See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377266988

Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID19 Pandemic
Preprint · January 2024
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13654.42560

CITATIONS

READS

0

89,348

1 author:
Wilson Sy
Investment Analytics
67 PUBLICATIONS 551 CITATIONSSEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Wilson Sy on 06 February 2024.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN: 2577 - 8005
Research Article

Medical & Clinical Research

Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19
Pandemic
Wilson Sy*
Director, Investment Analytics Research, Australia.

Corresponding Author*

Dr Wilson Sy, Director, Investment Analytics Research, Australia.
Submitted: 20 Jan 2024; Accepted: 25 Jan 2024; Published: 15 Feb 2024

Citation: Wilson Sy (2024) Excess Deaths in the United Kingdom: Midazolam and Euthanasia in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Medical& Clinical Research, 9(2), 01-21.

Abstract

Macro-data during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK) are shown to have significant data anomalies and inconsistencies
with existing explanations. This paper shows that the UK spike in deaths, wrongly attributed to COVID-19 in April 2020, was not due
to SARS-CoV-2 virus, which was largely absent, but was due to the widespread use of Midazolam injections which were statisticallyvery highly correlated (coefficient over 90 percent) with excess deaths in all regions of England during 2020. Importantly, excess deaths
remained elevated following mass vaccination in 2021, but were statistically uncorrelated to COVID vaccination, while remaining
significantly correlated to Midazolam injections. The widespread and persistent use of Midazolam in UK suggests a possible policy
of systemic euthanasia. Unlike Australia, where assessing the statistical impact of COVID vaccination on excess deaths is relatively
straightforward, UK excess deaths were closely associated with the use of Midazolam and other medical intervention. The iatrogenic
pandemic in the UK was caused by euthanasia deaths from Midazolam and also, likely caused by COVID vaccination, but their relative
impacts are difficult to measure from the data, due to causal proximity of euthanasia. Global investigations of COVID-19 epidemiology,
based only on the relative impacts of COVID disease and vaccination, may be inaccurate, due to the neglect of significant confounding
factors in some countries.
Introduction
In a recent paper [1], it was shown that COVID injections arecausally predictive of Australian excess deaths, suggesting
the Australian pandemic is iatrogenic [2]. Believing that theiatrogenesis by COVID injections may be universally relevant,
we studied closely the case of United Kingdom, because its Officefor National Statistics (ONS) is reputed to have some of the mostaccurate and detailed statistics on the COVID-19 pandemic in UK.
Obviously, comparing the statistics of the “vaccinated” versus“unvaccinated” is the most straightforward method to assess therisks and benefits of vaccination, but only if the data were accurate,
being free from data entry errors. Many data errors originated fromthe flawed PCR test, which does not detect presence of the SARSCoV-2 virus [3, 4]. The extensive analysis [5] of detailed ONS
statistics based on vaccination status and their relationships with
COVID cases and mortality has shown inconsistencies, whichappear to have originated from flawed definitions of vaccination
status and erroneous data entry.
This aspect of ONS data corruption appears universal, as it also
occurs with Australian data [6] which have originated from theflawed data entry and reporting convention [7] from the Centers for
Med Clin Res, 2023

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which may have recorded
status lagging actual status by at least 14 days. Essentially, the deathof a recently injected person may not be recorded in the databaseof deaths of the “vaccinated” [8]. This simple omission makes
comparison of deaths by vaccination status a data misdirection
inflating “unvaccinated” deaths which are calculated by subtracting“vaccinated” deaths from all deaths of the population [9].
Despite advances in modern information technology, the accuracyof data collection has not advanced in the United Kingdom forover 150 years, because the same problems of erroneous data entry
found then are still found now in the COVID pandemic, not only in
the UK but all over the world. We have independently discovered[6] the same UK data problem and solution for assessing
COVID-19 vaccination as Alfred Russel Wallace [10] had 150
years ago in investigating the consequences of Vaccination Acts
starting in 1840 on smallpox:“Having thus cleared away the mass of doubtful or erroneous
statistics depending on comparisons of the vaccinated andunvaccinated in limited areas or selected groups of patients,
we turn to the only really important evidence, those ‘masses ofnational experience’...”

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 1

Emphasis added. The entry of incorrect data for vaccination status,
over 150 years ago as now [10], cannot be solved by technology,
but by better data management. Just as did Alfred Wallace, aneminent peer and friend of Charles Darwin, the method we haveused (the “Wallace Method”) to overcome the lack of accurate
detailed vaccination data is to use accurate macro-data such as
all-cause mortality (‘masses of national experience’) and dosesof COVID vaccination, to perform detailed statistical analysis todraw broad and robust epidemiological conclusions.
This paper follows the Wallace Method by examining the “massesof national experience” of the pandemic which are the all-cause
and excess mortality data over time and across the regions ofEngland.
Many published statistical findings, based on data misdirection,
are internally inconsistent and are contradicted by macro-dataof the Wallace Method, as shown here for UK. These factual
contradictions show up as data anomalies, which are mortality datafacts which cannot be explained by data misdirection. Two main
data anomalies in April 2020 and January 2021 are discussed indetail below in successive sections.
Another important data anomaly is the absence, since 2021, of

any statistically significant relationship between vaccinationand mortality, even when mortality data are variously lagged
relative to the vaccination data. Therefore, apparently there is nocorrelation statistically, positive or negative, between vaccinationand mortality.
This counter-intuitive absence of a relationship between
vaccination and excess deaths and other anomalies are resolved inthis paper by showing the existence of a strong confounding factor,
which is a strong positive correlation between Midazolam use andexcess mortality data in England, across all regions throughout the
COVID-19 pandemic, particularly before mass vaccination.
The rest of the paper is devoted to a detailed discussion of theimplications of the findings on how UK health policy has led tothe observed outcomes of euthanasia and iatrogenic geronticide.
The UK findings raise strong doubt about many epidemiologicalfindings worldwide regarding the evidence of positive or negative
impact of vaccination on mortality in the COVID-19 pandemic.
UK Macro-Data
The macro-data include official UK all-cause mortality publishedby ONS [11]. The data collated from 2015 to July 2023 are shownin Figure 1.

Figure 1: UK Monthly All- Cause Total Deaths and Excess Deaths.
Figure 1: UK Monthly All- Cause Total Deaths and Excess Deaths.
The green curve with the left-axis, represents monthly raw death an example below). However, seasonal fluctuations make the
The green curve with the left-axis, represents monthly raw death counts of all causes for United Kingdom fromcounts of all causes for United Kingdom from 2015 to July 2023, relative significance of excess deaths visually harder to discern,2015 to July 2023, the latest monthly ONS data. Most data analysts (e.g. Australian Bureau of Statistics), would
the latest monthly ONS data. Most data analysts (e.g. Australian obscuring statistical significance.
simply overlay the green curve with the baseline (as expectation), with seasonal fluctuations, and a one standard
Bureau of Statistics), would
simplyband
overlay
the green
curve withdeviationaroundthe baseline,
to show the significance of all-cause mortality outside the expected band
the baseline (as expectation),withseasonal
fluctuations,and Forgreater clarity,
fluctuations
are removed
displaying(see an example below). However, seasonal
fluctuations
makeseasonal
the relative
significanceof excessbydeaths
visually
a one standard deviation harderband aroundthebaseline,
to
show
the
excessdeathsdirectly
where
excessmortalityiscalculatedasto discern, obscuring statistical significance.
significance of all-cause mortality outside the expected band (see deviations from the baseline, which is defined by the pre-pandemic
Med Clin Res, 2024

For greater clarity, seasonal fluctuations are removed by displaying excess deaths directly where excess
www.medclinres.org
Volume 9 period| Issue 2using| 2 2015mortality is calculated as deviations
from the baseline, which is defined by the pre-pandemic
2019 monthly averages. The average baseline UK mortality is about 44,000 monthly and 532,000 annually. The
purpose of the baseline is to serve as a benchmark for assessing whether pandemic excess deaths since 2020 are
statistically significant.

period using 2015-2019 monthly averages. The average baseline
UK mortality is about 44,000 monthly and 532,000 annually. The
purpose of the baseline is to serve as a benchmark for assessing
whether pandemic excess deaths since 2020 are statisticallysignificant.
The red curve with the right axis shows the excess mortality deathcounts. The average baseline excess deaths is zero (by definition)and the standard deviation (sigma) is 2,470 monthly. It is now
clearly evident that excess deaths in UK are statistically significant
for most periods in the COVID-19 pandemic since the enormous
spike in 2020.

mitigation effects by the COVID injections. However, thesecasual observations of causation are shown below to be anotherexample of Simpson’s Paradox, where confounding factors wereoverlooked and the correlations were invalid [12].
Specifically as indicated [13], a common error of those studies
comes from data selection bias, where early studies, withsynchronous correlation, occurring only in a selected subset of thedata, implied that vaccinations had immediate beneficial impact
on reducing deaths, which is medically highly unlikely [2], given
the vaccinology of how mRNA injections take significant time toaffect the immune system.

Note that the ONS includes 2017-2019 and 2021, but excludes The errors of earlier studies [12] can be understood, if those results
were placedin thebroader
epidemiological2020 in its calculation ofThethe errors
2022 baseline
thereforeONS
of earlierandstudies[12] canbe understood,
if thoseresults
werecontexts
placed inoftheotherbroader
contexts of otherepidemiologicalvariables
and in below.
hindsight,variables
with fullerandsetsinofhindsight,
available data.
many anomalies
with Illustrated
fuller setshereof areavailable
data.
excess deaths for 2022 differ
from ours as will
be discussed
andininconsistenciesof UK
datapersistentwhich haveIllustrated
led to inferencesof manyerroneousconclusions
and to harmful policies.
here areanomalies
and inconsistenciesof UK
Since the pandemic starting
2020, there havebeen
elevation of excess mortality, characterized sometimes by sharp data which have led to inferences of erroneous conclusions and to
Anomalyof April2020
spikes. The red curve for monthly
excessdeathsas percentage of harmful policies.
the baseline shows nevertheless a trend decline from 2020 before
establishsuggestingeven more(misleadingly
clearly the statisticalsignificanceof theexcess deaths, they are measured as percentagesof April
2020
vaccination to after 2021To
onwards,
as Anomalyof thebaseline,
as well as units of standard(sigma)of clearly
the monthly
fluctuationsof the baseline,
To deviation
establish evenmore
the statisticalsignificanceof the as
discussed below) a beneficial
effectof vaccination.
shown in Figure 2.
excess deaths, they are measured as percentages of the baseline,
Many studies published in 2022 found negative correlations as well as units of standard deviation (sigma) of the monthly
between excess deaths and mass vaccination [12], and suggested fluctuations of the baseline, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: UK Monthly Excess Deaths (%Baseline) and Sigma.
Figure 2: UK Monthly Excess Deaths (%Baseline) and Sigma.
The left axis shows excess deaths as percentages of the baseline. release [14]:left2020
axis reachedshows excess
deaths ofas thepercentages of the baseline. Note that the huge spike in April 2020 reached
Note that the huge spike inTheApril
100 percent
100 percent of the baseline. Since the monthly standard deviation of excess deaths as a percentage the 2015baseline. Since the monthly standard deviation of excess deaths as “The months with the highest number of total excess deaths were2019 baseline is 5.1 percent (“one sigma”), the huge spike was a 20-sigma event, shown on the right axis. Thisa percentage the 2015-2019 baseline is 5.1 percent (“one sigma”), April 2020 (43,796 excess deaths, a 98.8% increase) and January
event has received relatively little attention or analysis, as the ONS simply stated as a matter of fact, in an early
the huge spike was a 20-sigma event, shown on the right axis. This 2021 (16,546 excess deaths, a 29.2% increase).”version of its latest release [14]:event has received relatively little attention or analysis, as the ONS
simply stated as a matter of fact, inan early
versionof itslatestnumber
Doubling
normaldeath
ratewerein April
98.8%
increase”)“Themonthswith thehighestof total
excessdeathsApril2020,
2020 (“a(43,796excessdeaths, a
Med Clin Res, 2024

98.8% increase) and January
2021 (16,546 excess deaths, a 29.2% increase).”www.medclinres.org
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 3

Doubling normal death rate in April 2020, (“a 98.8% increase”) had received no special comment by the ONS,
and has been removed in recent releases. A sudden surge of 44,000 deaths cannot be explained by population
growth or changes in life expectancy. The official narrative was that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was very deadly tohad received no special comment by the ONS, and has been
removed in recent releases. A sudden surge of 44,000 deaths cannot
be explained by population growth or changes in life expectancy.
The official narrative was that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was very
deadly to have caused the huge spike in COVID deaths. This
interpretation, which is disputable (see below), justified politicallythe declaration of emergency and all public health measures,
including masking, lockdowns, etc.
However, the UK Health Security Agency declared [15] “As of 19
March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be an HCID in
the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness
which are not classified as HCIDs.” That is, COVID-19 wasBaseline (000)Actual (000)Excess (000)% Excess
Sigma (Mo Av)

2020
532
608
76
14.3
2.8

2021
532
586
54
10.2
1.9

2022
532
577
45
8.5
1.8

officially not considered a high consequence infectious disease(HCID) – no pandemic. This declaration was in stark contradiction
to 44,000 excess deaths, mostly attributed to COVID-19, which
represented a doubling of all-cause mortality in April 2020.
As confirmed by empirical data below, the UK Health Security
Agency was correct: there was no pandemic caused by a HCID.
If this interpretation of the huge spike being due to the COVID
virus were really correct (shown not to be correct below) then it isobvious apparently from Figure 2, that COVID injections may havesaved lives, because with mass vaccination since 2021 the rates ofexcess deaths have decreased systematically, as Table 1 confirms– vaccination was associated apparently, but misleadingly, withfewer excess deaths over time.

2022 (ONS)
611
577
34
5.6
1.1

2020-2022 Av
532
590
58
11.0
2.2

2023 (to July)
320
352
32
10.0
2

Table 1: UK Annual All-Cause and Excess Mortality.
All numbers in this paper are expressed, at most, to threesignificant figures for ease of reading. On an annual basis, Table
1 shows that both all-cause mortality and excess mortality haveconsistently declined (columns 2 to 4) from 2020 to 2022. From
this perspective, COVID vaccinations in the years 2021 and 2022,with 54,000 and 45,000 excess deaths respectively, would havebeen interpreted erroneously as effective in reducing excess deathsof 76,000 in 2020.
The apparent effectiveness was even more pronounced in 2022,
if the baseline were calculated using the method used by ONS(see column 5), where one sigma deviation in 2022 was hardly
statistically significant for UK excess deaths. This evidence of“vaccine effectiveness” was illusory, as shown below, due toincorrect attribution of the 2020 death spike.
Like the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the Office for
National Statistics (ONS) also excluded 2020 in its calculationof the 2022 baseline, but for diametrically opposite reasons. For
Australia [16], 2020 was a low mortality year, exclusion of whichleads to higher baseline and lower calculated excess mortality. On
the other hand for UK, 2020 was a high mortality year, exclusionof which leads to lower baseline and higher calculated excess

Med Clin Res, 2024

mortality.
Had 2020 been included in the 2022 calculation, the UK baseline
would have been raised by about 19,000 and 2022 excess mortality
would have dropped correspondingly even further, astonishingly
giving about three percent excess deaths above baseline. This
represents a “normalization” of the pandemic, so that excess
deaths no longer provide any statistical signal. This “too good to betrue” statistic would be unbelievable and may attract undesirable
criticism to its methodology.
By the UK officially assigning the April 2020 death spike to mostly
COVID deaths, the role of other causes of excess deaths have been
substantially reduced [14]:“When deaths due to COVID-19 were subtracted from the analysis,
April 2020 remained the month with the highest number of excess
deaths (14,361 excess deaths, a 32.4% increase on the five-year
average for deaths due to all causes).”
However, this questionable assignment of 67.6 percent of thedeaths to COVID in March/April 2020 is inconsistent with thenumber of COVID cases in that period, as shown in Figure 3.

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 4

Figure 3: UK Monthly New Covid cases and New Covid Deaths.
resolve
theDeaths.
inconsistency. If there were a shortage of tests, thenFigure 3 shows inconsistentcorrelation
between
COVID
cases andnot
Figure3: UK Monthly
New
Covid cases
New
Covid
(green line) and COVID deaths (red line), except for early 2021 the registration of the large number of COVID deaths could not
haveCOVID
been verified
PCRline)testsand
andCOVID
thereforedeaths
they werearbitrarily
when mass “vaccination”
was 3firstrolledout. The mostglaring
Figureshows
inconsistentcorrelation
betweencases by(green(red line),
exceptassigned.
anomaly is in early 2020
when 2021
relatively
led to a wasfor early
when few
masscases“vaccination”
first rolled out. The most glaring anomaly is in early 2020 whendisproportionate numberrelativelyof allegedfew
COVID
deathsthat thecases led
to asuchdisproportionate
number of COVID deaths, such that the infection fatality rate (orcasefatalityrate)
waswasvery highat the24.3data
percent,
when thedataUKare casetakenfatality
on theirrateface(CFR)
values.of
Givenof Figure3, theinfection fatality rate (ormore
moreaccurately
accurately
casefatalityrate)very high at 24.3 percent, if the data are taken on their face values. SARS-CoV-2 would have been an extreme 24.3 percent, comparedOn 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization
declared
the global
pandemic
based
on 4,291
deathsto later (WHO)CFR from
the Omicron
variant
of 0.18
percent.
The highworldwide.
In
April
2020,
the
UK
data
showed35,000new
COVID
deathswhich
represent
anextraordinary
On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) fatality rate was inconsistent with published research findings [17]increasein aonvery
shorttime,worldwide.
particularly thatwhenearly
therein were
only 139,000
new coronavirus
COVID casesin April 2020,
the pandemic
the “new
SARS-CoV-2
isdeclared the global pandemic
based
4,291
deathsmoreover,theUK
cumulative
total
cases
did
not
exceed500,000
(less
than
one
percentofthepopulation)
until
In April 2020, the UK data showed 35,000 new COVID deaths less deadly but far more transmissible than MERS-CoV or SARSafter September
thatinyear.
which represent an extraordinary
increasea very short time, CoV.”
particularly when there were only 139,000 new COVID cases
therewere suggestions
thatdid
UKnot
mayThehaveenormous
had a shortage
PCR spiketests available
early indeaths
the pandemic
April of2020
in UK excess
mayin April 2020, moreover,While
the UK
cumulative
total cases
which
may
explaintherelatively
small
numberof
COVID
cases,
but
this
explanationdoes
notresolve ifthe
exceed 500,000 (less than one percent of the population) until after have required fewer cases of infection to cause the deaths
inconsistency. If there were a shortage of tests,
then the registrationof the large
number numbersof COVIDofdeaths
couldtransmission
were localized
to limited
regions;
September that year.
not have been verified by PCR tests and therefore
they
were
arbitrarily
assigned.
otherwise unbelievably fast spreading across a wide geographic
While there were suggestions that UK may have had a shortage of area was needed. The data on excess deaths show the spikes in
Given the data of Figure 3, the UK case fatality rate (CFR) of SARS-CoV-2 would have been an extreme 24.3
PCR tests available early in the pandemic which may explain the excess deaths occurred simultaneously across a wide area in allpercent, compared to later CFR from the Omicron variant of 0.18 percent. The high fatality rate was inconsistent
relatively small number of COVID cases, but this explanation does major regions of the UK, as Table 2 shows.
with published research findings [17] that early in the pandemic the “new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is lessdeadly but far more transmissible than MERS-CoV or SARS-CoV.”The enormous April 2020 spike in UK excess deaths may have required fewer cases of infection to cause thedeaths if transmission were localized to limited numbers of regions; otherwise unbelievably fast spreading
across a wide geographic area was needed. The data on excess deaths show the spikes in excess deaths occurred
simultaneously across a wide area in all major regions of the UK, as Table 2 shows.
RegionMed Clin Res, 2024

LondonEast
North WestSouth West

April
Baseline
4,140
4,840
5,960
www.medclinres.org
4,720

All-cause
DeathsExcessDeathsExcess (%Baseline)

12,2009,510
12,400
7,600

8,030
4,670
6,390
2,880

194
97
107
Volume9 | Issue 2 | 5
61

Page 6 of 25

RegionApril Baseline
London
4,140
East
4,840
North West5,960South West4,720South East
6,840
South East
North East (& Yorkshire)
6,610
North East (&Yorkshire)
Midlands
Midlands 8,310
EnglandEngland41,400UK (& Wales)
UK (& Wales)
44,300
Table 2: UK Regions Excess Mortality April 2020.

All-cause Deaths
12,2009,510
12,4007,600
12,8006,840
12,300 6,610
16,700 8,310
83,500 41,400
44,30088,100

Excess Deaths Excess (% Baseline)
8,030
194
4,670
97
6,390
107
2,880
61
5,980
87
12,800
5,980
87
5,730
87
12,300
5,730
87
8,390
101
16,7008,390
101
83,50042,100102
42,100102
88,10043,80099
43,80099

Table 2: UK Regions Excess Mortality April 2020.

Note that UK statistics are mostly represented by those in England identified in Figure 4, where they are amalgamated into four major
Note that UK statistics are mostly represented by those in England (and Wales), which is sometimes loosely(and Wales), which is sometimes
looselyin thediscussions,following as regions.
referred,
in referred,
the following
UK. The seven regions in Table 2 are geographically identified in
discussions, as UK. The seven regions
Tablethey
2 are
Figure 4,inwherearegeographicallyamalgamated into four major regions.

Figure 4: UK Regions of ONS Data.
Unsurprisingly, the small area of London had one of the highest data on COVID cases and deaths are inconsistent, most likely
4: UK
Regionsof ONS
Data.
excess deaths, less expected isFigure
the neartripling(3X)of all-cause
indicated that the huge spike in death may not have been due tomortality compared to the baseline
with 194 percent
SARS-CoV-2
virus.excess
This deaths,
possibleto COVID-19
Unsurprisingly,
the smallexcess
area ofdeaths.
London had
one of the highest
lessmisattribution
expected is the near
tripling
all-causemortality
comparedto thewasbaselinewith 194
percent
AllAgency
other regions
had
All other regions also had very(3X)highofexcess
deaths,the SouthWestconfirmedby theUK excessHealthdeaths.
Security[15], alsomentioned
very highexcessdeaths,
deaths, which
the South
havingthe declared
lowest 61 thatpercent
excessdeaths,2020,
whichCOVID-19
is still highlywas
region having the lowest 61 percent
excessis Weststill region
earlier,
which
as of
19 Marchhighly statistically significant. statistically significant.
not a “high consequence infectious disease”. Therefore, this data
anomaly leaves the huge spike in the non-COVID excess deaths
If COVID-19 were the commonly accepted explanation for the April 2020 data, then the wide geographical
If COVID-19 were the commonly
accepted
explanationfortheyet to abevery
explained,
beforemass
vaccinationor any virus
othertofactors
spread of high excess deaths in all regions withinshort periodwouldrequirethe SARS-CoV-2
beApril 2020 data, then the widetransmitted
geographicalspreadofhighexcesswereavailable,
asdiscussed
below.
very rapidly and be very lethal at the same time, which is biologically unlikely. The data anomaly
deaths in all regions within a very
short theperiodwould require
theand the unfounded popular belief that most elderly who died early were
contradicts
COVID-19
hypothesis
evidence thattherapidly
elderly werewhich was unlikely, not being prevalent.
SARS-CoV-2 virus to be transmittedvery
and particularly
be very vulnerable
AnomalytoofCOVID-19,
January 2021
lethal at the same time, which is biologically unlikely. The data A similar anomaly occurred in January 2021 suggesting also a
In conclusion,
the UKof April
2020, where the dataon COVID cases
and todeathsare inconsistent,
anomaly contradicts the COVID-19
hypothesis
anddata
the anomaly
unfounded
misclassificationof non-COVID
deaths
COVID
deaths. That
most likely indicated that the huge spike in death may not have been due to SARS-CoV-2 virus. This possible
popular belief that most elderlymisattribution
who died early
wereevidencethatis,unvaccinatedindividuals
who
died
of
non-COVID
causes, may
to COVID-19 was confirmed by the UK Health Security Agency [15], mentioned earlier, which
the elderly were particularly vulnerable
to
COVID-19,
which
was
have
been
misclassified
as
COVID
deaths.
This
typeof datadeclared that as of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 was not a “high consequence infectious disease”. Therefore,
thisflaw
unlikely, not being prevalent. data anomaly leaves the huge spike in has
occurred in excess
the history
UKtodata
as Alfred before
Wallacemass
wrote
the non-COVID
deathsofyet
be explained,vaccination or any other factors were available,
below.
[10] as(p.discussed
28, p. 30)
on smallpox:
In conclusion, the UK data anomaly of April 2020, where theAnomaly of January 2021
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 6
A similar anomaly occurred in January 2021 suggesting also a misclassification of non-COVID deaths to
COVID deaths. That is, unvaccinated individuals who died of non-COVID causes, may have been misclassified

as COVID deaths. This type of data flaw has occurred in the history of UK data as Alfred Wallace wrote [10] (p.
28, p. 30) on smallpox:“…whereas the other result, of a greatly increased fatality in the unvaccinated so exactly balanced byan alleged greatly diminished fatality in the vaccinated is not explicable,…the two classes of facts
Emphasis
added. Thatis, during
smallpox
epidemic of the“…whereas the other result, ofa greatly
taken
togetherincreased
thus renderfatality
it almostincertainthat vaccination
has neversaved athesinglehuman life.”

the unvaccinated so exactly balanced by an alleged greatly second half of the 19th century, the justification of compulsory
smallpox
in UK
was19thduecentury,
to the same
type of data flaw
diminished fatality in thevaccinatednot is,explicable,…thetwo epidemic
Emphasis
added.isThat
during the smallpox
of vaccination
the second halfof thethe justificationof compulsory
smallpoxin UK
was dueto the samevaccinatedtype of data
flawunvaccinatedof confusing as
vaccinatedof confusing
within 2020.with
The likely
classes of facts taken together
thus renderit vaccination
almost certainthat
unvaccinatedin 2020.
The likely confusion confusion
also between
deathsand non-COVID
excess deaths excess
alsoCOVID
between
COVID
deaths and non-COVID
vaccination has never saveda singleashuman
life.”[11,14] in January 2021 is evident in Figure 5. deaths [11,14] in January 2021 is evident in Figure 5.

Figure 5: UK Monthly Composition of Excess Deaths.

Figure 5: UK Monthly Composition of Excess Deaths.

With 2020 COVID data, paraphrasing Alfred Wallace’s spike in April 2020. This meant that for the numbers to tally, nonWith 2020 COVID data, paraphrasing Alfred Wallace‟s observations for smallpox data in UK 150 years ago
observations for smallpox
data in UK 150 years ago [10], we COVID deaths had to plunge deeply below expectation, which is[10], we observe for the UK pandemic in January 2021: …a greatly increased fatality in the COVID deaths soobserve for the UK pandemic
in January
2021: greatly…a greatly
exactly balancedby an alleged
diminishedinexplicable.
fatality in non-COVID deaths is not explicable…
increased fatality in the COVID deaths so exactly balanced by an
In January
2021,
new[10].
COVID
cases
still
relatively too
alleged greatly diminishedfatality
non-COVID
deathsis above
not quote
The words
in in
bold
were substituted
in theof Alfred
Wallace
Why wastherewerea spikein COVID
subduedto explain
theinspikein COVID
there
explicable…
deaths and a compensating plunge in the non-COVID
deaths?
The spike
COVID
deaths indeaths
Januaryand
2021
waswas noslightly higher than that of April 2020, but was apparent
incongruous
withfor
total
which were
substantiallyreasontheexcessplungedeaths
in non-COVID
deaths.
The data werein January
comparedtheAlfredfirst spikein April 2020.
This meant suggestingthat for the numbers
tally, non-COVID
apparently
not explicable,
errors in torecording
The words in bold werelower
substituted
in 2021
the abovequotetoof
COVID
deathshad
toplungedeeplybelow
expectation,whichisinexplicable.
Wallace [10]. Why was there a spike in COVID deaths and a deaths, which are clear evidence confirming the unreliability ofcompensating plunge in the non-COVID deaths? The spike in COVID data generally [5, 6].
In January 2021, new COVID cases were still relatively too subdued to explain the spike in COVID deaths and
COVID deaths in January
2021 was slightly higher than that ofthere was no apparent reason for the plunge in non-COVID deaths. The data were apparently not explicable,
April 2020, but was incongruouswith total
excess COVID
deaths which
To analyze
data confusion
COVID ofdeathsand nonsuggesting errors
in recording
deaths, which
are clearthe
evidence
confirmingbetween
the unreliability
COVID
were substantially lower
January[5,2021dataingenerally
6]. compared to the first COVID deaths, we summarize the data in Figure 4 with Table 3.
COVID-19
Total Excess
To analyze the data confusion between
COVID deathsNon-COVID
and non-COVID deaths,
we summarize the data in Figure
4 with Mar-Dec
Table 3. 2020
95,000(15,700)
79,3002021
81,000(26,800)
54,200COVID-19
Non-COVID
Total Excess
2022
39,3005,770
45,10095,000(15,700)
79,300Mar-Dec 2020
Jan-May 2023
11,50013,60025,10081,000(26,800)
54,2002021
Mar
2020-May
2023
227,000(23,100)
39,3005,770
45,100 204,000
2022

Table 3: Decomposition of UK Excess Deaths.
Evidently (columns 2 and 4), both COVID-19 deaths and total
excess deaths have been falling annually from 2020 to 2022, but
non-COVID deaths have been rising generally, except for 2021 dueto the strange anomaly in January 2021, when the 26,800 plunge in
non-COVID excess deaths (see the yellow cell in the third column)
Med Clin Res, 2024

was inexplicable.
The spike in claimed COVID deaths, as high as
Page
8 of 25

that in April 2020, would have conveniently persuaded the public
to accept vaccination, just as it was being rolled out in January
2021.

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 7

flawed PCR tests which do not reliably detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and often produced fpositives. This fundamental flaw facilitated the inconsistent attribution of COVID cases and deaths.

In conclusion, in 2020 and early 2021, spikes in UK COVID deaths were likely misclassification of non-CO
deaths, which begs the question: what caused the surges in non-COVID deaths early in the pandemic? If
beginning of the UK pandemic was not largely related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, what was it related to?
By now, it should be well-known that data on COVID cases and the Australian explanation in vaccination causality [1,2]. It was
Vaccinationand Excess
Deathsdeaths are unreliable, because they arebased on flawed
PCR tests
predicted that mass vaccination reaching population herd immunity
which do not reliably detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 would end the UK pandemic, but this did not happen. Instead,
Before Thisaddressing
the enigma
excessdeaths
deathsandin non-COVID
2020, consider
the deaths
Australian
explanation
virus and often produced false positives.
fundamental
flaw of
COVID
excessremainedelevated.in vaccina
causality[1,2].
Itwas
predicted
that
mass
vaccination
reaching
population
herd
immunity
would
facilitated the inconsistent attribution of COVID cases and deaths. In Australia, the excess deaths since 2021 were shown likely
to end the
pandemic,
but
this
did
not
happen.
Instead,
COVID
deathsandnon-COVID
excessdeathsremained
In conclusion, in 2020 and early 2021, spikes in UK COVID deaths have been caused by COVID injections, where deaths followed elevatedwere likely misclassification of non-COVID deaths, which begs consistently and predictably after injections five-months later [1,2].
Inin
Australia,
the excess
2021 wereshown likely
have time
been incausedby COVID
injections, w
the question: what caused the surges
non-COVID
deathsdeaths
early since
On average,
normally
it takestosome
a multistage
process
deathsfollowedconsistently
andpredictably
after
injections
five-month
later[1,2].
On
average,in the pandemic? If the beginning of the UK pandemic was not for the injections to cause the generation of antibodies in response normal
takes whatsome wastimeit ina multistage
process
for theinjections
to cause
the generationof antibodies
largely related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus,
relatedto?
toantigenic
cellularproductionof toxic
spike proteins
which arein respons
antigenic cellular production of toxic
spike
proteins
which
arepotentiallypathogenic,
possibly
potentially pathogenic, possibly causing death. The correspondingcausing deThecorresponding
relationshipof
COVID injections
and injections
five-monthandlaggedexcess deaths
UK data is sh
relationshipof COVID
five-month
laggedfor
excessVaccination and Excess DeathsinFigure6.
Before addressing the enigma of excess deaths in 2020, consider deaths for UK data is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: UK Monthly COVID Injections (Lead five mo) and Excess Deaths.
Figure 6: UK Monthly COVID Injections (Lead five mo) and Excess Deaths.

In 2020,
since mostmedical
COVID-19
infection
There were clear positive correlations
selected
Thereinwere
clear periods
positive (e.g.
correlations
in selectedperiods(e.g. treatments
first half offor2022),
but the wholedataset, wit
as Ivermectin,
Hydroxychloroquine,
etc. wereforbidden
or signifi
first half of 2022), but the whole dataset,without
selectionbias, suchselectionbias, showsa negative
correlationof -12 percent,but the relationshipis notstatisticallynot recommended
in many countries,
for selected
medicinesshows a negative correlation of -12withpercent,
but thea p-valueof relationship
0.587. Therefore,
the causal relationshipobservedexcept
in Australia,
of COVID
injections b
cannotbe similarly
for UK.
On US
the otherhand, these in
data
show
suchestablished
as Remdesivir
in theand Midazolam
thealsoUK,
we no indica
is not statistically significant with asources
p-valueofofharm,
0.587.
Therefore,that vaccination
had injections
any beneficial
effects onthe
UKpossible
excess role
deaths.
investigate
of Midazolam in the UK pandemic.
the causal relationship observed in Australia,
of COVID
being sources of harm, cannot be similarly established for UK. On
the other hand, these data also show no indication that vaccination Midazolam is a Benzodiazepine, which enhances the effects of
gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), a naturally occurring inhibitor
had any beneficial effects on UK excess deaths.
of brain activity.Page
Midazolam
9 of 25is on the World Health Organization
Further statistical investigation of the correlation spectrum, (WHO) list of essential medicine [21] for preoperative short-termwith different leads and lags of the two time-series, produced no sedation, for palliative care and for diseases of the nervous system.
significant relations, suggesting no detectable causality. Therefore, For each function, there are usually several other pharmaceuticalstatistically, the unclear impact of COVID injections on UK excess alternatives; for example, for sedation and palliative care, UK
deaths remains a puzzle, and the whole UK pandemic has remained alternatives include Lorazepam and Diazepam [21,22].
a statistical mystery.
Used orally, Midazolam is not normally lethal to healthy people.
Midazolam and Excess Deaths
However, given intravenously in large doses continuously, often
The doubling of all-cause mortality in April 2020 was unlikely with opioids, to the elderly with comorbidities, particularly those
explicable by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, because there were low who are terminally ill, it could be lethal. According to the US
levels of infection at that time and there was low lethality of National Library of Medicine [23]: “Midazolam injection may
the SARS-CoV-2 virus [15]. This puzzle in April 2020 and the cause serious or life-threatening breathing problems such as
puzzle of lack of statistical relationships between excess deaths shallow, slowed, or temporarily stopped breathing that may leadand COVID injections later in the pandemic, suggest alternative to permanent brain injury or death.” Midazolam is used in US
executions.
explanations are required for the UK pandemic.
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 8

continuously, often with opioids, to the elderly with comorbidities, particularly those who are terminally ill, it
could be lethal. According to the US National Library of Medicine [23]: “Midazolam injection may cause
serious or life-threatening breathing problems such as shallow, slowed, or temporarily stopped breathing that
may lead to permanent brain injury or death.” Midazolam is used in US executions.
From an observational study [24] in a French hospital, 60 mg could cause death in 24 hours and at that rate few
From an observational studysurvive[24] inmore
a French60and
mg could
was suggestedby theanecdotesof UK
funeral had
directors
thanhospital,
five days,in that hospital
only oneearly
third of54 palliative
sedationspatient[18]consent,
cause death in 24 hours and
at
that
rate
few
survive
more
than
and
more
recentlybystatisticalobservations[19].
Indeed,thesuggesting both voluntary and nonvoluntary euthanasia which will be discussed below.
five days, and in that hospital only one third of the 54 palliative Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science publishes a raw English
sedations had patient consent,
suggesting
both voluntaryand Prescribing
Dataset [20],which includes,by anecdotes
English regions
The possible
widespreaduse of Midazolam
in the pandemic
was suggested
early byof UK(asfuneralnonvoluntary euthanasia which
willbediscussed
below.
shown
in
Table
2
above),
prescriptionsof
Midazolam
10
ml Data
directors [18] and more recently by statistical observations [19]. Indeed, the Bennett Institute for mg/2
Appliedsolutionfor[20],injection
in regions
Figure 7.
Science publishes a raw English Prescribing
Datasetwhichampoules,
includes, as
byshown
English(as shown in Table
The possible widespread 2useof Midazolam
in ofthepandemic10 mg/2 ml solution for injection ampoules, as shown in Figure 7.
above),
prescriptions
Midazolam

Figure 7: Items for Midazolam
107:
mg/2
ml forsolution
for injection
ampoulesby allFigureItems
Midazolam
10 mg/2
ml solution
forreagions.
injection ampoules by all reagions.

As noted in several blog posts on the internet [19], doses of Midazolam injections show visually remarkableAs noted in several blog posts on the internet [19], doses of regions in England have been calculated individually andcorrelation with excess deaths for UK. In Figure 8, excess deaths for various regions in England have been
Midazolam injections show visuallyremarkablecorrelation
with attemptedcolourtomatched
to Figure 7.
calculated
individually
and attemptedcolour matched
Figure 7.
excess deaths for UK. In Figure 8, excess deaths for various

Page 10 of 25

Figure 8: UK Monthly Excess Mortality by Region.
Figure 8: UK Monthly Excess Mortality by Region.
Visually, Figures 7 and 8 suggest a high correlation between distribution of excess deaths, particularly in April 2020, as though
Visually,deaths
Figuresacross
7 and all8 suggesta highbetween Midazolam injections and excess deaths across all
Midazolam injections and excess
regions
by correlation
deliberate allocation.
regions similar
in England.
Figure8 also shows similar regional numerical distribution of excess deaths, particularly inin England. Figure 8 also shows
regional
numerical
April 2020, as though by deliberate
allocation.
www.medclinres.org
Med Clin Res, 2024
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 9

Midazolam Correlation
Aggregating over English regions, the time series relationship between Midazolam injections and excess deathsregions in England. Figure 8 also shows similar regional numerical distribution of excess deaths, particularly in
April 2020, as though by deliberate allocation.

Midazolam Correlation
Aggregating over English regions, the timeseriesrelationshipbetweenandMidazolaminjections
and excess
Midazolam Correlation
betweenMidazolaminjections
excess deaths
in Englandis deaths
inEnglandisshown
inFigure9.
Aggregating over English regions, the time series relationship shown in Figure 9.

Clearly,Midazolam
Midazolaminjections
excessdeaths in England are highly correlated, but not synchronously,
Figure 9: UK Engliand Monthly
Injections
andandExcessDeathsbecausemedication
generally
does Midazolam
not have instantaneous
also reporting of dosages used andFigure9: UK Engliand
Monthly
Injections andimpact
Excess andDeathsregistration of deaths may lag. Shifting the time series for Midazolam injections one-month forward, very highClearly, Midazolam injections
and excess
in England
are dosages used and registration of deaths may lag. Shifting the timecorrelationis seendeathsin Figure10.
highly correlated, but not synchronously, because medication series for Midazolam injections one-month forward, very highgenerally does not have instantaneous impact and also reporting of correlation is seen in Figure 10.

Page 11 of 25

Figure 10: UK Monthly Midazolam Injections (Lead One Month) and Excess Deaths.
Figure 10: UK Monthly Midazolam Injections (Lead One Month) and Excess Deaths.
The very high correlation (coefficient 91 percent) between excess percent, but still statistically significant with p-value at 0.0007.
high correlation(coefficient
percent)
between excess
deaths deaths,
lagged one
monthafter Midazolam
deaths lagged one month The
aftervery
Midazolaminjections
is largely 91 The
misclassificationof COVID
possiblydeliberate,
also
injections
islargely
due
to
the
first
two
enormous
spikes
to
early
2021.
From
April
2021
onwards2023,
due to the first two enormous spikes to early 2021. From April led to their high correlation with Midazolam injectionstoasMay
seen
the same correlation dropped to 59 percent, but still statistically significant with p-value at 0.0007. The
2021 onwards to May 2023, the same correlation dropped to 59 Figure 11.
misclassification of COVID deaths, possibly deliberate, also led to their high correlation with Midazolam
injections as seen Figure 11.
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 10

The very high correlation (coefficient 91 percent) between excess deaths lagged one month after Midazolam
injections is largely due to the first two enormous spikes to early 2021. From April 2021 onwards to May 2023,
the same correlation dropped to 59 percent, but still statistically significant with p-value at 0.0007. The
misclassification of COVID deaths, possibly deliberate, also led to their high correlation with Midazolam
injections as seen Figure 11.

high correlation(77Injections
percent) between
COVID
deathsmonth after Midazolam injections is
Figure 11: UKThe
Monthly
Midazolam(Lead One
Month)and lagged
COVIDone
Deaths.
largely due to Figure
the first 11:
two UK
enormous
spikes
to
early
2021.
From
April
2021
MayCOVID
2023, there
was noMonthly Midazolam Injections (Lead Oneonwards
Month)toand
Deaths.
significant correlation (with any lags), implying that Midazolam had no statistical relationship to COVID
The high correlation(77 percent)between
COVID deaths
deaths, suggestinga changein assignment
policy. lagged The temporal separation between Midazolam cause and excess
one month after Midazolam injections is largely due to the first deaths effect was consistently one month for the whole pandemic
two enormousThespikesto early
2021. between
From April
2021 onwards
since
2020,
indicating
palliativefor forassisted
Page
12
of 25
temporalseparation
Midazolamcause andtoexcess
deathseffectwasconsistently
oneusemonth
the dying or otherMay 2023, therewasno significant
correlation
any uselags),
euthanasia.
Midazolam
was theMidazolam
proximate,was
if notwhole
pandemic
since 2020,
indicating(withpalliative
for assisted
dying orother euthanasia.
the the primary, cause
proximate, if had
not nothe statisticalprimary, causeof excesstodeathsin the ofUK.excess
Statistically,
improve
substantially
implying that Midazolam
relationship
COVID
deathscorrelationsin the UK.
Statistically,correlations improve
whenaMidazolam
leadpolicy.
excess deaths by one monthfor all regions
in England,
as illustrated
by Figuredeaths, suggestingchange in injections
assignment
substantiallywhen
Midazolaminjections
lead excess deaths by
12.
one month for all regions in England, as illustrated by Figure 12.

Figure 12: Midazolam Injections Lead Excess Deaths (Lead One Month) for All Regions in England.

Figure 12: Midazolam Injections Lead Excess Deaths (Lead One Month) for All Regions in England.
www.medclinres.org
Med Clin Res, For
2024the rest of this paper, unless stated otherwise,correlations between Midazolam injections and excessVolume
deaths 9 | Issue 2 | 11
imply lags of one-month have been applied to excess deaths. Before the pandemic, the correlations were mostly
moderate with low statistical significance.

For the rest of this paper, unless stated otherwise, correlations
between Midazolam injections and excess deaths imply lagsof one-month have been applied to excess deaths. Before thepandemic, the correlations were mostly moderate with low
statistical significance.

Midazolam in the 2020 Death SpikeThe extraordinary death spike in April 2020 caused by Midazolam
has attracted disproportionally little attention. Table 4 shows thatin that month 35,600 doses of Midazolam were associated with
42,000 excess deaths, which is virtually an average of one dose
per death.

RegionMidazolam Doses

Excess Deaths

LondonEast
North WestSouth WestSouth East
North East (& Yorkshire)
Midlands

2,680
3,990
5,210
4,560
6,000
6,920
6,210

8,030
4,680
6,390
2,880
5,980
5,730
8,390

Dose per Death(Rank)
0.33 (7)0.85 (4)0.82 (5)1.58 (1)1 (3)1.21 (2)0.74 (6)Excess % Baseline(rank)
194 (1)96.6 (4)107 (2)61 (7)
87.4 (5)86.6 (6)101 (3)

Table 4: Midazolam Injections and Regional Excess Deaths for March/April 2020.
Compared to regional baselines calculated from 2015-2019
monthly averages (see Table 2), London region had tripled(300 percent) its expected all-cause mortality, while most otherregions had approximately doubled (200 percent) their respective
expected all-cause mortality. Such rapid, temporally concentrated
and uniformly distributed deaths across England were unlikely to
be caused naturally by an infectious disease.
Indeed, the Midazolam dose-to-death relationships were very
similar across all regions, further supporting the supposed role ofMidazolam in a UK systemic policy of euthanasia.
Some regions such as London, East, North West and Midlands had
less than one dose per excess death, which suggests that Midazolam
was not uniformly applied in all cases and that Midazolam was
not the only sedative used in the euthanasia, particularly in the
London region. For example, along with many other drugs,
Levomepromazine hydrochloride which is a sedative as well as an
RegionLondonEast
North WestSouth WestSouth East
North East (&Yorkshire)
Midlands
Englandanti-psychotic drug, also had a surge in usage in UK [25] at aboutsame time.
Another possible reason for why the London region had relatively
high excess deaths compared to the registered doses of Midazolam
may be due to selection bias by sick patients. It is possible thatmany sick patients from other regions may have sought specialist
treatment from major London hospitals and clinics, which may
have to use other sedatives due to limited supplies of Midazolam.
The London outlier statistics may be another example of Simpson’s
Paradox where a subpopulation may have confounding factors
including selection bias, violating a statistical property which isvalid only for the whole population or for other subpopulations.
Midazolam in the Pandemic
The deliberate use of Midazolam during the COVID-19 pandemic
in causing deaths can be seen from a more normal use of Midazolam
before the pandemic in 2020, as seen in Table 5 below.

Pre-pandemic June
1918 -2020 Correlation% (p-value)
33 (0.09)
25 (0.16)
48 (0.02)
51 (0.01)
39 (0.06)
49 (0.02)

Pandemic since 2020
Correlation %2020 Pre-vaccination
Correlation %

92
89
92
77
87
91

99
99
98
97
96
98

Pandemic Postvaccination
Correlation %
66
75
62
48
74
57

60 (0)
48 (0.02)

88
91

98
98

63
70

Table 5: Correlation of Midazolam Injections and Regional Excess Deaths (p-values < 0.001 or zero unless specified in brackets).
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 12

For 2020, the correlation coefficient (fourth column) for the whole of England spiked to 98 percent, leaving
little doubt about Midazolam‟s role in UK excess deaths in 2020. The overall correlation coefficient (thirdcolumn) for the whole pandemic was 91 percent, contributed substantially by 2020 data. Importantly, even after
2020, in the vaccination era, the correlation coefficient (last column) was still highly statistically significant at
70 percent.
While the pre-pandemic correlations (second column) between response relationships, follow naturally from consideration of thepharmaceutics
of Midazolam.
Midazolam injectionsRegardlessand excess deaths
are factors,
statisticallysignificant
of othersuch
as COVID-19
disease andvaccination, Midazolam was an importantto p-value < 0.05, for
North
West,
South
West,
North
East
(&
confounding factor in explaining excess deaths, competing with other possible factors.
Yorkshire) and Midlands, the correlation coefficient for the whole In summary, Midazolam was strongly and causally associatedwith UK
excessparticularly
in correlation,
2020. It wasconsistency
clearly theof England was only The
48 percent.
main Bradford Hill criteria of medical causality
have
beendeaths,
satisfiedwith strong
proximatecauseofexcessmortality
in
UK,
but
it
was
over time and geography, specificity of effect and consistent temporality of one-month lag in excess unlikely
deathsprimarysuch
cause
in the chainof causality
for deaths,
For 2020, the correlation
coefficient(fourthcolumn)for Bradford
the to befollowing
Midazolaminjections.
Other
Hilltheaspects,
as biologicalgradient
or dose-response
Midazolam wasmostly for accelerated or assisted
whole of England spiked
to 98 percent,littledoubt
about because
relationships,
followleaving
naturallyfromconsiderationof the pharmaceutics
of usedMidazolam.
Midazolam’s role in UK excess deaths in 2020. The overall dying in euthanasia often to alleviate possible suffering in endof-lifeassociatedprotocols.with
Midazolam’s
basedparticularly
on its pharmaceutics
correlation coefficientIn(thirdcolumn)for the whole
pandemicand
wascausallysummary,
Midazolam
was strongly
UK excessrole
deaths,in 2020. Itis
circumscribedin healthguidelines.
91 percent, contributedby 2020 data.
wassubstantiallyclearly the proximate
cause Importantly,
of excess mortality
in UK, but
it was policy
unlikely
to be the primary cause in theeven after 2020, in thevaccinationera, thecoefficientchainof causality
forcorrelation
deaths, because
Midazolam was used mostly for accelerated or assisted dying inoften tosignificant
alleviate at
possiblesufferingin end-of-life
Biological
Gradientprotocols. Midazolam‟s role based on its(last column) was stilleuthanasia
highly statistically
70 percent.
circumscribed
health policy
guidelines.
the close association of UK excess deaths following
Regardless of otherpharmaceutics
factors, suchisas
COVID-19 indiseaseand Clearly
vaccination, Midazolam was an important confounding factor in Midazolam injections suggests significant involvement ofsedatives with euthanasia in the UK pandemic. A systemic policy of
explaining excess deaths,
competingwith other possible factors.
Biological
Gradient
The main Bradford Hill criteria of medical causality have been euthanasia may be evident from the pharmaceutics of Midazolam
the close
association
UK excessdeaths acrossfollowingsuggests
timeMidazolam
and across injections
the various
regionssignificant
during thesatisfied with strongClearlycorrelation,
consistency
overof timeand applied
involvement
withtemporality
euthanasia in
UK pandemic.
A systemicof euthanasia may
be evident
Figure13 showspolicy
the dose-response
relationships
forgeography, specificity
of effect ofandsedatives
consistentofthepandemic.
fromdeaths
the pharmaceutics
of Midazolam
applied acrosstimeandacrossthe various
regions during the pandemic.
Englandover
three
separate
periods.
one-month lag in excess
following Midazolam
injections.
shows
the dose-response
for England over three separate periods.
Other Bradford Hill Figure
aspects,13suchas biologicalgradientrelationships
or dose-Figure 13: UK England Monthly Midazolam doses to Excess Deaths Responses.
Figure 13: UK England Monthly Midazolam doses to Excess Deaths Responses.
The data points in aquathe pre-pandemic
July to period
the pandemic
periodpost
vaccination.
The instatistics
of tothe2020,
doseThereferdatatopoints
in aqua referperiod
to the frompre-pandemic
from July2018
to 2020,
the points
red refer2018 to 2020, the points
in redrefer toperiod
2020, before
the first
pandemic
response
the threeperiods areshown
the first
pandemic
mass
vaccination,
while relationships
the green datainpoints
refer distinct
to the pandemic
periodpostinperiod before mass vaccination,
the greenpoints refer relationships
Table 5.
vaccination.while
The statistics
ofdatathe dose-responsein the three distinct periods are shown in Table 5.

Page 15 of 25
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 13

Period

SampleIntercept (000)Slope

Correlation (%)

p-value

Pre-Pandemic to 2020

18

-12.9

0.803

47

0.0465

12
-43.6
2.35
98
0
2020 Pre-Vaccination
PeriodSampleIntercept (000)Slope
Correlation (%)
p-value
29
-29.9
1.67
70
0
2021 to May 2023
Pre-Pandemic to 2020
18
-12.9
0.803
47
0.04652020 Pre-Vaccination
12
-43.6
2.35
98
0
2021Into theMay
20232020 spike, 29
1.67
70with 38,700 excess deaths.
0
April
35,000 doses-29.9
of Midazolam wereassociated
The statisticalanalysis
shows
that
in
Englandbeforethepandemic,thedose-response
relationshipbetweenMidazolam
Table 5: Regression of Midazolam Injections and Excess Deaths (England: Three Periods to May 2023).
injections and excess deaths was weak and only marginally significant. In 2020 of the pandemic, before
vaccination,
the impactof Midazolam
injections vaccination,
was very strong
and highly
significantinjections
statistically,thethe impactof Midazolam
waswhile
very strong
In the April 2020 spike,
35,000 dosesof Midazolam
were associatedof TheMidazolammoderated
due tosignificant
the competing
influencebut itstatistically,
whileof
thevaccination,
impact of Midazolam
with 38,700 excessimpact
deaths.
statisticallater
analysisshowsundoubtedlythat and highly
highlythe
statisticallysignificant.
in England before remained
the pandemic,
dose-response
relationship later moderated undoubtedly due to the competing influence ofbetween Midazolam injections and excess deaths was weak and vaccination, but it remained highly statistically significant.
Table 5: Regression
Injections
only marginally significant.
In 2020 ofof Midazolam
the pandemic,
beforeand Excess Deaths (England: Three Periods to May 2023).

Figure 14: UK England Monthly Midazolam doses since 2021 to Excess Deaths Responses.
Figure 14: UK England Monthly Midazolam doses since 2021 to Excess Deaths Responses.
Note that the London region is a statistical outlier in the use sedatives which might be even more powerful than Midazolam for
Note that thethe additional
London region
is aotherstatisticaloutlierin the use
Midazolam,the inadditionalof Midazolam, suggestinguse ofsimilareuthanasia,
as ofsuggestedby thesuggesting
comparisons
Table 6. use ofother similar sedatives which might be even more powerful than Midazolam for euthanasia, as suggested by thecomparisons in Table 6.
RegionIntercept Slope
Correlation (%)
p-value
London
-4.81
4.39
66
0.0001p-value
RegionIntercept
Slope
Correlation (%)
East
-4.76
2.03
75
0
-4.81
4.39
66
0.0001
London
North West
-3.43
1.59
62
0.0004
-4.76
2.03
75
0
East
South West
-1.94
0.776
48
0.0078
-3.43
1.59
62
0.0004
North WestSouth East
-4.73
1.59
74
0
-1.94
0.776
48
0.0078South West
North East (& Yorkshire) -3.30
0.669
57
0.0012
-4.73
1.59
74
0
South East
Midlands
-5.08
1.54
63
0.00020.669
570.0012
North East (& Yorkshire) -3.30
Table 6: Regression of Midazolam Injections and Regional Excess Deaths (Post Mass Vaccination since 2021).
-5.08
1.54
63
0.0002
Midlands

Med Clin Res, 2024

Page 16 of 25

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 14

Note that all regional subpopulations have consistently positive correlations, avoiding Simpson‟s Paradox andsuggesting the absence of significant confounding factors in the statistical relationships. That is, even though themathematical details of the regressions may differ quantitatively (due to other minor confounding factors), thefirm conclusion prevails that Midazolam injections have significant causal impact on excess deaths in England.

Note that all regional subpopulations have consistently positive beds were already felt before the pandemic. Therefore, there wasPandemic Euthanasia
correlations, avoiding Simpson’s Paradox and suggesting the apprehension that UK hospitals could not cope with the anticipatedabsence of significant confounding factors in the statistical surge in COVID-19 cases.
With dire predictions from SAGE computer modelling early in 2020, an atmosphere of panic prevailed in therelationships. Thatis, evenmathematicaldetailsof beds in England were halved from 299,000 in 1987/88 to
UK. After
30 thoughyears ofthe
cutbacks[26], NHS
hospital
the regressions141,000
may differ
quantitatively
(due
to
other
minor
clear thathighestof UK
public healthin 2019/20. Shortages of hospital beds wereIt isalready
felt thebeforethe priority
pandemic.
Therefore,
therepolicy,
was early
confounding factors),thefirmconclusion
prevails
that
Midazolaminthepandemic,
was
to
avoid
hospitals
being
overwhelmed,
likeapprehension that UK hospitals could not cope with the anticipated surge in COVID-19 cases.
injections have significant causal impact on excess deaths in those sensationally reported in northern Italy around that time.
England.
The policy,
NHS created
new
March
2020 [27]to facilitate
It is clear that the highest priority of UK public healthearly intheguidelines
pandemic,inwas
to avoid
hospitalsdischarges
fromhospitals,
stating“Unless
required
to be inbeing overwhelmed, like those sensationally reported in northern Italy around that time. The NHS created new
Pandemic Euthanasia(see AnnexB), patientsnot remain
an NHS bed”.
guidelines in March 2020 [27] to facilitate dischargeshospitalfrom hospitals,
stating“Unlessmust
required
to be ininhospitalWith dire predictions
fromB),SAGE
computerin bed”.
(see Annex
patients
must notmodellingremain in earlyan NHS
2020, an atmosphere of panic prevailed in the UK. After 30 years In a move which was later judged irrational [28], many elderlyof cutbacks [26],hospital
Englandwere
halved[28],from many
weredischarged
from hospitaldied andin careIn NHSa movewhichbeds
wasinlater
judgedirrational
elderly
were discharged
from andhospitaldied homes
in care across
299,000 in 1987/88
141,000
in 2019/20.
Shortages
hospital
Englandas shown
homestoacrossEnglandas shown
from anofONS
report [29]in Figure15. from an ONS report [29] in Figure 15.

Figure 15: Number of weekly deaths of care Home residents registered from 14 March 2020 50 2 April, England and Wales.
Figure 15: Number of weekly deaths of care Home residents registered from 14 March 2020 50 2 April,and residents
Wales. died in April 2020 across system which facilitated euthanasia in care homes [32]. A sudden
About 28,000 Englandcare homevoluntary
assisteddying wasunlikely,butortheextent ofEngland, whichAbout
represented
abouthome
one residents
third or 33.5
percent
of surge
28,000 caredied in
April 2020
acrossinEngland,
which
represented
about
one third
33.5
suggesting
iatrogenic
geronticide
all deaths in England.
Asallthere
were
about 375,000
care
home
percent ofdeathsin England.
As there
wereabout nonvoluntary
375,000 care euthanasia,
home residents(three quarters
elderly,some in the
UK has notofbeen
estimated.
residents (threewith
quarters
elderly,somedementia,inand
rest population
dementia,
andthe with
rest disabled)an theEnglish65 million,
the mortality rates for that month
disabled) in an English
of 65
million,the mortality
ratesimplying an April 2020 death rate in care homes about sixty
were 7.5population
percent and
0.128
percent
respectively,that ofandthe national
average.
for that month times
were (X60)
7.5 percent
0.128 percent
respectively, A second fallacy has come from the fact that compared to the huge
implying an April 2020 death rate in care homes about sixty times spike in 2020, fewer elderly deaths occurred after 2021 with mass
Manyof theUK elderly with comorbidities or terminal
illnesses havediedtowith
euthanasia
in carehomes,and hadvaccination,
has ledthe false
conclusionthat
vaccination(X60) that of thenational
average.
not from COVID-19 due to few cases of infections early
in
2020.
The
relativeabsenceof
COVID
infections
wassaved many elderly lives, whereas Midazolam injections and othercorroborated
largely empty
hospitalsillnesses
in early medication
2020 [30],wereas theoverblown-feared
spike2020.
in COVID
significantly
reduced after
The benefit ofMany of the UK
elderly withbycomorbidities
or terminal
hospitalization
never
eventuated.
Even
temporary“Nightingale”
hospitals
constructedfortheexpected
evidence of
have died with euthanasia in care homes, and not from COVID-19 vaccination for the elderly was illusory, but statisticalemergency
wereearly
empty
due to few casesof infectionsin [31].
2020. The relative absence vaccination causing deaths was also illusory, due to misleadingof COVID infections was corroborated by largely empty hospitals data, as shown above in the section containing Figure 5.
in early 2020 [30], as the overblown-feared spike in COVID
hospitalization never eventuated. Even temporary “Nightingale”
PageUK
17 Policyof 25 on Euthanasia
hospitals constructed for the expected emergency were empty [31]. In its definitions, the UK National Health Service (NHS) [33]The circumstances of euthanasia have led to the first common states “Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending a person’s
fallacy that the elderly were particularly vulnerable to COVID, life to relieve suffering” and “Depending on the circumstances,whereas the elderly were vulnerable to the UK health care euthanasia is regarded as either manslaughter or murder. The
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 15

maximum penalty is life imprisonment.” Even assisted suicide isillegal according to the Suicide Act (1961) and is punishable by up
to 14 years’ imprisonment, while suicide itself is not a criminal act.
The above data analysis has shown clearly that most of the
UK excess mortality during the pandemic was associated with
Midazolam use in the euthanasia of the elderly, on a widespread
and apparently coordinated scale. How was this possible wheneuthanasia was still strictly illegal in UK?
New guidelines were rapidly developed in early 2020 by the
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for
managing COVID-19 symptoms, including those at the end-oflife [22]. The rapidly developed new guidelines effectively opened
the door to implement a policy of euthanasia in UK during the
pandemic:“NICE has developed these recommendations in direct response to
the rapidly evolving situation and so could not follow the standard
process for guidance development. The guideline has beendeveloped using the interim process and methods for developing
rapid guidelines on COVID-19.”
The interim process for developing the guidelines includes thefollowing caveats: “no public consultation on the scope”, “there
will be no systematic literature research”, “following WHO
COVID-19 guidance”, “there will be no formal risk of bias
assessment of the evidence”, “there will be no public consultationof the draft guidance”, etc.
Table 5 of the NICE rapid guidelines on treatments in the last days
and last hours of life for managing breathlessness for adult patients
include:• Opioid: Morphine sulfate 10 mg over 24 hours via a syringe
driver, increasing stepwise to morphine sulfate 30 mg over 24hours as required.
• Benzodiazepine if required in addition to opioid: Midazolam 10
mg over 24 hours via the syringe driver, increasing stepwise to
midazolam 60 mg over 24 hours as required.
There were changes in the guidelines [34] for anticipatoryprescribing (AP) of injectable medications in advance of clinicalneeds in UK community palliative care.
Evidently, in an environment of rapidly changing guidelines,
regular oversight procedures for care homes were suspended
by the statutory regulating body, the Care Quality Commission(CQC), and the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.
Amnesty International UK published [35] a 2020 report titled: “Asif expendable: The UK government’s failure to protect older people
in care homes during the COVID-19 pandemic” which stated:“The UK government, national agencies, and local-level bodies
have taken decisions and adopted policies during the COVID-19
pandemic that have directly violated the human rights of older
Med Clin Res, 2024

residents of care homes in England—notably their right to life,
their right to health, and their right to non-discrimination. These
decisions and policies have also impacted the rights of care homeresidents to private and family life, and may have violated theirright not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment.”
Emphasis added. Amnesty International was careful to avoid using
the word: euthanasia, but instead used “violating human rights”– particularly right to life. De facto euthanasia in hospitals andcare homes was made possible by loosening guidelines, lack ofregulatory oversight and the blanket use of “Do Not Attempt
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation” (DNACPR) notices or more
simply “Do Not Attempt Resuscitation” (DNAR) notices.
The use of blanket DNAR notices in hospitals and care homes wasa systemic policy of euthanasia, when it was not investigated or
stopped by government regulators. From a joint investigation by
the House of Commons and House of Lords, the UK Parliament
admitted [36] in September 2020:“Blanket use of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation(DNACPR) notices in care homes constitutes a systematic
violation of individuals’ rights. The Government must ensure that
their blanket use is not allowed.”
Again, the UK government’s response to COVID-19 was asystematic violation of human rights – the right to life, noteuthanasia which is a criminal offence. Many cases werenonvoluntary euthanasia, which were different from voluntary
assisted dying, as the UK Parliament reported [36]:“We have received deeply troubling evidence from numerous
sources that during the Covid-19 pandemic DNACPR notices havebeen applied in a blanket fashion to some categories of person bysome care providers, without any involvement of the individuals or
their families.”“The blanket imposition of DNACPR notices without proper
patient involvement is unlawful. The evidence suggests that theuse of them in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic has been
widespread.”
Emphasis added. The Care Quality Commission (CQC), which isan independent regulator funded from fees of hospitals and carehomes to oversight them, was asked belatedly to review DNACPR
decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic:“It was prompted by concerns about the blanket application of
DNACPR decisions, that is applying them to groups of people
rather than on an assessment of each person’s individual
circumstances, and about making decisions without involving theperson concerned.”
Emphasis added. In its interim report released in November 2020,
the CQC agreed with UK government investigation and observed

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 16

somewhat apologetically [37]:

UK COVID-19 pandemic.

“It is clear that there was confusion and miscommunication
about the application of DNACPRs at the start of the pandemic,
and a sense of providers being overwhelmed. There is evidenceof unacceptable and inappropriate DNACPRs being made at thestart of the pandemic.”

It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss further how
the systemic policy of euthanasia was carried out. The above
discussion serves to explain that uniformity and consistency of thestatistical data, throughout the pandemic and across all regions,relating Midazolam use to excess deaths.

Relative Impact of Vaccination
On explaining UK excess deaths, Midazolam injections havestatistically significant correlation even post-vaccination, whereas
COVID injections had no significant correlation (see Figure 6).
Does vaccination have any impact in explaining any aspect of UKdata?
A systemicOn
policyof euthanasia,
whichdeaths,
is illegal
under UKinjections
laws, mortality
explaining
UK excessMidazolam
have statisticallysignificant correlation even postvaccination,
COVID
injections
had norightsignificant
correlation (see Figure 6). Does vaccination have any
was couchedmerely aswhereas
a violationof humanrights–thetoexplaining
aspect ofpolicy
UK mortality
data? A comparison of relative impact of Midazolam injections andlife. There impact
is muchinmore
to the any
euthanasia
which appears
to have discriminated according to vaccination status, with a bias COVID injections on non-COVID excess deaths is shown incomparison of relative
impact policyof Midazolam
injectionsFigure
and COVID
injections on non-COVID excess deaths
16.
against theA“unvaccinated”.
The systemic
has significant
is
shown
in
Figure16.
effect obscuring an understanding the impact of vaccination in the
Clearly, the “user-pays” regulator was the last to admit its own
failure in regulation and merely repeated the findings of Amnesty
International and the UK Government’s report on human rights in
the COVID-19 pandemic.

Figure 16: UK Monthly Midazolam injections and Non-COVID Excess Deaths.
Figure 16: UK Monthly Midazolam injections and Non-COVID Excess Deaths.
From the right
16, Figure
vaccination
had a negative
Relative impactsof Midazolam
versusvaccination are
FromFigure
the right
16, vaccination
had correlationa negative correlation(-20 percent)impact oninjections
non-COVID
deaths,(-20 percent)impact onbenefit,
non-COVID
deaths, suggesting
benefit,comparedthe2021
period30 Juneto 31 Maysuggesting
but statisticallyinsignificant.
Onbut
the otherhand, forfromonwards
to 2021
May 2023,
there 2023.
was The June
statisticallyainsignificant.
On theothercorrelation
hand, from 2021
onwards
to between
start date Midazolamof the comparison
is due to a five-monthlead in COVID
significant 48
percent(p-value<0.005)and non-COVID
excess deaths
May 2023, (lagged
there wassignificant
48 percent
correlation (p-value
injections,Midazolaminjections
have only a one-month leadonea month),
implyingthat Midazolam
was likely involved
inwhilenon-COVID
deathssince 2021.
<0.005) between Midazolam and non-COVID excess deaths relative to the deaths. Table 7 shows only Midazolam injection had
Midazolaminjections
versusvaccination
are comparedfor correlation
the period to
30excess
June 2021
31(lagged oneRelative
month), impacts
implyingofthat
Midazolam
was likely
involved
statisticallysignificant
deathsto(highlighted
inMaydeaths
2023. since
The Juneto a infive-monthlead inperiod.
COVID injections, while
in non-COVID
2021.start date of the comparison is due
yellow)
the vaccination
Midazolam injections have only a one-month lead relative to the deaths. Table 7 shows only Midazolam
injection
had statistically significant correlation
to excess Non-COVID
deaths (highlighted
in the vaccination
ValuesCOVID deaths
deathsin yellow)
Excess deaths
period.
Midazolam correlation (%)
742
530.04 Excess
0.004
Values p-value
COVID0.73
Non-COVID
deathsdeathsdeathsVaccination correlation (%)
27
-20
-12
7
42
53
Midazolamcorrelation (%)
p-value
0.21
0.36
0.59
0.73
0.04
0.004
p-value
Table 7: Relative Impacts of Midazolam (lead one month) and Vaccination (lead five months) on UK Deaths-20-12
Vaccination correlation (%) 27
Neither Midazolam
norvaccination
were
statisticallycorrelated
of
the
data.
Midazolam, shaded yellow in Table 7, was significantly
0.21
0.36
0.59
p-valuewith COVID deaths, which is not surprising given the unreliability correlated with both non-COVID deaths and excess deaths.
Med Clin Res, 2024

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 17

Table 7: Relative Impacts of Midazolam (lead one month) and Vaccination (lead five months) on UK Deaths

Neither Midazolam nor vaccination were statistically correlated with COVID deaths, which is not surprising
given the unreliability of the data. Midazolam, shaded yellow in Table 7, was significantly correlated with bothVaccination had no significant statistical correlation with UK Attempting to attribute excess deaths solely to either COVID
deaths with a five-month time lag or with any other time lag. disease or COVID vaccination may be erroneous. Applying
the UK, other approaches and methods are needed to establish the relationship between vaccination and excess
Unlike in Australia, this lack of consistent correlation, suggests simplistic models globally to estimate how many millions lives
deaths.
that COVID vaccination has no statistically provable impact on vaccination has saved or how many million deaths vaccination
has caused, without really understanding the actual facts of data
UK deaths: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths or excess deaths.
Implications for Epidemiology
This lack of statistical evidence does not mean that vaccination limitations, has led to a confusion which prolonged bad policy
may not be a primary cause which was likely masked by the causal decisions costing many lives.
The current study of excess deaths in the UK holds important lessons for the epidemiology of the COVID-19
proximity of euthanasia with Midazolam. Given the Australian
pandemic globally, as it has demonstrated that in some countries, such as the UK, specific confounding factors
research which
proved“vaccination
kills” [1], it is highly probable A simple example may illustrate the prevailing fallacy. Figure 17
shouldnot beoverlooked.
that the sustained elevation of the levels of UK excess deaths was shows the pooled weekly total number of deaths for all ages in 27
data-providing[38] partnerand subnational
not due to Attempting
natural causes,
but dueexcess
to vaccination.
However,
forCOVID
to attributedeaths solely
to eitherdisease orEuroMOMO
COVID vaccination
maycountries
be erroneous.
regions,
consistingofAustria,
Belgium,
Cyprus,Denmark,
the epidemiologyofthe
confoundedsituation
in
the
UK,
other
Applying simplistic models globally to estimate how many millions lives vaccination has saved or how many Estonia,
Finland, France,
Germany,(Berlin), Germany
approaches million
and methods
needed tohas
establish
relationshipdeathsarevaccination
caused,thewithout
really understanding
the actual
facts Germanyof data limitations,
has led (Hesse),
Greece,Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta,
between vaccinationand excess
to a confusion
whichdeaths.
prolonged bad policy decisions costing
many Hungary,
lives.
Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,(England),
UKthe(Northern
Ireland),total
UKnumber(Scotland),Implications
Epidemiology
A forsimpleexample may illustrate the prevailing fallacy. UK
Figure17 shows
pooled weeklyof and UK
The currentdeaths
study forof allexcessin the UK holds
important[38](Wales).
ages deathsin 27 data-providing
EuroMOMO
partner countries and subnational regions, consisting
lessons for theof theCyprus,
COVID-19
pandemic
globally,Finland, France, Germany, Germany (Berlin), Germanyof epidemiology
Austria, Belgium,
Denmark,
Estonia,
as it has demonstrated
that insome countries,
such asItaly,
the Luxembourg,
UK,(Hesse), Greece,
Hungary,
Ireland, Israel,
Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain,
specific confounding
factors shouldbe overlooked.
Sweden, Switzerland,
UKnot(England),UK (Northern Ireland), UK (Scotland), and UK (Wales).

Figure 17: Weekly total number of deaths for all ages.
Figure 17: Weekly total number of deaths for all ages.
Ignoring confounding factors in individual countries, the pooled data may not be adequate for proving either case using existing
Ignoring confounding factors in individual countries, the pooled all-cause mortality (solid line) of 27 countries
all-cause mortality (solid line) of 27 countries is shown above their methods.
is shown above their baseline bands (dotted lines). Due to seasonal fluctuations and a slight rise in the baseline
baseline bands (dotted lines). Due to seasonal fluctuations and aover time, Figure 17 is not the clearest way to compare excess deaths.
slight rise in the baseline over time, Figure 17 is not the clearest This paper has shown that for global pandemic epidemiology,
need toleast into two
way to compare
excesscomparing
deaths.
Evidently,
major all-cause mortality peaks, countries
excess deaths
in betheclassified
Europeanat pandemic
havegroups:
never one grouphas
members
such
as
the
US
and
UK
which
have
exceeded the peak of early 2020. The general observation has allowed European governments, with the help of intervened
significantly
medical andclinical virus
protocols
Evidently, flawed
comparingmajorbased
all-causemortality
researchon flawed
data, peaks,
to claimexcessthat excess
deaths arewith
all explainedby COVID
and itsearly fromof thelittle
pandemic.
Anotherhas members
deaths in theEuropeannever exceeded
the peakvariants.
Ourpandemic
paper herehave
has shownthat the COVID
virusthehadstart
evidently
consistentimpactgroupon excessdeaths such asof early 2020.
in theThe
UK.general observation has allowed European Australia and New Zealand which apparently had no such medical
governments, with the help of flawed research based on flawed intervention until the rollout of COVID vaccination. (Australia
voluntary
only recently
in most states,
data, to claimthat excess
deaths are
all explainedby COVID
virushaveallowedSomegovernments,
withpharmaceuticalfunding,
speculatedwith assistedcomputerdying
modellingthat without
exceptVictoriaof which
first allowed
it in 2019,and its variants.
Our paper
heredeaths
has shownthebeen
COVID
virus
vaccination
excesswouldthathave
muchhigher,savingformillions
lives. Equallyunjustified
are thebut also it
happens
to havethe highest
Australian
COVID
had evidently
little consistentimpacton excessdeathsin the UK.
oppositeclaims thatthe data
show thatvaccination
has cost
millionsof lives.
This paper
has shownthat deaths
neitherin 2020.)
may be the case for UK, because currently available data may not be adequate for proving either case using
Some governments,
with pharmaceutical funding, have speculated Summary of Findings
existing methods.
with computer modelling that without vaccination excess The COVID-19 pandemic in UK was iatrogenic, as it did not
This
paper
hasmuchshownhigher,that forglobalmillions
pandemic
epidemiology,
countries
to be classifiedvirus,
at least
two
originatefrom need
the SARS-CoV-2
butintooriginatedfromdeaths would
have
been
savingof lives.
groups: onehas members
US show
and UKMidazolam
which have useintervened
significantlywith likely
medicalandfrom massin euthanasia
and thenlater
Equally unjustified
are group
the opposite
claimssuchthat asthethedata
clinical
early offrom
theThisstartpaperof thehas
pandemic.
groupThe
hasmainmemberssuch
as Australia
New are:vaccination.
findings
supporting
thisandconclusionthat vaccination
hasprotocols
cost millions
lives.
shown Another
Zealandwhich
apparently
had
no
such
medicalintervention
until
the
rolloutof
COVID
vaccination.
(Australia
that neither may be the case for UK, because currently available • There were relatively few cases of infections in early 2020,
allowed voluntary assisted dying only recently in most states, except for Victoria which first allowed it in 2019,www.medclinres.org
Med Clin Res,
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 18
but2024also it happens to have the highest Australian
COVID deaths in 2020.)

Summary of Findings

indicating the non-prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the UK.
• The UK Health Security Agency declared on 19 March 2020, theabsence of any “high consequence infectious disease”, denying theexistence of a pandemic.
• The enormous spike in excess deaths attributed to COVID-19
was inconsistent with the lack of prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2
virus, which was not verified, due to shortages and unreliability of
PCR tests.
• NHS and Nightingale hospitals were mostly empty, confirming
absence of a pandemic.
• The excess deaths were spread uniformly and simultaneously
across all English regions, inconsistent with natural contagion.
• The spikes in excess deaths across all regions were strongly
correlated with Midazolam injections, implicating euthanasia,
particularly of the elderly in care homes.
• On investigation, the UK Government, Amnesty International
and the Care Quality Commission have all acknowledged that “asystemic or structural dysfunction in hospital services” and thewidespread blanket use of “Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary
Resuscitation” (DNACPR) notices in care homes have contributed
to excess deaths in the UK.

pandemic have considered the relative impact of only two factors:
COVID disease and COVID vaccination. Due to the presence ofsignificant confounding factors, claims of observed correlation
between deaths and vaccination for many countries are illusory.

That “COVID vaccination kills” has been proven statistically using
Australian macro-data, which should apply universally. However,this causality has not been confirmed for the UK, because the same
method of proof is not available from UK macro-data due to theconfounding effect of Midazolam use in UK euthanasia.

Statistically, Midazolam injections were highly correlated with UK
excess deaths throughout the pandemic, overwhelming COVID-19
disease or vaccination as other possible explanations for excess
mortality.

A major finding of this paper is that the very high excess deathsin 2020 in the UK were due to Midazolam intervention rather
than SARS-CoV-2 infections, demonstrating the unreliability of
COVID data as evidence of a SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which wasdenied the status of a “High Consequence Infectious Disease” by
UK Health Security Agency in March 2020.
Any claim that COVID vaccination saved lives has little merit,because few lives were threatened by the largely absent SARSCoV-2 virus in the UK; the spike in so-called COVID deaths in2020 was actually euthanasia deaths by Midazolam, which remains
the dominant causal explanation of the pandemic, overwhelming
other factors.
Midazolam injections were agnostic to vaccination status.
Therefore, excess deaths caused by Midazolam were randomly
related to vaccination status, confusing the raw data on “deaths byvaccination status” and thus invalidating most UK studies basedon that flawed data.
The illusion that COVID vaccination was “safe and effective”
was caused by Midazolam injections in UK being very high in2020 and diminishing after vaccination, resulting in falling excess
deaths over time, mistakenly credited to vaccination. This fallacy
is material in justifying a continuation of vaccination policy in UK
and Europe.
Most epidemiological studies of excess deaths in the COVID-19
Med Clin Res, 2024

Only those countries such as Australia, which were apparently freefrom euthanasia and other medical intervention, are suitable forthe epidemiological study of the impact of vaccination on excess
deaths.
Conclusion
The extraordinary spike in UK excess deaths in April 2020 was notdue to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, because there were relatively few
infections and there was no “high consequence infectious disease”,
as officially declared in March 2020.
The UK COVID-19 pandemic was iatrogenic, created withwidespread and persistent use of Midazolam injections in all
regions of England, particularly in care homes, under a systemic
policy of euthanasia. The nature of the euthanasia needs further
investigation.

Midazolam was the common proximal cause of excess deaths in
the pandemic, but there were likely many other primary causes
including comorbidities, infections and vaccination. The data
available are not sufficient to measure the precise impact ofvaccination on excess deaths.
Vaccination was unlikely to have saved many, if any, lives
because the unreliable early data grossly exaggerated COVID
deaths, inflating the extent of the SARS-CoV-2 threat which was
subsequently assumed and projected in computer models which
created illusory benefits.
Most global investigations of COVID-19 epidemiology, only
based on the relative impacts of COVID disease and vaccination,
are probably inaccurate, because their assumptions are generally
false due to the significant presence of confounding factors insome countries, such as the UK.
Conflicts and Funding
The author has no financial or political conflicts of interest and is
not funded by external sources.
Acknowledgment
Lex Stewart, Jeremy Beck and David Richards are thanked for
helpful comments.
References
1. Sy W (2023) Early Indication of Long-Term Impact of COVID
Injections. 26 September 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 19

publication/374261986_Early_Indication_of_Long-Term_
Impact_of_COVID_Injections/stats
2. Sy W (2023) Australian COVID-19 pandemic: A Bradford
Hill analysis of iatrogenic excess mortality. J Clin Exp Immunol 8(2):542-556. https://www.opastpublishers.com/
open-access-articles/australian-covid19-pandemic-a-bradford-hill-analysis-of-iatrogenic-excess-mortality.pdf
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, FDA News Release. https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
4. Corman V, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al. (2020) Detection of 2019
novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR, Euro
Surveill. 25(3):pii=2000045.
5. Neil M, Fenton N, et al. (2022) Official mortality data for
England suggest systematic miscategorisation of vaccine
status and uncertain effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination.
ResearchGate 12 January 2022. https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/357778435_Official_mortality_data_for_England_suggest_systematic_miscategorisation_of_vaccine_
status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination
6. Sy W (2022) Data reporting flaw in plain sight distorting
COVID-19 mortality statistics, ResearchGate, 25 August2022. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374587533_
Data_reporting_flaw_in_plain_sight_distorting_COVID-19_
mortality_statistics [accessed Oct 15 2023].
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19
Vaccine Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting(Updated June 23, 2022), https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/hd-breakthrough.html#report (accessed
15 August, 2022).
8. Neil M, Fenton N, McLachlan S (2021) Discrepancies andinconsistencies in UK Government datasets compromise accuracy of mortality rate comparisons between vaccinated andunvaccinated, ResearchGate 20 October 2021. https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/355437113_Discrepancies_and_inconsistencies_in_UK_Government_datasets_compromise_
accuracy_of_mortality_rate_comparisons_between_vaccinated_and_unvaccinated
9. Office for National Statistics (2023) Estimation method –COVID-19 Un-vaccinated population. Release date: 30 May
2023. https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/estimationmethodcovid19unvaccinatedpopulation
10. Wallace AR (1898) Vaccination a Delusion, Official Evidence
in the Reports of the Royal Commission, Swan Sonnenschien& Co., London, 1898. https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/pdf/
b21356336
11. Office for National Statistics (2023) Deaths registered monthly
in England and Wales, Release date; 23 August 2023. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlyfiguresondeathsregisteredbyareaofusualresidence
12. Rahmani K, Shavaleh R, Forouhi M, et al. (2022) The effecMed Clin Res, 2024

tiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the incidence,
hospitalization, and mortality from COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Front. Public Health, 26 August
2022, Sec. Infectious Diseases: Epidemiology and Prevention
Volume 10 –2022 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.873596
13. Sy W (2023) Simpson’s paradox in the correlations between
excess mortality and covid-19 injections: a case study of iatrogenic pandemic for elderly Australians. Medical & ClinicalResearch 8(7):01-16. https://www.medclinrese.org/open-access/simpsons-paradox-in-the-correlations-between-excessmortality-and-covid19-injections-a-case-study-of-iatrogenicpandemic.pdf
14. Office for National Statistics (2022) Excess deaths in Englandand Wales: March 2020 to June 2022, 20 September 2022.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/
birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/excessdeathsinenglandandwalesmarch2020tojune2022/2022-09-20
15. UK Health Security Agency. Guidance: High consequence
infectious diseases. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid
16. Sy W (2023) Australian Excess Deaths: Moving the Goalposts.
Principia Scientific International, 29 August 2023. https://principia-scientific.com/australian-excess-deaths-moving-the-goalposts/
17. Petersen E, Koopmans M, et al. (2020) Comparing SARSCoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics. The Lancet
20: e238-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30484-9
18. Naughton L (2021) Interview with Funeral Director, UK:
Deaths Jumped 250% When Injections Began, Interviews Funeral Director John O'Looney. BitChute https://www.bitchute.
com/video/iopPf0YM6m7C/
19. Alexander P. 2 graphs of UK's data (2017 to 2022), one on
excess mortality, the other on the powerful sedative midazolam usage; what do you see in terms of March 2020 & March
2021 in both graphs? Alexander COVID News-Dr. Paul Elias,
12 Mar 2023. https://palexander.substack.com/p/2-graphs-ofuks-data-2017-to-2022
20. OpenPrescribing. Items for Midazolam 10mg/2ml solution for
injection ampoules by all regional teams. https://openprescribing.net/analyse/#org=regional_team&numIds=1501041T0AAAAAA&denom=nothing&selectedTab=chart
21. World Health Organization. Model List Essential Medicines,
26 July 2023, 23rd List. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/371090/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.02-eng.pdf?sequence=1
22. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. COVID-19
rapid guideline: managing symptoms (including at the endof life) in the community, 3 April 2020. https://web.archive.
org/web/20200409054527/https:/www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng163/resources/covid19-rapid-guideline-managingsymptoms-including-at-the-end-of-life-in-the-communitypdf-66141899069893
23. MedlinePlus, Midazolam Injection. US Government National
Library of Medicine. https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/
a609014.html

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 20

24. Gamblin V, Berry V, et al. (2020) Midazolam sedation in
palliative medicine: retrospective study in a French centerfor cancer control. BMC Palliat Care 19(1):85. doi: 10.1186/
s12904-020-00592-3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305615/
25. Frazer JS, Frazer GR (2021) Analysis of primary care prescription trends in England during the COVID-19 pandemic compared against a predictive model. Fam Med Community Health 9(3):e001143. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/34344766/
26. The King’s Fund (2021) NHS hospital bed numbers: past,present, future, 05 November 2021 https://www.kingsfund.
org.uk/publications/nhs-hospital-bed-numbers
27. National Health Service (2020) COVID-19 Hospital Discharge Service Requirements. 19 March 2020. https://assets.
publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/911541/COVID-19_hospital_discharge_service_requirements_2.pdf
28. Dyer C (2022) Covid-19: Policy to discharge vulnerable patients to care homes was irrational, say judges. BMJ
377:o1098 https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1098
29. Office for National Statistics (2021) Deaths involving
COVID-19 in the care sector, England and Wales: deaths registered between week ending 20 March 2020 and week ending 2 April 2021 Release date: 11 May 2021. https://www.
ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecaresectorenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetweenweekending20march2020andweekending2april2021
30. West D (2020) NHS hospitals have four times more empty
beds than normal, HSJ, 14 April 2020. https://www.hsj.co.uk/
acute-care/nhs-hospitals-have-four-times-more-empty-bedsthan-normal/7027392.article

31. Day M (2020) Covid-19: Nightingale hospitals set to shut
down after seeing few patients BMJ 7 May 2020; 369 doi:
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1860
32. Menage J (2021) Assisted dying is open to Abuse. BMJ
2021;374:n2128.
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.
n2128/rr-11
33. National Health Service (2023) Euthanasia and assisted suicide, 12 July 2023. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/euthanasia-and-assisted-suicide/
34. Antunes B, Bowers B, et al. (2020) Anticipatory prescribing
in community end-of-life care in the UK and Ireland during
the COVID-19 pandemic: online survey. BMJ Supportive &Palliative Care 10:343-349. https://spcare.bmj.com/content/
bmjspcare/10/3/343.full.pdf
35. Amnesty International United Kingdom. As if expendable:
The UK government’s failure to protect older people in carehomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. 4 October 2020.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/EUR45/3152/2020/en/
36. UK Parliament. The Government’s response to COVID-19:
human rights implications, Joint Committee on Human
Rights, House of Commons House of Lords, 21 September
2020, https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/2649/
documents/26914/default
37. Care Quality Commission, Review of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation decisions during the COVID-19
pandemic, Interim Report, November 2020, https://www.cqc.
org.uk/sites/default/files/20201204%20DNACPR%20Interim%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf
38. Euromomo, Pooled number of deaths by age group. Graphand maps, Last updated on week 44, 2023. https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

Copyright: ©2024 Wilson Sy. This is an open-access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,provided the original authors and source are credited.
Med Clin Res, 2024

View publication stats

www.medclinres.org

Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 21