Media and government moved the "vaccine efficacy" goalposts several months ago. The EUAs were based on case reduction, but when they could no longer hide that vaxxed people were getting and transmitting COVID, they said that the shots were never designed to stop infection - only to reduce severity of symptoms. But, reduction in symptom severity and protection against death should be noticeable for these miracle products, right? The math here is simple: all things being equal, since COVID was supposedly such a dangerous disease that significantly increased all cause mortality, then we would expect to see those with the vax have lower all cause mortality rates. And since these products are so effective, the impacts would be clear as day.
ONS (the UK's official Office of National Statistics) released their age-stratified all cause mortality dataset.
What does the data say? The opposite.
The graph below shows age-stratified vaccine efficacy vs all cause mortality using vaccinated percentage of all cause mortality vs. percent of vaccinated over time. And keep in mind, this is using ONS' population estimates, which are likely outdated and make the vax cohort look better; UK originally used NIMS population estimates, which painted an even grimmer picture for vax efficacy.
You might be asking yourself why all the numbers are negative. That's likely because adverse effects resulting in heart attacks, strokes, clots, etc. increasing non-COVID deaths. What good does COVID symptom reduction do when the shot causes a heart attack?
Do any of you recall the CDC or FDA publishing all cause mortality numbers? Why didn't they?
If the COVID shots ever provided protection, and if COVID was as deadly as marketed, then you would expect to see that "vaccinated" cohorts would have a lower share of all cause mortality. That... is not the case. Can someone point me to the vax efficacy in any of these graphs?
