A major international study of almost 19 million individuals has found that official government data for Covid “vaccines” from several different countries was artificially inflated to make the injections appear “safe and effective” in the eyes of the public.
The study found that the effectiveness of the injections was greatly exaggerated to boost “vaccine” uptake.
Led by James Humphreys of Epiconcept in France, the study’s collaborators include, among others:
- The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
- Statens Serum Institut (Denmark)
- Instituto de Salud Pública de Navarra (Spain)
- Sciensano (Belgium)
- Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Italy)
- Instituto Nacional de Saúde (Portugal)
- RIVM (Netherlands)
The researchers hypothesize that vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates derived from electronic health record (EHR) data are vulnerable to being fed with falsified and exaggerated data.
This allows skewed results that benefit those pushing the “vaccines” to be logged in official data.
The researchers published the results of their study in the journal medRxiv.
The VEBIS-EHR study is a retrospective cohort analysis funded by the ECDC.
The team evaluated Covid “vaccine” effectiveness against hospitalizations and deaths among adults aged 65+ across six European countries.
Researchers assessed unmeasured confounding by comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals for a negative control outcome—non-COVID-19-related deaths.
They also evaluated how delays in EHR data extraction (4–6 vs. 8–10 vs. 26–32 weeks) affected exposure and outcome classification.
The study included up to 18.7 million individuals and used Cox regression models and random-effects meta-analyses.
The study revealed that official data shows vaccinated individuals exhibited a 30–65% lower risk of non-COVID-19 deaths.
However, they note that this is an implausible outcome that signals significant unmeasured confounding.
The researchers explain that the unrealistic figures are most likely the result of a pervasive “healthy vaccinee bias.”
Frail, often terminally ill individuals are underrepresented among the vaccinated, artificially boosting vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates.
While delays in data extraction, especially in Portugal and Italy, modestly increased the capture of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and deaths.
The wide variability across sites in how data delays affected vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups highlights a more systemic issue: inconsistent data quality and record-keeping practices across countries threaten the reliability and comparability of multinational EHR-based VE analyses.
These results raise red flags about the internal validity of many EHR-based “vaccine” effectiveness studies.
The authors confirm that commonly used methods fail to fully correct for the healthy vaccinee effect or frailty bias, both of which may lead to systematic overestimation of VE.
Moreover, the choice of negative control (non-COVID-19 deaths) may itself be flawed due to possible undiagnosed post-Covid sequelae.
The study urges expanded use of negative control exposures, frailty scoring, and enhanced data linkage, such as through the European Health Data Space, to ensure more accurate, real-world assessments.
The findings should prompt public health authorities and journals to treat EHR-based VE claims with great skepticism.
The researchers warn that falsified or inflated data is pushing people into believing the “safe and effective” narratives without properly informing them of the risks.
READ MORE – 3 Decades Wiped from Life Expectancy of Covid-Vaxxed
