Published On: Tue, Feb 2nd, 2021

No UK Government vaccine triumph suggests no culling of the over-80s, actually

The reader may have come across an alternative media talking point that over 80s are being decimated by “Covid-19 vaccinations” (in quotation marks, because nothing about the term is literal). As it happens, in correspondence with a reader just the other day, the author was discussing the topic of public relations operations (and when they are actually based in Royal Navy towns, and fronted and run by ex-Royal Navy of 21 years, one has to wonder at the discernment of the alternative media audience) to create an impression of a successful deployment of a vaccine programme (with the added bonus of giving grist to the mill of mainstream accusations of alternative media crackpottery).

Firstly, this is crucial: in England, at the 24th January, 3,530,752 under-80s had had a first dose of the vaccine, while 2,261,407 over-80s had had one†. There were about 440,000 second doses across both categories, but this is something for later. At the 1st February, there had been 8,543,262 total doses, both first and second – this data set, however, doesn’t stipulate whether doses were administered to under or over 80 year olds. The point is, there’s a good chance that the conduct of the programme will have continued as established, with a good majority of vaccinations having been given to people under the age of 80.

UK Government, of course, wants belief from the population in any sleight of hand that it performs, and so on 2nd February, one of the chief culprits in the “Covid-19” fraud, and also so-called Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Matt Hancock, announced  that 90% of “over-80s” had received a jab, and while this definite message from UK Government is that there has been at least one vaccination for everyone in a priority age group (forgetting that at the beginning of this farce in 2020, it said people of all ages were equally vulnerable), things are still more complex than that. An ITV story, using ONS figures as at the 17th January, reported that even midway through January, vaccinations were being given to a broader range of people:

Over-80s, care home residents, NHS and social care staff and now everyone over the age of 70 and those that are extremely clinically vulnerable are entitled to the coronavirus vaccine.

Hancock claimed that half of “over-70s” had had a vaccine, but the data that the author has looked at and used, from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS), stopped  giving  specific numbers for each below-80 age category half way through January. As it happened, an early data sheet showed that vaccine shots had been evenly distributed across intervals from 0-49 to 75-79.

Without the raw data, of course, there’s no need to trust UK Government pronouncements, either made directly, or through corporate-media mouthpieces. Armed with the data, on the other hand, we can see that the extent of the success of the vaccine programme (as UK Government would defined it) has already been a matter of public relations assertion rather than reality. For instance, take the story in the Daily Mail, ran on the 13th January, claiming that in some places in the country, because all people of 80 years of age and over had had a vaccination, GP practices were looking to vaccinate the next target group, people in their 70s. However, the same ITV story introduced above showed that there was nowhere in England where all those in their 80s had received the first jab. Progress across the country differed dramatically from Suffolk and North East Essex, where 36% of people in their 80s had had a vaccine, to Gloucestershire, where 85% of them had.

Incidentally, the underlying necessity for the Daily Mail story was clearly to blame delays to the vaccination programme on a supposed lack of vaccine stock. The real reason is to draw out the economic blockade for a longer time –  but more treatment of what is a very significant deduction is for later in this piece. The point here is that the vaccination programme in its initial manifestation is not so simple a thing that it can be blamed so surely for the deaths of 80 year olds.

Furthermore, it’s more important to look beyond what we’re supposed to think is a spike demonstrating a particular cause of death, and observe the slow rise in the mortality numbers since September, because UK Government wants to create an illusion of a second wave as predicted (as being much bigger than it is – see here) in the initial Imperial College modelling. In the FBEL article, Latest ICNARC Graphs: Amongst General Reattribution Of Other Illness To Covid-19, Pneumonia From Flu Is A Thing Of The Past, we can see that this could be done by the reattribution of other illness to “Covid-19”. It’s more likely the case that the current phenomenon of more death than usual has been manifested, as it was earlier in 2020, by withholding of NHS death pathway management, compounded by seasonal illness, and blamed upon “Covid-19”. Moreover, ICNARC, which showed the April peak to come in March through its ICU data (see here), suggests that it will be shown that the high death numbers will  have reached a peak at the beginning of January. This does not support the hypothesis of the vaccine causing death.

Below is a graph made by the author from the data that can be found on the website of the ONS (link).

It shows deaths for over 75s in 2019, with the first weeks of 2020 (red), and then in 2020, with the first weeks of 2021 (blue). The legend for the horizontal axis might appear a bit haphazardly spaced, but the month names had to be placed where they corresponded for both years. That the data being used is for over-75s is a dependency on the categories used by the ONS.

While we can see that, yes, there is more death at this time in people approaching and above the age of 80, there is more correlation with what would usually happen in any year (with 2019 as the example) than there was in the spring of 2020. This is more likely to be evidence for a manipulation more subtle even than the one performed in 2020, than it is for a vaccine massacre.

But when UK Government can so easily shrug off straw man accusations made by its own “Information Activity and Outreach” operations – ably aided by Piers Corbyn getting himself arrested in a very timely manner for distributing leaflets “comparing Britain’s vaccination programme to Auschwitz”, for instance –  it can and will use any device to create the perception it needs the public to have. The truth is, UK Government’s vaccination programme is actually in a deal of trouble, given that hundreds of thousands of people are not receiving the second dose that is required at 21 days after the first.

The following table gives an adequately succinct instruction into the deficit that got larger as the programme developed over January. The data is for England, extracted from spreadsheets produced by the NHS, sourced by National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) (see the footnote).

As the cumulative total stands, as of 31st January, in England, 8,082,355 people across all the age groups had a first dose, while 460,907 people had had a second dose – which means that about 20,000 must have been vaccinated in a big push over the weekend of  the 30th and the 31st, when 900,000 were administered across the whole country (the UK), according to reports.

Period 1st jab administered 79 and under receiving vaccine 1 80 and over receiving vaccine 1 Target period for 2nd jab (after 3 week interval) 79 and under receiving vaccine 2 80 and over receiving vaccine 2
8th – 27th December


261,561 524,439 29th December – 17th January 104,076 319,522
28th December – 3rd January 176,514 130,371 18th – 24th January 7,366 9,461
4th – 7th January 253,663 140,009 25th – 28th January 5947 (no separate report for each age grouping)


It doesn’t take a great intellect to see that in fact the UK Government’s vaccine programme is actually a shambles.

And there are two levels of why this is a problem. Firstly, what UK Government is doing is stretching credibility by trying to make the vaccination programme last as long as possible, to the detriment of the plausibility of the story that the vaccines are a necessity. We must deduce that UK Government needs more time to make fully manifest any outcome it was expecting from the economic blockade that it implemented using Covid-19 as a pretext. (Naturally, in this context, controlled media would be tasked, instead, to talk about lots of deaths caused by a bulldozing vaccination exercise).

It’s not just about the risk of people waking up to the fakery of UK Government, either. The UK Government must look authoritative, so that the true believers of the coronahoax will take everything prescribed to them – this is especially important when it involves siphoning off every penny possible from tax revenue into the pockets of the big-pharmaceutical sector of the corporate-government complex.

The back story can be introduced, if the reader doesn’t already know about it, quite efficiently by quoting from a Guardian piece from January (12th):

Late last month the joint committee on vaccinations and immunisation (JCVI) decided to stretch the timeline for the second dose of both the Pfizer vaccine and the rival Oxford/AstraZeneca jab to up 84 days or 12 weeks.

While there is some evidence from clinical trials of the Oxford vaccine that a late second dose, of up to 12 weeks, does not interfere with efficacy, Pfizer released a statement saying there was no evidence from its trials to support a delay beyond 21 days.”

The article the extract is taken from is one that reports how it was the intention of Joan Bakewell, Labour peer and long-time BBC operative, to sue Hancock because

The government’s instruction to delay the provision of the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine is potentially unlawful and unsafe and would therefore impede rather than advance the pandemic response.

Here, you see reader, is an example of the danger posed from within the belief system.

While Pfizer, backed by the World Health Organisation (WHO), which objects on the basis that it “deliberated and came out with the following recommendation: two doses of this [Pfizer] vaccine within 21-28 days”, have openly remonstrated that it only knows about its vaccine’s full efficacy “when the two doses were given up to 21 days apart”, the AstraZeneca product’s continued effectiveness beyond the 3 week period is a matter of blind and even perhaps fantastically unrealistic faith:

Prof Anthony Harnden, of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI)… said of the Oxford vaccine that “it may be that the longer you leave the second dose, the better protection you have”.

This following is from the same article:

Hancock reiterated that there was “a high degree of confidence” that delaying the second dose would save more lives. “In a situation where there is a limited supply … you want to get as many people to have as much protection as possible as quickly as possible.”

Now, it did happen to be the case that in a moment of bungling in the AstraZeneca testing, it was found that one and a half shots had a higher percentage of efficacy than a full two doses (see here), so perhaps this is what makes the professor and the minister say that a second dose kicked down the road for some indefinite period is a better outcome. It’s hardly remotely scientific, however – and this is the fundamental point.

The really important part from the same source whence the two extracts above come is this, because it actually makes a direct link between vaccine administration, its efficiency, or not, and the reason for it:

A representative of the UK’s vaccine advisory committee has defended its decision to delay giving people a second dose, saying it will “save many lives”, as the health secretary, Matt Hancock, warned lifting restrictions was “a long, long way off”.

It’s not that UK Government doesn’t know what it’s doing that is the reason for why the greatest vaccine programme in British history appears to have been planned by some village idiot bumpkin and the turnip-head of a scarecrow, his best drinking pal. It’s because the vaccine doesn’t matter. The Covid-19 vaccines don’t do anything, as discussed in the FBEL articles, UK Government’s pointless Covid-19 vaccine; the ultimate in vaccination for the sake of being vaccinated (link), and The Pfizer vaccine’s meaningless 90% effectiveness, and the circus surrounding it (link). They are a device, like the new recommendations from WHO for a lower cycle count threshold for PCR tests (“which will cause up to 90% less positive COVID-19 tests” – source), to give a government the apparent ability to end a supposed health crisis. No wonder we are already hearing about “Covid-19 “ being a seasonal illness – which would mean UK Government could have a crisis next winter, and the associated economic warfare, if it can’t quite meet its objectives at this time – which is how we should explain the stringing out of the vaccine distribution.

The crucial thing is, of course, and the bad news for UK Government is that, as the pantomime of purely invented pandemic gets sillier (as pneumonia from flu suddenly disappears forever, for instance),  the resistance is just going to get stiffer – and this is not merely to talk about the problem of people who would have longer to live with any vaccine damage refusing an injection that doesn’t do anything particularly for them.

Which brings us to this: at this time, your controlled alternative media will undoubtedly be preaching doom and teaching helplessness about more lockdown, and will be pointing to your suicidal high street as evidence, but, again, things in reality are very different. Look at the roads. The main one near the author’s location was busy into the early hours last night – the first time for approaching a year. Today amongst the traffic, which has returned to normal so that there are queues, there are big vehicles, including trailers moving cars. This isn’t March and April 2020.


† The data used in this evidence is to be found here: Statistics » COVID-19 Vaccinations ( – link. [Update, 23.05, 04/02/21; with regards this data, a commenter makes a good point (as well as reminding that the vaccine – to use the common parlance – products are still in a stage of their trialling lifetime); who can believe any figures presented by the regime? It’s true we shouldn’t have any trust, but at the same time we can only work with what is presented to us. So, when this presentation, when it is supposed to support perception management, can be used instead to damage it, the failure for UK Government is great.]

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 2 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Keith says:

    but MHRA have explicitly said that no data re. the injections (they are not vaccines and indeed are still in trial 3 level until 2023) will be made public because the NHS is already overwhelmed – who can believe any figures presented by the regime for anything – it’s all perception management

  2. Mara D says:

    “Recombinant, replication-deficient chimpanzee adenovirus vector encoding the SARS CoV 2 Spike (S) glycoprotein. Produced in genetically modified human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293 cells.”

    Wiki: “Human embryonic kidney 293 cells, also often referred to as HEK 293, HEK-293, 293 cells, or less precisely as HEK cells, are a specific cell line originally derived from human embryonic kidney cells grown in tissue culture taken from an aborted female fetus.”