(The Daily Sceptic) – There were 1,540 more deaths than usual in England and Wales registered in the week ending June 24, the most recent week for which data are available, according to the latest update from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), released on Tuesday.
This is 16.6 percent above the five-year average. Of these deaths, 285 were registered ‘with COVID’ and 166 as due to COVID as underlying cause, leaving 1,374 from a different underlying cause.
This brings to 7,840 the total number of non-COVID excess deaths (above the five-year average) since April 29, the start of the recent spike. Of these, a large proportion are occurring in the home, leading to calls for an urgent investigation into why thousands more people are dying than would be expected, despite COVID death numbers staying low.
It is doubly concerning as following the 138,000 excess deaths since March 2020, a reduced number of deaths would now be expected due to the mortality displacement of people dying earlier than they ordinarily would.
As I noted last week, the current spike in non-COVID deaths has broadly coincided with the spring rollout of boosters to over-75s, which began on March 21. This pattern is depicted in the following two charts.
The first shows cumulative non-COVID excess deaths by date of registration since week ending March 25 (the dip in the week ending June 3 is due to the bank holiday weekend). The rise in doses and deaths around the same time is obvious.
The second chart shows weekly (not cumulative) non-COVID excess deaths by date of occurrence (I have split the first week’s vaccine doses between the first two weeks as there was no report in the first week).
A correlation of sorts is evident between vaccine doses and non-COVID death occurrences. However, it can also be seen that non-COVID mortality was rising since at least the start of February, though with a marked acceleration around the time of the booster rollout. It is also clear that non-COVID deaths do not fall off as the rollout winds up, which might have been expected if the vaccines are the primary driver.
The sharp rise in deaths by occurrence in the week ending June 17 is particularly noticeable.
The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response.
But it's not too late to do something about it.
SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.
The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level.
194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.
This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations.
SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.
Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."
Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.
The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO.
Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.
These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed.
SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty
The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read.
"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive.
"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.
SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.
These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights.
We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.
Sign the petition - speak up now!
For More Information:
Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews
Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews
**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**
Breaking it down by age, around 75 percent of the non-COVID excess deaths registered since the week ending April 29 have been in the over-75s, meaning around 25 percent of the excess deaths are in the under-75s, despite that age group not participating in the spring booster campaign. In the most recent week (ending June 24) the proportion of deaths in the over-75s dropped sharply to 64 percent, compared to 72 percent the previous week. This suggests the latest spike since mid-June is being driven to a large extent by the under-75s.
This gives a somewhat mixed picture of how the current wave of non-COVID deaths may relate to the spring booster campaign. This does not mean vaccinations should be dismissed as among the causes, however.
A recent article by Michael Simmons appeared in the Spectator asking what is behind the surge in deaths at home. He briefly considers the possibility that the vaccines may be involved, only to dismiss it:
“Might the rise in at-home deaths be linked to the COVID vaccines? A paper by BMJ Editor Peter Doshi is doing the rounds saying that in trials the jab’s side effects hospitalised more than the virus. But the data wasn’t actually that clear cut. Sir David Speigelhalter, a statistician from Cambridge, points out that the study ‘only considers COVID hospitalisation during the trials themselves, which covered only around two months at a time of low COVID. The true benefit of vaccines extends far beyond this period, so the harm/benefit comparison used in this study seems entirely inappropriate.’ He doesn’t think the Doshi paper will pass peer review.
But why then is all this happening?”
This is clearly far too quick to dismiss the role of the vaccines. Even granting Spiegelhalter’s point, it only means the risk/benefit ratio may change over a longer study period. It doesn’t affect the absolute number of serious adverse events that occurred with the vaccines within the study period.
Dr. Doshi and colleagues found that the vaccines were associated with excess non-COVID serious adverse events of around one per 800 people vaccinated (12.5 per 10,000 or 0.125 percent). Since 47.5 million people in England and Wales have been vaccinated with at least one dose, on these figures we should expect around 60,000 serious adverse reactions (at a minimum – the trial participants were younger than the general population).
This estimate of adverse events from the trial data is broadly in line with the real-world findings of an Israeli Government survey, which found 0.3 percent of vaccinated people reported being hospitalized as a result of their COVID vaccination, as well as a U.S. Government survey, which found 0.9 percent of vaccinated people reported seeking medical care as a result of their vaccination, and a German study, which found 0.8 percent of vaccinated people reported struggling with serious side-effects.
With up to 1 percent of the vaccinated needing medical care, it is thus not inconceivable that as many as 0.1 percent may suffer something very serious or fatal, perhaps higher in an older population. Taking 0.1 percent of the 4 million spring booster doses gives a figure of 4,000, a similar ballpark to the non-COVID excess deaths during the period.
Whatever the respective role of vaccines, COVID, and lack of access to healthcare, this is clearly something which needs looking into properly.
Reprinted with permission from The Daily Sceptic.