Britain’s life of excess

From time to time it’s important to draw attention to the kind of stats I was reviewing regularly during COVID. That’s because, with the “emergency” ostensibly over, the studied blindness towards the damaging effects of the COVID response by all our “institutions” becomes more of a running sore. But like a real running sore, or an ongoing war of attrition, it becomes a lot easier for those institutions to bury the bad news as non-news.

So here is an article reviewing, once again, the unexplained excess deaths in England and Wales over the last year. The problem itself is easily demonstrated in one single graphic from official ONS data:

I regularly reviewed this dataset during COVID – it’s the basic tool for assessing deaths above the average, and so is the usual way to plot things like winter flu epidemics. And of course deaths during the COVID roll-out. Interpreting it is easy – all deaths above the black line are abnormal, being higher than the five-year average for the time of year. But as the chart mentions, since that five year average currently includes the peaks during COVID, the picture is skewed: the couple of periods over the last year when deaths seemed below or close to the average are mere artifacts. In fact those periods are still in excess of normal mortality.

The total of those excess deaths is 56,000 in last year England and Wales, and as far as I can see this figure has not been adjusted upwards for the effect of the previous COVID peaks on the averages. According to the official figures, which for a variety of reasons grossly overestimated the number of deaths from SARS-CoV-2 itself, 2022-23 deaths fall somewhere between the number of COVID deaths in 2020 (which was higher) and 2021 (which was lower).

So it’s as great a medical disaster as the “pandemic” ever was, except that it is ongoing, unexplained – and worst of all, unaddressed. Andrew Bridgen called for a debate on the matter in Parliament at the end of March, and has subsequently been expelled from the Conservative Party. The estimable Dr John Campbell had his interview with Bridgen taken down from YouTube, and was banned for a week for putting it up.

Just to put this in perspective, people argue over whether the “meatgrinder” war in Ukraine has killed 100,000 Ukrainian troops, or less, or more. Comparisons are made to the First World War carnage. But it has to be of note that Britain has concurrently lost over half that number in peacetime. But it isn’t noted – you won’t find it on the BBC news or the Guardian.

Now, inasmuch as excess deaths have been acknowledged officially at all, they have been blamed on the damage inflicted on the NHS during COVID, and the consequent neglect of individual cancers, diabetes and so on that are now coming home to roost. And we are all aware that questions have been raised by crudely silenced people about the role of vaccine side effects in the slaughter. It remains one of life’s great mysteries why questioning possible downsides of Big Pharma’s rushed roll-out of experimental drugs should be regarded as heresy akin to blasphemy by the educated classes (whilst actual blasphemy is OK).

But here I don’t want to argue any particular causation apart from the obvious one that, since COVID itself is no longer a significant player in this unprecedented across-the-year excess death phenomenon, the only plausible explanation is that it is something to do with our response to COVID. No other explanation is possible apart from black magic. The figures prove that the response is still causing at least as high a death rate as the virus ever did. Evidence from around the world strongly indicates that we are unlikely to have increased the COVID death rate by as much even if we had done nothing at all (if indeed epidemiological considerations based on centuries of experience didn’t show the same). We have killed, and continue to kill, more people by our COVID policies than the measures have saved, if indeed they save anyone.

This ongoing health crisis is not hidden behind obscure statistics – it emerges from the most fundamental tool used by both the ONS and by EuroMOMO in Europe as a whole. The fact that it is being actively suppressed by the whole apparatus of government, press and the professions is all the evidence one needs to say that whatever our elites are working for, it is not the people.

I’m happy to hear evidence to the contrary.

Avatar photo

About Jon Garvey

Training in medicine (which was my career), social psychology and theology. Interests in most things, but especially the science-faith interface. The rest of my time, though, is spent writing, playing and recording music.
This entry was posted in Medicine, Politics and sociology, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Britain’s life of excess

  1. Peter Hickman says:

    It seems to me that the disruption of routine NHS work during the pandemic, leading to a decline in cancer referrals and the compromising of diabetic care, is insufficient to explain anything but a small proportion of excess deaths, not least because there were significant numbers of excess deaths ‘not involving Covid-19’ very early on, too soon for cancer and diabetes deaths to have spiked.

    According to the ONS, in response to an FOI request dated 30/7/2021, in 2019 there were 147,419 deaths due to malignant neoplasms in English and Welsh residents, and in 2020 there were 147,407. I’m not a statistician, but I’m fairly certain that this does not represent an increase. Perhaps 2021-23 will be different.

    The silence from those who should be investigating excess deaths is deafening.

    • Avatar photo Jon Garvey says:

      Peter, I agree that blaming NHS failures for most of it probably overestimates the value of our profession! The claims that lack of BP monitoring led to non-treatment of people who consequently died of stroke is as far-fetched as the missed cancer one… though I’ll not be surprised to find five-year survivals down and therefore an increased rate of cancer deaths over the next few years.

  2. Robert Byers says:

    In a free nation and people there must not be punishment of speech. Its illegal on the important matters in civilation especially English one.
    I here too accusations there is greater death ratye from the vaccinations. I don’t know and doubt it.
    the death rate might be greater from the weakness that happened to the old who recovered from covids. The pop is aginf always and so always the rate is. Immigration of old people from thord world countries is a facto in Britain and might be a factor.
    So maybe studies on age and odentity might help.
    I never got any vacs and did get covid but mildly. Someone i know, who gave it to me, got it bad and is has lingered in aftereffects.
    However full discussion is our right whether high or low.
    it reveals the establishment leads in contriling thought and speech. the public is not innocent either and must be taught to obey the freedoms of thought and speech.

    • Avatar photo Jon Garvey says:


      An epidemic primarily affecting the elderly should have “cleared the dead wood,” so that fewer elderly would die than usual in the aftermath. In fact, it is younger people who are the main cause of the excess deaths, and that is unusual and warrants proper investigation – as well as open discussion, of course.

      On free speech, we hear that in Ireland they are passing a law making it illegal to have “hate speech” in one’s possession. That makes it dangerous for someone to have, for example, a copy of Mein Kampf in order to know how to combat Nazi ideas, or even to possess those many works of English literature that are being branded as “problematic” by the woke. It can’t be long before someone decides that possessing a Bible is promoting genocide, discrimination or whatever corrupt minds choose to see in it.

      • shopwindows says:

        The fact a substantive response to the excess deaths occurring globally in the healthier and younger demographics/deciles in the wake of heavily injecting their people (multi variant confidence interval analyses) is not forthcoming from, in fact wilfully resisted by those who made the “life saving” policy decisions might lead a cynic to consider possible reasons beyond even reluctance to issue mea culpas.

        It is even more significant to those conspiracy theorists suspecting Malthusianism, a new approach to Marxism/feudalism, could have been discussed in lofty places that the birth rate is impacted and compliance with state edict high. Because democide of plebeians is most innocently and effectively achieved through depressing reproduction rates and their obeisance through sophisticated public service messaging.

        Apparently the Georgia Guidestones were removed very soon after them strangely being blown up in that strange period punctuated by the appearance of lookalike installations randomly.

        Yes the dry tinder clear out might reasonably have lead to a lower percentage death toll subsequently but no, it hasn’t. And the Pfizer 75 year data dump indicates such a wide range of statistically significant immediate effects (never mind medium to long term) it clearly becomes difficult to separate collateral undiagnosed lock down cancer deaths from v induced other than by variant, detection turbo stage and fancy statistical interpolation.

        Adjacency, time lag, many factors will operate to muddy, effectively normalise less healthy people’s medical markers. Yes the life, medical and pension insurance industry will adjust its risk premium weightings but even that will become normalised. And many will breathe a sigh of relief that unfunded pension liabilities will recede.

        Jon Galt had a way to respond which might indicate include some pointers.

      • Robert Byers says:

        To understand the death excess claims they simply can do a simple math. If the facts are open it should be obvious. The elderly might not be killed off right away but weakened greatly. in stas there are many cause and effects. If its young people then the stats should show something that matters.
        Ireland gets everything wrong always. Free speech is our right and nobody, by law or any means, can take it from us. there is no such thing in human nature as hate speech as any speech at any moment cab n be hateful. anyways hate is a right of mankind ynless acted upon. They can not legislate aghainst bhate or for live. its just words to bring censorship and rejection of our feedoms which they are afraid to clearly say.
        In short we must demand our rightys obeyed, no control on thought or speech except from precedent not clearly rejected.
        Hate is not to be illegal and they are not the judge of what is hate and indeed they would say the bible is hatred.
        We must out flank them. We must demand hate in humans is not open to other humans to control and punish except in a action made. Hat is our right and we can hate evil people unless god says otherwise.
        where in civilization did anyone ban hatred in word or print?
        We have this flankinf movemenyt and the frontal; assault of our settled freedoms.
        Remember this comes from those who say we must not censor porn or we are evil freedon of speech abusers.
        We can fix everything. Stop censorship and start it but in historic precedents.
        Your a doc but thats law.

  3. Avatar photo Jon Garvey says:

    It occurred to me yesterday that if the powers that be can suppress the excess death story for long enough, it will go away for the same reason that there were apparent below-average deaths on occasions in the last year: the five year average will simply catch up, and a higher death rate will become the normal.

    Even now it’s astonishing how what was close to unknown three years ago – sudden deaths of healthy thirty year olds, for example – have simply become routine news items. “What a tragedy that musician/athlete/actor died so young. But stuff happens.”

  4. shopwindows says:

    I can see the argument that the Bibles are hate speech in that the society being “progress ively” introduced, does not have Ten Commandments remotely recognisably but perhaps two. To tug forelocks, to obey todays state edict.

Leave a Reply