craig and Scott McLachlan