Over the past week there have been a number of posts about data on deaths in England by vaccination status, both for deaths related to Covid and other deaths.
Great analysis. I had a look at the English population yesterday to try and work out what the true unvaccinated percentage is. I too find it astounding that the estimates range so wildly. Between the ONS census data and NIMS data there is a 6.9 million difference! Not knowing this number has a massive impact on many things, not just vaccine efficacy.
It has been one of the more depressing things about this whole fiasco that governments around the western world have been shown up as being pretty useless at even basic things like knowing the number of people living in the country. I wonder whether they have a better idea of the English population in relation to how many taxpayers there are or how many people claim benefits and whether this is just a "don't want to know because it will make the jabs and all the instructions we gave look really bad" scenario. Purely anecdotally, I knew of one person who died "of" covid but she had many serious comorbidities and could have gone at any point. Since the jab craze I know of at least half a dozen young to middle aged men who have generally been found dead in bed with no explanation. Until the roll out I actually only knew one person who actually had covid. Since then all my jabbed acquaintances seem to be continuously infected - 3 or 4 times at least and often actually ill with a cold rather than just tested. Complicated times!
You get 5 points for being useful -- these points aren't redeemable at any bookstores, but can be used to make your day a better one (actual results may vary).
I see this article that I linked to is behind a paywall. Sorry. The main point of the article was that the UK government's unvaccinated population data was inconsistent and, in some cases, completely and obviously wrong by a wide margin.
Finding the true unvaccinated population from that data set is tricky since I think it claims to be a subset and the unvaccinated person years is likely underestimated due to the fact that true population rates are unknown but generally underestimated due to population growth. It's unclear to me what part of the subset is missing ie., areas of higher or lower vaccination status? (Thus it's difficult to use other population estimates as a substitute) I was working on it for a post awhile back and gave up.
I looked over the ONS data and the all cause mortality data was generally bad for the vaccinated with a slight advantage for the triple jabbed (concerning May 2022) over the unvaccinated in mortality. However, it is clear from the data on the double jabbed that this benefit is transitory and eventually will go negative where the risk of death becomes substantially higher as compared to the unvaccinated.
thanks a lot for this. Two things that are useful for those of us who don't want to repeat the work you've done (1) please share some code if you've got it at hand (2) share the link to NIMs data so we're all on the same page. I convinced myself that the ballpark number of 35 Mio is correct btw. However a priori I would've used "31/2" as the "average person year lost". I.e. how many people died in May x Average number of days / 365 lost (i.e. the fraction of days lost in a year x how many people died), and that number would be half what you mention above. However I'm no epidemilogist, just a physicist, so maybe my interpretation contradicts the standard calculations :)
Hi, if you ever get the time would be mind explaining a little deeper into how you achieved your ONS population size figure.
Could this be achieved by adding all the person years of all vax status presented in table 6 of the ONS data linked in your article? But I don’t think that is what you were referring to.
I know you have already replied to a similar question but I still don’t get. Sorry if I’m missing the obvious. If no time don’t worry and thank you for all your articles, they’ve been a joy to follow
The 'total population' of the UK is not an easy number to define, let alone estimate. It comprises:
Known, traditionally registered citizens
'Known' citizens who for some reason are not registered on some or all databases
Valid 'traditional' Tourists
Non-Citizens legally in this country via a number of paths
Non-Citizens illegally in this country via a number of paths
Depending on current politics, any or all of these figures may either be ignored, or greatly exaggerated. I do not find the story of the 'supermarket estimate' based of food provision of as much as 80m 'mouths to feed' a completely impossible one...
I'm still unsure how to calculate the 'any dose' number for each entry in T2. You mention person-years but I assume that this is (age x number of deaths) and age is a broad range, e.g. 18-39
They give data for 'person-years at risk'. As we know the data is by month we know that the person-years will be 1/12th of the actual population at risk. If we want to be a bit more exact, we can use the fact that there are 31 days in May and that it wasn't a leap-year, so the proportion will be 31/365.
Great analysis. I had a look at the English population yesterday to try and work out what the true unvaccinated percentage is. I too find it astounding that the estimates range so wildly. Between the ONS census data and NIMS data there is a 6.9 million difference! Not knowing this number has a massive impact on many things, not just vaccine efficacy.
It has been one of the more depressing things about this whole fiasco that governments around the western world have been shown up as being pretty useless at even basic things like knowing the number of people living in the country. I wonder whether they have a better idea of the English population in relation to how many taxpayers there are or how many people claim benefits and whether this is just a "don't want to know because it will make the jabs and all the instructions we gave look really bad" scenario. Purely anecdotally, I knew of one person who died "of" covid but she had many serious comorbidities and could have gone at any point. Since the jab craze I know of at least half a dozen young to middle aged men who have generally been found dead in bed with no explanation. Until the roll out I actually only knew one person who actually had covid. Since then all my jabbed acquaintances seem to be continuously infected - 3 or 4 times at least and often actually ill with a cold rather than just tested. Complicated times!
i spotted it!
the "un"was dropped in "reports from the ONS of usually high deaths:.
good of you to keep the readers on their toes....
Thanks for that! Corrected now!
You get 5 points for being useful -- these points aren't redeemable at any bookstores, but can be used to make your day a better one (actual results may vary).
😅😅😅
This is a good post on the lack of accuracy as to the size of the unvaccinated population. Nice post as always by the way.
How to Lie with Statistics - What is the real percentage of Unvaccinated individuals in England?
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/how-to-lie-with-statistics-what-is?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
I see this article that I linked to is behind a paywall. Sorry. The main point of the article was that the UK government's unvaccinated population data was inconsistent and, in some cases, completely and obviously wrong by a wide margin.
Finding the true unvaccinated population from that data set is tricky since I think it claims to be a subset and the unvaccinated person years is likely underestimated due to the fact that true population rates are unknown but generally underestimated due to population growth. It's unclear to me what part of the subset is missing ie., areas of higher or lower vaccination status? (Thus it's difficult to use other population estimates as a substitute) I was working on it for a post awhile back and gave up.
I looked over the ONS data and the all cause mortality data was generally bad for the vaccinated with a slight advantage for the triple jabbed (concerning May 2022) over the unvaccinated in mortality. However, it is clear from the data on the double jabbed that this benefit is transitory and eventually will go negative where the risk of death becomes substantially higher as compared to the unvaccinated.
thanks a lot for this. Two things that are useful for those of us who don't want to repeat the work you've done (1) please share some code if you've got it at hand (2) share the link to NIMs data so we're all on the same page. I convinced myself that the ballpark number of 35 Mio is correct btw. However a priori I would've used "31/2" as the "average person year lost". I.e. how many people died in May x Average number of days / 365 lost (i.e. the fraction of days lost in a year x how many people died), and that number would be half what you mention above. However I'm no epidemilogist, just a physicist, so maybe my interpretation contradicts the standard calculations :)
Never say "just a physicist"! I have more faith in your grasp of real science than any of these medico-malarkians.
Hi, if you ever get the time would be mind explaining a little deeper into how you achieved your ONS population size figure.
Could this be achieved by adding all the person years of all vax status presented in table 6 of the ONS data linked in your article? But I don’t think that is what you were referring to.
I know you have already replied to a similar question but I still don’t get. Sorry if I’m missing the obvious. If no time don’t worry and thank you for all your articles, they’ve been a joy to follow
Best wishes paddy
The 'total population' of the UK is not an easy number to define, let alone estimate. It comprises:
Known, traditionally registered citizens
'Known' citizens who for some reason are not registered on some or all databases
Valid 'traditional' Tourists
Non-Citizens legally in this country via a number of paths
Non-Citizens illegally in this country via a number of paths
Depending on current politics, any or all of these figures may either be ignored, or greatly exaggerated. I do not find the story of the 'supermarket estimate' based of food provision of as much as 80m 'mouths to feed' a completely impossible one...
Many thanks for your article, very informative
I've charted the ONS Table 2 data, which can be viewed at
http://rpubs.com/DavidHawkins/937821
I'm still unsure how to calculate the 'any dose' number for each entry in T2. You mention person-years but I assume that this is (age x number of deaths) and age is a broad range, e.g. 18-39
All and any advice welcome
Take a look at gov covid dashboard
45million equals 93% of population
This must under estimate uk population by 20 million
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
This is the England population. Still an underestimate, but not by that much.
How do you calculate the popolation from the person-years value? I’m studying these issues for my high school class.
Sorry to delay in getting back to you.
They give data for 'person-years at risk'. As we know the data is by month we know that the person-years will be 1/12th of the actual population at risk. If we want to be a bit more exact, we can use the fact that there are 31 days in May and that it wasn't a leap-year, so the proportion will be 31/365.
This assumes that the deaths all occur on the 31st day of May. This produces an underestimate of incidence.