An article in the Lancet claims that 20 million lives were saved with the use of COVID ‘vaccines’. Where is the evidence for this? How sound is it? Where is the risk benefit analysis? How many lives saved compared to how many excess deaths caused or at least strongly associated with the COVID injections worldwide?
Here is the article:
23 June, 2022 – Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study
Findings: Based on official reported COVID-19 deaths, we estimated that vaccinations prevented 14·4 million (95% credible interval [Crl] 13·7-15·9) deaths from COVID-19 in 185 countries and territories between Dec 8, 2020, and Dec 8, 2021. This estimate rose to 19·8 million (95% Crl 19·1-20·4) deaths from COVID-19 averted when we used excess deaths as an estimate of the true extent of the pandemic, representing a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19·8 million of 31·4 million) during the first year of COVID-19 vaccination.
24 June, 2022 – COVID vaccines saved 20M lives in 1st year, scientists say,
According to a study published Thursday. June 23, 2022 in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases, nearly 20 million lives were saved by COVID-19 vaccines during their first year, but even more deaths could have been prevented if global targets had been reached. (Pfizer via AP)
A bright red flag is here:
“This work was supported by a Schmidt Science Fellowship in partnership with the Rhodes Trust (OJW), Centre funding from the UK Medical Research Council (all authors), grant funding from WHO (OJW, ABH, PW, and ACG), Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (JT and ACG), support from the Imperial College Research Fellowship (PW and ABH), and support from the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Modelling Methodology and Community Jameel (all authors). We thank Sondre Ulvund Solstad from The Economist for developing excess mortality statistics and their help in interpreting these estimates.”
There are clear conflicts of interest in the funding from bodies directly invested in the vaccine industry such as Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI.
Imperial College London are the original modellers that grossly over-estimated the expected GOVID deaths leading to policies and practices based on unrealistic fear. They predicted over half a million deaths in the UK and over 2 million deaths in the US. They had a vested interest in balancing the books with a model that produced an outcome with strikingly similar number of ‘lives saved’.
WHO (World Health Organisation) are funded heavily by the Gates Foundation. They are at present lobbying to have global oversight over all future pandemics. Changes to the IHR (International Health Regulations, if successful will give them unprecedented powers including mandating vaccination in all member countries.
24 June, 2022 – Did Covid Vaccines Save Tens of Millions of Lives?
A recent preprint, with the now questionable Medical Journal Lancet, makes the claim that the Covid vaccine introduction in December 2020 actually prevented tens of millions of deaths worldwide.
This paper was submitted by the research group headed by Azra Ghani from the Imperial College of London. Dr. Ghani acts as a consultant for HSBC, GlaxoSmithKline, and the WHO and as with her other Imperial College colleagues, has been pro-lockdown/pro-panic, and pro-vaccine for more than two years.
20 August, 2022 – 20 million saved or 20 million killed
A single logical fallacy destroys the claims in the piece published on the Lancet. Brownstone (Roger Koops) describes it like this:
“C. Population Susceptibility
The above piece completely ignores the huge gradient in mortality susceptibility in the population. Younger people have had very low infection mortality throughout the past two years. The mathematical models assume the same level of mortality susceptibility across all populations. This assumption we know to be a fallacy and completely negates any of their “models.”
“The mathematical models that have been presented from Imperial College have always been wildly WRONG.”
In other words, the Lancet piece assumes that the young have the same remaining life as the elderly. Ludicrous.
analysis-of-covid19-vaccination-effectiveness 
10 August, 2023 – MORE HARM THAN GOOD Clear evidence for all to see
In defence of the unprecedented numbers of reported deaths and serious adverse effects following the Covid injections, the pro-vax “health experts” always retreat to the mythical “20 million lives saved” claim without providing any evidence.
CLICK HERE to view a paper by Makeover, T. et al entitled “Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness” which was published in May 2023. I quote from this paper:
“By comparing graphs of the intensity of vaccination and the rate of mortality, we see periods of intense vaccination are followed by periods of higher excess mortality. Basic statistical data confirm that COVID-19 vaccines increased the mortality rate” and “it has confirmed that the vaccinated part of the global population has an increased mortality rate of about 14.5% with respect to the non-vaccinated population cohort”.
and here are the numbers from the paper:
Infection fatality ratio (IFR):
The proportion of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 who die from COVID-19.
20 million lives saved? Here are quite recent pre-vaccination IFR data on Covid-19 in the young and working-age population:
“The median [pre-vaccination] IFR was 0.0003% at 0–19 years, 0.002% at 20–29 years, 0.011% at 30–39 years, 0.035% at 40–49 years, 0.123% at 50–59 years, and 0.506% at 60–69 years.”
“At a global level, pre-vaccination IFR may have been as low as 0.03% and 0.07% for 0–59 and 0–69 year old people, respectively.”
‘Age-stratified infection fatality rate of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population’
Professor John Ioannidis (Stanford University) et al.
1 January 2023
Apr 19·edited May 2Pinned
Your responses are incredible. They are literally coming faster than I can read them. I cannot read as fast as the rate at which they are arriving. I am overwhelmed. I will read all your replies over the next few weeks.
Sorry if you mentioned something important or missed some replies. I will try very hard to get to them. I always try to read all reply traffic for new articles.
I am also struck by how intelligent and well written the responses are.
I only read maybe 25% of comments so far, but I am struck by
– how different is everyone’s thinking
– how substantial — loaded with original thought — the comments are
– How well spoken are most of the authors, instead of “yeah I beleeeeve science” they gave long, open ended, and well articulated accounts
Keep them coming please
168ReplyCollapse
Writes Steve Kirsch’s newsletterApr 18Liked by Igor Chudov
Brilliant article. This is why Twitter had to ban me (twice). I actually got sucked into the narrative, but when my friends got injured, the math didn’t make any sense since those injuries would have been statistically unlikely. So my friends’ injuries was what got me to realize that “hey, this story they told us was a lie.”
854ReplyCollapse