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 COVID-
19 Pandemic

Preprint · January 2024

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13654.42560

CITATIONS READS
0 62,028

1 author:

Wilson Sy
Investment Analytics
67 PUBLICATIONS 548 CITATIONS

SEE 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 statistically
very 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 are
causally predictive of Australian excess deaths, suggesting
the Australian pandemic is iatrogenic [2]. Believing that the
iatrogenesis by COVID injections may be universally relevant,
we studied closely the case of United Kingdom, because its Office
for National Statistics (ONS) is reputed to have some of the most
accurate 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 the
risks and benefits of vaccination, but only if the data were accurate,
being free from data entry errors. Many data errors originated from
the flawed PCR test, which does not detect presence of the SARS-
CoV-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, which
appear 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 the
flawed data entry and reporting convention [7] from the Centers for
Med Clin Res, 2023 www.medclinres.org
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which may have recorded
status lagging actual status by at least 14 days. Essentially, the death
of a recently injected person may not be recorded in the database
of 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 accuracy
of data collection has not advanced in the United Kingdom for
over 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 and
unvaccinated in limited areas or selected groups of patients,
we turn to the only really important evidence, those ‘masses of
national experience’...”
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, an
eminent peer and friend of Charles Darwin, the method we have
used (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 doses
of COVID vaccination, to perform detailed statistical analysis to
draw broad and robust epidemiological conclusions.
This paper follows the Wallace Method by examining the “masses
of national experience” of the pandemic which are the all-cause
and excess mortality data over time and across the regions of
England.
Many published statistical findings, based on data misdirection,
are internally inconsistent and are contradicted by macro-data
of the Wallace Method, as shown here for UK. These factual
contradictions show up as data anomalies, which are mortality data
facts which cannot be explained by data misdirection. Two main
data anomalies in April 2020 and January 2021 are discussed in
detail below in successive sections.
Another important data anomaly is the absence, since 2021, of
any statistically significant relationship between vaccination
and mortality, even when mortality data are variously lagged
relative to the vaccination data. Therefore, apparently there is no
correlation statistically, positive or negative, between vaccination
and mortality.
This counter-intuitive absence of a relationship between
vaccination and excess deaths and other anomalies are resolved in
this paper by showing the existence of a strong confounding factor,
which is a strong positive correlation between Midazolam use and
excess 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 the
implications of the findings on how UK health policy has led to
the observed outcomes of euthanasia and iatrogenic geronticide.
The UK findings raise strong doubt about many epidemiological
findings 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 published
by ONS [11]. The data collated from 2015 to July 2023 are shown
in 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 from
counts 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
deviation overlay the green
around curve with
the baseline, to show the significance of all-cause mortality outside the expected band
the baseline (as expectation), with seasonal fluctuations, and For
(see an example below). However, seasonal greater clarity,
fluctuations makeseasonal fluctuations
the relative are removed
significance of excessbydeaths
displaying
visually
a one standard deviation harder
band around the baseline, to show the excess
to discern, obscuring statistical significance. deaths directly where excess mortality is calculated as
significance of all-cause mortality outside the expected band (see deviations from the baseline, which is defined by the pre-pandemic
For greater clarity, seasonal fluctuations are removed by displaying excess deaths directly where excess
Med Clin Res, 2024 www.medclinres.org
mortality is calculated as deviations Volume 9 period
from the baseline, which is defined by the pre-pandemic | Issue 2using
| 2 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
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 statistically
significant.
The red curve with the right axis shows the excess mortality death
counts. 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, these
casual observations of causation are shown below to be another
example of Simpson’s Paradox, where confounding factors were
overlooked and the correlations were invalid [12].
Specifically as indicated [13], a common error of those studies
comes from data selection bias, where early studies, with
synchronous correlation, occurring only in a selected subset of the
data, 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 to
affect 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
2020 in its calculation ofThe
the errors
2022 baseline
of earlierand therefore
studies ONS
[12] can were placed
be understood, in the
if those broader
results werecontexts
placed inoftheother epidemiological
broader contexts of other
epidemiological
excess deaths for 2022 differ variables
from ours as will and in below.
be discussed hindsight,variables
with fullerand
setsinofhindsight,
available data.
with Illustrated
fuller setshere
of are many anomalies
available data.
Since the pandemic startingandininconsistencies
2020, there haveof UK datapersistent
been which haveIllustrated
led to inferences
here are of many
erroneous conclusions
anomalies and to harmful policies.
and inconsistencies of UK
elevation of excess mortality, characterized sometimes by sharp data which have led to inferences of erroneous conclusions and to
Anomaly
spikes. The red curve for monthly of April
excess deaths2020
as percentage of harmful policies.
the baseline shows nevertheless a trend decline from 2020 before
vaccination to after 2021To establishsuggesting
onwards, even more(misleadingly
clearly the statistical significance
as Anomaly of the
of April excess deaths, they are measured as percentages
2020
of the
discussed below) a beneficial baseline,
effect as well as units of standard
of vaccination. To deviation (sigma)
establish even moreof clearly
the monthly fluctuations
the statistical of the baseline,
significance of the as
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]:
Note that the huge spike inThe left2020
April axis reached
shows excess deaths of
100 percent as the
percentages of the baseline. Note that the huge spike in April 2020 reached
100 percent of the baseline. Since the monthly standard deviation of excess deaths as a percentage the 2015-
baseline. Since the monthly standard deviation of excess deaths as “The months with the highest number of total excess deaths were
2019 baseline is 5.1 percent (“one sigma”), the huge spike was a 20-sigma event, shown on the right axis. This
a 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, in an early
“The monthsversion of its
with the latestnumber
highest Doubling normal
of total death
excess ratewere
deaths in April
April2020,
2020 (“a 98.8%
(43,796 increase”)
excess deaths, 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 politically
the 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 was
2020 2021 2022
Baseline (000) 532 532 532
Actual (000) 608 586 577
Excess (000) 76 54 45
% Excess 14.3 10.2 8.5
Sigma (Mo Av) 2.8 1.9 1.8
Table 1: UK Annual All-Cause and Excess Mortality.
All numbers in this paper are expressed, at most, to three
significant figures for ease of reading. On an annual basis, Table
1 shows that both all-cause mortality and excess mortality have
consistently 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 have
been interpreted erroneously as effective in reducing excess deaths
of 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 to
incorrect attribution of the 2020 death spike.
Like the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), the Office for
National Statistics (ONS) also excluded 2020 in its calculation
of the 2022 baseline, but for diametrically opposite reasons. For
Australia [16], 2020 was a low mortality year, exclusion of which
leads to higher baseline and lower calculated excess mortality. On
the other hand for UK, 2020 was a high mortality year, exclusion
of which leads to lower baseline and higher calculated excess
Med Clin Res, 2024 www.medclinres.org
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 is
obvious apparently from Figure 2, that COVID injections may have
saved lives, because with mass vaccination since 2021 the rates of
excess deaths have decreased systematically, as Table 1 confirms
– vaccination was associated apparently, but misleadingly, with
fewer excess deaths over time.
2022 (ONS) 2020-2022 Av 2023 (to July)
611 532 320
577 590 352
34 58 32
5.6 11.0 10.0
1.1 2.2 2
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 be
true” 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 the
deaths to COVID in March/April 2020 is inconsistent with the
number of COVID cases in that period, as shown in Figure 3.
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 4
Figure 3: UK Monthly New Covid cases and New Covid Deaths.

Figure 3 shows inconsistentFigurecorrelation between

3: UK Monthly New COVID cases andnot
Covid cases Newresolve
CovidtheDeaths.
inconsistency. If there were a shortage of tests, then
(green line) and COVID deaths (red line), except for early 2021 the registration of the large number of COVID deaths could not
when mass “vaccination” was 3first
Figure showsrolled out. The most
inconsistent glaring
correlation haveCOVID
between been verified
cases by PCRline)
(green testsand
andCOVID
thereforedeaths
they were arbitrarily
(red line), except
anomaly is in early 2020 when 2021
for early relatively
when fewmasscases led to a was
“vaccination” assigned.
first rolled out. The most glaring anomaly is in early 2020 when
disproportionate numberrelatively
of allegedfew COVID deaths
cases led to asuch that the
disproportionate number of COVID deaths, such that the infection fatality rate (or
infection fatality rate (ormore
moreaccurately
accurately case
casefatality rate)
fatality waswas
rate) very high
Given at the
24.3data
percent, when the
of Figure dataUK
3, the are case
takenfatality
on theirrate
face(CFR)
values.of
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, compared
On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization to later (WHO)
CFR from declared the global
the Omicron pandemic
variant based
of 0.18 on 4,291
percent. deaths
The high
worldwide. In April 2020, the UK data showed 35,000 new COVID deaths
On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) fatality rate was inconsistent with published research findings [17] which represent an extraordinary
increase
declared the global pandemic in aonvery
based short
4,291 time,worldwide.
deaths particularly that
whenearlytherein were only 139,000
the pandemic new coronavirus
the “new COVID cases in April 2020,
SARS-CoV-2 is
moreover, the UK cumulative total cases did not exceed 500,000 (less than
In April 2020, the UK data showed 35,000 new COVID deaths less deadly but far more transmissible than MERS-CoV or SARS- one percent of the population) until
after September
which represent an extraordinary thatinyear.
increase a very short time, CoV.”
particularly when there were only 139,000 new COVID cases
in April 2020, moreover,While there
the UK were suggestions
cumulative total casesthatdid
UKnotmayThehaveenormous
had a shortage
April of2020
PCR spike
tests available early indeaths
in UK excess the pandemic
may
which may explain the relatively small number of COVID cases, but this explanation
exceed 500,000 (less than one percent of the population) until after have required fewer cases of infection to cause the deaths does not resolve ifthe
September that year. inconsistency. If there were a shortage of tests, then the registration
transmission of the large
were localized number numbers
to limited of COVIDofdeaths could
regions;
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 all
percent, 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 less
deadly 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 the
deaths 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.

Region April All-cause Excess Excess (%

Baseline Deaths Deaths Baseline)
London 4,140 12,200 8,030 194
East 4,840 9,510 4,670 97
Med Clin Res, 2024 North West 5,960
www.medclinres.org 12,400 6,390 107
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 5
South West 4,720 7,600 2,880 61

Page 6 of 25
 Region April Baseline All-cause Deaths Excess Deaths Excess (% Baseline)
London 4,140 12,200 8,030 194
East 4,840 9,510 4,670 97
North West 5,960 12,400 6,390 107
South West 4,720 7,600 2,880 61
South East 6,840 12,800 5,980 87
South East 6,840 12,800 5,980 87
North East (& Yorkshire) 6,610
North East (& Yorkshire) 12,300 6,610 5,730
12,300 87
5,730 87
Midlands Midlands 8,310 16,700 8,310 8,390
16,700 101
8,390 101
England England 41,400 83,500 41,400 83,500
42,100 42,100
102 102
UK (& Wales) 44,300 88,100 43,800 99
UK (& Wales) 44,300 88,100 43,800 99
Table 2: UK Regions Excess Mortality April 2020.
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 loosely
referred, in referred, in thediscussions,
the following following as regions.
UK. The seven regions in Table 2 are geographically identified in
discussions, as UK. The seven regions
Figure 4,inwhere
Tablethey
2 are
aregeographically
amalgamated 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
excess deaths, less expected isFigure 4: UK
the near Regions
tripling of ONS
(3X) Data.
of all-cause indicated that the huge spike in death may not have been due to
mortality compared to the baseline with 194 percent
Unsurprisingly, the smallexcess
area ofdeaths.
London had SARS-CoV-2 virus.excess
one of the highest This deaths,
possiblelessmisattribution to COVID-19
expected is the near tripling
All other regions also had very(3X)highofexcess deaths,
all-cause the South
mortality comparedWestto thewas confirmed
baseline by the
with 194 UK excess
percent Healthdeaths.
SecurityAllAgency [15], also
other regions mentioned
had
very high
region having the lowest 61 percent excessdeaths,
excess deaths, which
the Southis West
still region having
earlier, the declared
which lowest 61 that
percent excess
as of deaths,2020,
19 March whichCOVID-19
is still highlywas
highly 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 explanation for the
spread of high excess deaths in all regions within yet to abevery
explained, before
short period wouldmass vaccination
require or any virus
the SARS-CoV-2 othertofactors
be
April 2020 data, then the widetransmitted
geographical spread of high excess were available, as discussed 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 the
contradicts period would require
COVID-19 hypothesistheand the unfounded popular belief that most elderly who died early were
SARS-CoV-2 virus to be transmittedevidence thatverytherapidly
elderly were
and particularly
be very vulnerable
AnomalytoofCOVID-19,
January 2021which was unlikely, not being prevalent.
lethal at the same time, which is biologically unlikely. The data A similar anomaly occurred in January 2021 suggesting also a
anomaly contradicts the COVID-19 In conclusion,
hypothesisthe UKanddata
the anomaly
unfounded of April 2020, where the data
misclassification on COVID cases
of non-COVID and to
deaths deaths are inconsistent,
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 were evidence that is, unvaccinated individuals who died of non-COVID
to COVID-19 was confirmed by the UK Health Security Agency [15], mentioned earlier, which
causes, may
the elderly were particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, which was have been misclassified as COVID deaths.
declared that as of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 was not a “high consequence infectious disease”. Therefore, This type of data thisflaw
unlikely, not being prevalent. data anomaly leaves the huge spike in has occurred in excess
the non-COVID the history
deathsofyet
UKtodata as Alfred before
be explained, Wallacemass wrote
vaccination or any other factors were available, [10] as
(p.discussed
28, p. 30) on smallpox:
below.
In conclusion, the UK data anomaly of April 2020, where the
Anomaly 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 by
an alleged greatly diminished fatality in the vaccinated is not explicable,…the two classes of facts
“…whereas the other result, of a greatly
taken togetherincreased
thus renderfatality Emphasis
it almostincertain added. That
that vaccination is, during
has never saved athe smallpox
single epidemic of the
human life.”
the unvaccinated so exactly balanced by an alleged greatly second half of the 19th century, the justification of compulsory
diminished fatality in the vaccinated
Emphasis added.isThat
not is,
explicable,…the smallpox
two epidemic
during the smallpox of vaccination in UK
the second half was19th
of the duecentury,
to the same type of data flaw
the justification
classes of facts taken together thus render
of compulsory smallpox it vaccination
almost certain that
in UK of confusing
was due to the samevaccinated with
type of data flawunvaccinated
of confusing as in 2020.with
vaccinated The likely
unvaccinated
vaccination has never saved a singleashuman
in 2020. The likely confusion confusion
life.” also betweenalsoCOVID
betweendeaths
COVIDand non-COVID excess deaths excess
deaths and non-COVID
[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, non-
With 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 so
observe for the UK pandemic in January
exactly balanced 2021: greatly
by an alleged diminishedinexplicable.
…a greatly fatality in non-COVID deaths is not explicable…
increased fatality in the COVID deaths so exactly balanced by an
alleged greatly diminished fatality
The words in in
boldnon-COVID deaths
were substituted is above
in the In January
not quote of Alfred2021, new[10].
Wallace COVID
Why wascases
therewere still
a spike relatively too
in COVID
explicable… deaths and a compensating plunge in the non-COVID subdued to explain
deaths? The spiketheinspike
COVIDin COVID
deaths indeaths
Januaryand there
2021 waswas no
slightly higher than that of April 2020, but was apparent
incongruous withfor
reason total
theexcess
plungedeaths which were
in non-COVID substantially
deaths. The data were
The words in bold werelower in January
substituted in 2021 compared
the above quotetoof
theAlfred
first spike in April 2020.
apparently This meant suggesting
not explicable, that for the numbers
errors in torecording
tally, non-COVID
COVID deaths had to plunge deeply below expectation, which is inexplicable.
Wallace [10]. Why was there a spike in COVID deaths and a deaths, which are clear evidence confirming the unreliability of
compensating 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 of
there was no apparent reason for the plunge in non-COVID deaths. The data were apparently not explicable,
April 2020, but was incongruous with total
suggesting errors excess COVID
in recording deaths which To analyze
deaths, which are clearthe data confusion
evidence confirmingbetween COVID of
the unreliability deaths
COVID and non-
were substantially lower dataingenerally
January[5, 2021
6]. compared to the first COVID deaths, we summarize the data in Figure 4 with Table 3.
COVID-19
To analyze the data confusion between COVID deathsNon-COVID Total Excess
and non-COVID deaths, we summarize the data in Figure
4 with Mar-Dec
Table 3. 2020 95,000 (15,700) 79,300
2021 81,000 (26,800) 54,200
COVID-19 Non-COVID Total Excess
2022 39,300 5,770 45,100
Mar-Dec 2020 95,000 (15,700) 79,300
Jan-May 2023 11,500 13,600 25,100
2021 81,000 (26,800) 54,200
2022
Mar 2020-May 2023 39,300227,000 5,770 (23,100) 45,100 204,000
Table 3: Decomposition of UK Excess Deaths.
Evidently (columns 2 and 4), both COVID-19 deaths and total Page 8 of 25
was inexplicable. The spike in claimed COVID deaths, as high as
excess deaths have been falling annually from 2020 to 2022, but that in April 2020, would have conveniently persuaded the public
non-COVID deaths have been rising generally, except for 2021 due to accept vaccination, just as it was being rolled out in January
to the strange anomaly in January 2021, when the 26,800 plunge in 2021.
non-COVID excess deaths (see the yellow cell in the third column)
Med Clin Res, 2024 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 f
positives. 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
deaths are unreliable, because they areVaccination and Excess
based on flawed PCR tests Deaths
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 This
virus and often produced false positives. addressing
fundamentalthe enigma
flaw of excessdeaths
COVID deathsand
in non-COVID
2020, consider the deaths
excess Australian explanation
remained elevated.in vaccina
causality [1,2]. It was predicted that mass vaccination reaching population
facilitated the inconsistent attribution of COVID cases and deaths. In Australia, the excess deaths since 2021 were shown likely herd immunity would
to end the
In conclusion, in 2020 and early 2021, spikes in UK COVID deaths have been caused by COVID injections, where deaths followed elevated
pandemic, but this did not happen. Instead, COVID deaths and non-COVID excess deaths remained
were likely misclassification of non-COVID deaths, which begs consistently and predictably after injections five-months later [1,2].
the question: what caused the surges Inin
Australia,
non-COVID the excess
deathsdeaths
early since 2021 were
On average, shown likely
normally it takestosome
have time
been in
caused by COVID
a multistage injections, w
process
in the pandemic? If the beginning of the UK pandemic was not for the injections to cause the generation of antibodies in response normal
deaths followed consistently and predictably after injections five-month later [1,2]. On average,
takes what
largely related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, some wastimeit in a multistage
related to? process
to for the
antigenic injections
cellular to cause
production the generation
of toxic of antibodies
spike proteins which arein respons
antigenic cellular production of toxic potentially pathogenic, possibly causing death. The correspondingcausing de
spike proteins which are potentially pathogenic, possibly
Vaccination and Excess Deaths The corresponding relationship of COVID injections
relationship of COVID and injections
five-monthand lagged excess deaths
five-month laggedfor UK data is sh
excess
in Figure 6.
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.
There were clear positive correlations Thereinwere
selected
clear periods
positive (e.g. In 2020,
correlations since most
in selected medical
periods (e.g. treatments
first half offor COVID-19
2022), infection
but the whole dataset, wit
first half of 2022), but the whole dataset, without
selection selection
bias, shows bias, such
a negative as Ivermectin,
correlation Hydroxychloroquine,
of -12 percent, etc. were
but the relationship forbidden
is not or signifi
statistically
shows a negative correlation of -12with percent, but the
a p-value of relationship not recommended
0.587. Therefore, in many countries,
the causal relationship observedexcept for selected
in Australia, medicines
of COVID injections b
is not statistically significant with asources
p-valueofofharm, cannot
0.587. be similarly
Therefore, suchestablished for UK.
as Remdesivir On US
in the the other hand, these in
and Midazolam data
thealso show
UK, we no indica
that vaccination
the causal relationship observed in Australia, of COVID had injections
any beneficial effects onthe
investigate UKpossible
excess role
deaths.
of Midazolam in the UK pandemic.
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
had any beneficial effects on UK excess deaths. gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), a naturally occurring inhibitor
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-term
with 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 pharmaceutical
statistically, 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 lead
and COVID injections later in the pandemic, suggest alternative to permanent brain injury or death.” Midazolam is used in US
explanations are required for the UK pandemic. executions.
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 French
thanhospital,
five days,60and
mg could was suggested
in that hospital only oneearly by the
third of anecdotes of UK
54 palliative funeral had
sedations directors
patient[18]
consent,
cause death in 24 hours and at that rate few survive more than and more recently by statistical
suggesting both voluntary and nonvoluntary euthanasia which will be discussed below. observations [19]. Indeed, the
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
The possible both voluntary
widespread and Prescribing
use of Midazolam Dataset [20],
in the pandemic which includes,
was suggested by anecdotes
early by English regions
of UK(asfuneral
nonvoluntary euthanasia which
directors [18] and more recently by statistical observations [19]. Indeed, the Bennett Institute for mg/2
will be discussed below. shown in Table 2 above), prescriptions of Midazolam 10 Appliedml Data
Science publishes a raw English Prescribing solution
Datasetfor[20],
injection
whichampoules,
includes, asbyshown in regions
English Figure 7.
(as shown in Table
The possible widespread 2use of Midazolam
above), in ofthe
prescriptions pandemic10 mg/2 ml solution for injection ampoules, as shown in Figure 7.
Midazolam

Figure 7: Items for Midazolam 107:

Figure mg/2 ml for
Items solution for injection
Midazolam 10 mg/2ampoules by all
ml solution forreagions.
injection ampoules by all reagions.
As noted in several blog posts on the internet [19], doses of Midazolam injections show visually remarkable
As noted in several blog posts on the internet [19], doses of regions in England have been calculated individually and
correlation with excess deaths for UK. In Figure 8, excess deaths for various regions in England have been
Midazolam injections show visually remarkable
calculated correlation
individually with attempted
and attempted colourtomatched
colour matched to Figure 7.
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
Midazolam injections and excess
Visually,deaths
Figuresacross
7 and all regions
8 suggest by correlation
a high deliberate allocation.
between Midazolam injections and excess deaths across all
regions similar
in England. Figure 8 also shows in England. Figure
regional 8 also shows similar regional numerical distribution of excess deaths, particularly in
numerical
Med Clin Res, 2024
April 2020, as though by deliberate allocation.
www.medclinres.org 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

Midazolam Correlation Aggregating over English regions, the time series

between relationship
Midazolam betweenand
injections Midazolam injections
excess deaths and excess
in England is deaths
in England is shown in Figure 9.
Aggregating over English regions, the time series relationship shown in Figure 9.

Clearly,Midazolam
Figure 9: UK Engliand Monthly Midazolam injections
Injections andand excess
Excess deaths in England are highly correlated, but not synchronously,
Deaths
because
Figure medication generally
9: UK Engliand does Midazolam
Monthly not have instantaneous
Injections andimpact
Excess and also reporting of dosages used and
Deaths
registration of deaths may lag. Shifting the time series for Midazolam injections one-month forward, very high
Clearly, Midazolam injections and excess
correlation is seendeaths in England
in Figure 10. are dosages used and registration of deaths may lag. Shifting the time
highly correlated, but not synchronously, because medication series for Midazolam injections one-month forward, very high
generally 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.
deaths lagged one month Theaftervery high correlation
Midazolam (coefficient
injections is largely 91 The
percent) between excess
misclassification deaths deaths,
of COVID lagged one month
possibly after Midazolam
deliberate, also
due to the first two enormous spikes to early 2021. From April led to their high correlation with Midazolam injectionstoasMay
injections is largely due to the first two enormous spikes to early 2021. From April 2021 onwards 2023,
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.

Figure 11: UKThe high correlation

Monthly Midazolam (77Injections
percent) between
(Lead OneCOVID
Month)deaths
and lagged
COVIDone month after Midazolam injections is
Deaths.
largely due to Figure
the first 11:
two UK
enormous
Monthly Midazolam Injections (Lead Oneonwards
spikes to early 2021. From April 2021 Month)toand
MayCOVID
2023, there was no
Deaths.
significant correlation (with any lags), implying that Midazolam had no statistical relationship to COVID
The high correlation (77 percent)
deaths, suggesting between
a change COVID deaths
in 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 enormousThe spikes to early
temporal 2021. between
separation From April 2021 onwards
Midazolam cause andtoexcess
since Page
2020,
deaths 12
effect of 25
indicating
was palliative
consistently oneuse for for
month assisted
the dying or other
May 2023, there
wholewas no significant
pandemic since 2020,correlation
indicating(with any use
palliative lags), euthanasia.
for assisted dying or Midazolam was theMidazolam
other euthanasia. proximate,was if not
the the primary, cause
proximate, if had
implying that Midazolam not no
the statistical
primary, cause of excesstodeaths
relationship COVID in the of
UK.excess
Statistically,
deathscorrelations
in the UK.improve substantially
Statistically, correlations improve
whenaMidazolam
deaths, suggesting change in injections
assignment leadpolicy.
excess deaths by one month for all regions
substantially in England,
when as illustrated
Midazolam by Figure
injections 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.
Med Clin Res, For www.medclinres.org
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 lags
of one-month have been applied to excess deaths. Before the
pandemic, the correlations were mostly moderate with low
statistical significance.
Midazolam in the 2020 Death Spike
The extraordinary death spike in April 2020 caused by Midazolam
has attracted disproportionally little attention. Table 4 shows that
in that month 35,600 doses of Midazolam were associated with
42,000 excess deaths, which is virtually an average of one dose
per death.

Region Midazolam Doses Excess Deaths Dose per Death Excess % Baseline
(Rank) (rank)
London 2,680 8,030 0.33 (7) 194 (1)
East 3,990 4,680 0.85 (4) 96.6 (4)
North West 5,210 6,390 0.82 (5) 107 (2)
South West 4,560 2,880 1.58 (1) 61 (7)
South East 6,000 5,980 1 (3) 87.4 (5)
North East (& Yorkshire) 6,920 5,730 1.21 (2) 86.6 (6)
Midlands 6,210 8,390 0.74 (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 other
regions 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 of
Midazolam 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
anti-psychotic drug, also had a surge in usage in UK [25] at about
same 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 that
many 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 is
valid 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.

Region Pre-pandemic June Pandemic since 2020 2020 Pre-vaccination Pandemic Post-
1918 -2020 Correlation Correlation % Correlation % vaccination
% (p-value) Correlation %
London 33 (0.09) 92 99 66
East 25 (0.16) 89 99 75
North West 48 (0.02) 92 98 62
South West 51 (0.01) 77 97 48
South East 39 (0.06) 87 96 74
North East (& 49 (0.02) 91 98 57
Yorkshire)
Midlands 60 (0) 88 98 63
England 48 (0.02) 91 98 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 (third
column) 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 the
Midazolam injectionsRegardless
and excess deaths
of otherare factors,
statistically
suchsignificant
as COVID-19pharmaceutics
disease and of Midazolam.
vaccination, Midazolam was an important
to 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 associated
of England was only The48 percent.
main Bradford Hill criteria of medical causality with UK haveexcess
beendeaths, particularly
satisfied with strongin correlation,
2020. It wasconsistency
clearly the
over time and geography, specificity of effect and consistent temporality of one-month lag in excess unlikely
proximate cause of excess mortality in UK, but it was deaths
For 2020, the correlation
following coefficient
Midazolam (fourth column)
injections. Other the to be
for Bradford Hilltheaspects,
primarysuchcause in the chain
as biological of causality
gradient for deaths,
or dose-response
whole of England spiked to 98 percent,
relationships, followleaving little
naturally doubt
from about because
consideration Midazolam was
of the pharmaceutics of used mostly for accelerated or assisted
Midazolam.
Midazolam’s role in UK excess deaths in 2020. The overall dying in euthanasia often to alleviate possible suffering in end-
correlation coefficientIn(third column)
summary, for the whole
Midazolam pandemicand
was strongly of-lifeassociated
wascausally protocols.with
Midazolam’s
UK excessrole basedparticularly
deaths, on its pharmaceutics
in 2020. Itis
91 percent, contributed
wassubstantially by 2020 data.
clearly the proximate cause Importantly, circumscribed
of excess mortality in UK, but in health
it was policy guidelines.
unlikely to be the primary cause in the
even after 2020, in the vaccination
chain era, the
of causality forcorrelation coefficient
deaths, because Midazolam was used mostly for accelerated or assisted dying in
(last column) was stilleuthanasia
highly statistically
often tosignificant
alleviate at 70 percent.
possible Biological
suffering Gradientprotocols. Midazolam‟s role based on its
in end-of-life
Regardless of otherpharmaceutics
factors, suchisas circumscribed
COVID-19 in health policy
disease guidelines.
and Clearly the close association of UK excess deaths following
vaccination, Midazolam was an important confounding factor in Midazolam injections suggests significant involvement of
Biological
explaining excess deaths, Gradient
competing with other possible factors. sedatives with euthanasia in the UK pandemic. A systemic policy of
The main Bradford Hill criteria of medical causality have been euthanasia may be evident from the pharmaceutics of Midazolam
satisfied with strongClearly the close
correlation, association
consistency overof time
UK excess deaths across
and applied following
timeMidazolam
and across injections
the varioussuggests
regionssignificant
during the
geography, specificityinvolvement
of effect ofandsedatives
consistentwithtemporality
euthanasia in ofthepandemic.
UK pandemic. FigureA systemic
13 showspolicy of euthanasia may
the dose-response be evident
relationships for
fromdeaths
one-month lag in excess the pharmaceutics of Midazolam
following Midazolam applied across
injections. England time
overand across
three the various
separate periods.regions during the pandemic.
Other Bradford Hill Figure
aspects,13such
shows the dose-response
as biological gradientrelationships
or dose- for England over three separate periods.

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 aqua
Therefer
datatopoints
the pre-pandemic
in aqua referperiod
to the from July to period
pre-pandemic the pandemic period
from July post
2018 vaccination.
to 2020, The in
the points statistics
red referof to
the2020,
dose-
2018 to 2020, the points in red
the first refer toperiod
pandemic 2020, before
the first pandemic
mass response
vaccination, while relationships
the green datainpoints
the three
refer distinct periods are
to the pandemic shown
period postin
period before mass vaccination,
vaccination.while the green
The statistics ofdata points refer relationships
the dose-response Table 5. in 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 Sample Intercept (000) Slope Correlation (%) p-value
Pre-Pandemic to 2020 18 -12.9 0.803 47 0.0465
2020 Pre-Vaccination 12 -43.6 2.35 98 0
Period Sample Intercept (000) Slope Correlation (%) p-value
2021 to May 2023 29 -29.9 1.67 70 0
Pre-Pandemic to 2020 18 -12.9 0.803 47 0.0465
2020 Pre-Vaccination 12 -43.6 2.35 98 0
2021Into the
May 20232020 spike, 29
April 35,000 doses-29.9
of Midazolam were 1.67
associated70with 38,700 excess deaths.
0 The statistical
analysis shows that in England before the pandemic, the dose-response
Table 5: Regression of Midazolam Injections and Excess Deaths (England: Three Periods to May 2023). relationship between Midazolam
injections and excess deaths was weak and only marginally significant. In 2020 of the pandemic, before
vaccination,
In the April 2020 spike, the impact
35,000 doses of Midazolam
of Midazolam injections vaccination,
were associated was very strong and highly
the impact significantinjections
of Midazolam statistically,
waswhile the
very strong
with 38,700 excessimpact of The
deaths. Midazolam
statisticallater moderated
analysis showsundoubtedly due tosignificant
that and highly the competing influence
statistically, whileofthevaccination, but it
impact of Midazolam
in England before remained highlythe
the pandemic, statistically significant.
dose-response relationship later moderated undoubtedly due to the competing influence of
between Midazolam injections and excess deaths was weak and vaccination, but it remained highly statistically significant.
Table 5: Regression
only marginally significant. In 2020 of of Midazolam
the pandemic,Injections
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 the
of Midazolam, suggesting the additional
London region is aother
use of statistical outlier
similar in the use
euthanasia, as of Midazolam,
suggested by thesuggesting the in
comparisons additional
Table 6. use of
other similar sedatives which might be even more powerful than Midazolam for euthanasia, as suggested by the
comparisons in Table 6.
Region Intercept Slope Correlation (%) p-value
London
Region -4.81
Intercept 4.39
Slope 66 0.0001p-value
Correlation (%)
East -4.76 2.03 75 0
London -4.81 4.39 66 0.0001
North West -3.43 1.59 62 0.0004
East -4.76 2.03 75 0
South West -1.94 0.776 48 0.0078
North West -3.43 1.59 62 0.0004
South East -4.73 1.59 74 0
South West -1.94 0.776 48 0.0078
North East (& Yorkshire) -3.30 0.669 57 0.0012
South East -4.73 1.59 74 0
Midlands -5.08 1.54 63 0.0002
North East (& Yorkshire) -3.30 0.669 57 0.0012
Table 6: Regression of Midazolam Injections and Regional Excess Deaths (Post Mass Vaccination since 2021).
Midlands -5.08 1.54 63 0.0002

Page 16 of 25
Med Clin Res, 2024 www.medclinres.org Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 14
 Note that all regional subpopulations have consistently positive correlations, avoiding Simpson‟s Paradox and
suggesting the absence of significant confounding factors in the statistical relationships. That is, even though the
mathematical details of the regressions may differ quantitatively (due to other minor confounding factors), the
firm 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 was
Pandemic Euthanasia
correlations, avoiding Simpson’s Paradox and suggesting the apprehension that UK hospitals could not cope with the anticipated
absence 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 the
relationships. That is, even
UK. After 30 though
years ofthe mathematical
cutbacks [26], NHS details of beds in England were halved from 299,000 in 1987/88 to
hospital
the regressions141,000
may differ
in 2019/20. Shortages of hospital beds wereIt is
quantitatively (due to other minor clear that
already felt the highest
before the priority of UK
pandemic. public health
Therefore, therepolicy,
was early
confounding factors), the firm conclusion prevails that Midazolam in the pandemic, was to
apprehension that UK hospitals could not cope with the anticipated surge in COVID-19 cases.avoid hospitals being overwhelmed, like
injections have significant causal impact on excess deaths in those sensationally reported in northern Italy around that time.
England. It is clear that the highest priority of UK public health The policy,
NHS created
early in newtheguidelines
pandemic,inwas
March 2020 [27]
to avoid to facilitate
hospitals
discharges from hospitals, stating “Unless
being overwhelmed, like those sensationally reported in northern Italy around that time. The NHS created new required to be in
Pandemic Euthanasia
guidelines in March 2020 [27] to facilitate dischargeshospital (see Annex
from hospitals, B), patients
stating “Unlessmust not remain
required to be ininhospital
an NHS bed”.
With dire predictions fromB),SAGE
(see Annex computer
patients must notmodelling
remain in early
an NHSin bed”.
2020, an atmosphere of panic prevailed in the UK. After 30 years In a move which was later judged irrational [28], many elderly
of cutbacks [26],
In NHS
a movehospital
whichbeds
wasinlater
England
judgedwere halved[28],
irrational from many
were discharged
elderly from hospital
were discharged from and died and
hospital in care
died homes
in care across
299,000 in 1987/88
homestoacross
141,000 in 2019/20.
England Shortages
as shown from anofONShospital England
report [29] as shown
in Figure 15. 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,
About 28,000 England and residents
care home Wales. died in April 2020 across system which facilitated euthanasia in care homes [32]. A sudden
England, whichAbout
represented abouthome
28,000 care one residents
third or 33.5 percent
died in of surge
April 2020 acrossinEngland,
voluntary assisted
which dying was
represented unlikely,
about butorthe
one third extent of
33.5
all deaths in England. Asallthere
percent of were
deaths about 375,000
in England. care
As there were about nonvoluntary
home 375,000 care euthanasia, suggesting
home residents iatrogenic
(three quarters geronticide
elderly, some in the
residents (threewith
quarters elderly,
dementia, andsomethe with dementia,inand
rest disabled) an the rest population
English UK has notofbeen estimated.
65 million, the mortality rates for that month
disabled) in an English
were 7.5population
percent and of 65 million,
0.128 the mortality
percent ratesimplying an April 2020 death rate in care homes about sixty
respectively,
for that month times
were (X60) that ofand
7.5 percent the national average.
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
Many
(X60) that of the of the
national UK elderly with comorbidities or terminal
average. illnesses have
vaccination, diedtowith
has led euthanasia
the false in care
conclusion homes,
that and had
vaccination
not from COVID-19 due to few cases of infections early in 2020. The relative absence of COVID infections was
saved many elderly lives, whereas Midazolam injections and other
Many of the UK corroborated
elderly withbycomorbidities
largely empty hospitalsillnesses
or terminal in early medication
2020 [30],were
as the overblown-feared
significantly spike2020.
reduced after in COVID
The benefit of
hospitalization never eventuated. Even temporary “Nightingale” hospitals constructed
have died with euthanasia in care homes, and not from COVID-19 vaccination for the elderly was illusory, but statistical for the expected
evidence of
due to few casesemergency wereearly
of infections empty in [31].
2020. The relative absence vaccination causing deaths was also illusory, due to misleading
of 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 Policy
of 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 is
illegal 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 when
euthanasia 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-of-
life [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 been
developed using the interim process and methods for developing
rapid guidelines on COVID-19.”
The interim process for developing the guidelines includes the
following 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 consultation
of 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 24
hours 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 anticipatory
prescribing (AP) of injectable medications in advance of clinical
needs 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: “As
if 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 www.medclinres.org
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 home
residents to private and family life, and may have violated their
right 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 and
care homes was made possible by loosening guidelines, lack of
regulatory 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 was
a 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 a
systematic violation of human rights – the right to life, not
euthanasia which is a criminal offence. Many cases were
nonvoluntary 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 have
been applied in a blanket fashion to some categories of person by
some 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 the
use of them in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic has been
widespread.”
Emphasis added. The Care Quality Commission (CQC), which is
an independent regulator funded from fees of hospitals and care
homes 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 the
person concerned.”
Emphasis added. In its interim report released in November 2020,
the CQC agreed with UK government investigation and observed
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 evidence
of unacceptable and inappropriate DNACPRs being made at the
start 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 the
statistical data, throughout the pandemic and across all regions,
relating Midazolam use to excess deaths.

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

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
FromFigure 16, Figure
the right vaccination had a negative
16, vaccination had correlation Relative impacts
a negative correlation of Midazolam
(-20 percent) impact oninjections
non-COVID versus vaccination are
deaths,
(-20 percent) impact onbenefit,
suggesting non-COVID deaths, suggesting
but statistically benefit,
insignificant. Onbut compared
the other hand, for
fromthe2021
period 30 June
onwards to 2021 to 31 May
May 2023, there 2023.
was The June
statisticallyainsignificant. On the
significant 48 othercorrelation
percent hand, from 2021 onwards
(p-value to between
<0.005) start date Midazolam
of the comparison is due to a five-month
and non-COVID lead in COVID
excess deaths
May 2023, (lagged
there was
onea month),
significant 48 percent
implying correlation (p-value
that Midazolam injections,
was likely involved inwhile Midazolam
non-COVID injections
deaths have only a one-month lead
since 2021.
<0.005) between Midazolam and non-COVID excess deaths relative to the deaths. Table 7 shows only Midazolam injection had
(lagged oneRelative
month), impacts
implyingofthat
Midazolam
Midazolam injections versus
was likely vaccination
involved are compared
statistically for correlation
significant the period to
30excess
June 2021
deathsto(highlighted
31 in
in non-COVID Maydeaths
2023. since
The June
2021.start date of the comparison is due to a in
yellow) five-month lead inperiod.
the vaccination COVID injections, while
Midazolam injections have only a one-month lead relative to the deaths. Table 7 shows only Midazolam
injection had statistically significant correlation
Values to excess Non-COVID
COVID deaths deaths (highlighted
deathsin yellow) in the vaccination
Excess deaths
period.
Midazolam correlation (%) 7 42 53
Values p-value COVID0.73 Non-COVID 0.04 Excess 0.004
Vaccination correlation (%) deaths 27 deaths -20 deaths -12
Midazolam correlation (%)
p-value 7 42 53
0.21 0.36 0.59
p-value 0.73 0.04 0.004
Table 7: Relative Impacts of Midazolam (lead one month) and Vaccination (lead five months) on UK Deaths
Vaccination correlation (%) 27 -20 -12
Neither Midazolam
p-value nor vaccination were statistically
0.21 correlated
0.36 of the data. Midazolam, shaded yellow in Table 7, was significantly
0.59
with 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
UK deaths: COVID deaths, non-COVID deaths or excess deaths. has caused, without really understanding the actual facts of data
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
should “vaccination
not be overlooked.kills” [1], it is highly probable A simple example may illustrate the prevailing fallacy. Figure 17
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
not due to Attempting
natural causes, but dueexcess
to attribute to vaccination. However,
deaths solely to either data-providing
forCOVID disease orEuroMOMO [38] partner
COVID vaccination maycountries and subnational
be erroneous.
Applying simplistic models globally to estimate how many millions lives vaccination has saved or how many Estonia,
the epidemiology of the confounded situation in the UK, other regions, consisting of Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark,
approaches million
and methods
deathsare needed tohas
vaccination establish
caused,the relationship
without Finland, France,
really understanding Germany,
the actual facts Germany (Berlin), Germany
of data limitations, has led (Hesse),
between vaccination and excess
to a confusion whichdeaths.
prolonged bad policy decisions costing Greece,
many Hungary,
lives. Ireland, Israel, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta,
Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
ImplicationsA for Epidemiology
simple example may illustrate the prevailing fallacy. UK (England),
Figure 17 shows UKthe(Northern Ireland),total
pooled weekly UKnumber
(Scotland),
of and UK
The currentdeaths
study for
of all
excess
ages deaths in the UK holds
in 27 data-providing important[38](Wales).
EuroMOMO partner countries and subnational regions, consisting
lessons for the
of epidemiology of theCyprus,
Austria, Belgium, COVID-19 pandemic
Denmark, globally,Finland, France, Germany, Germany (Berlin), Germany
Estonia,
as it has demonstrated that in
(Hesse), Greece, some countries,
Hungary, such asItaly,
Ireland, Israel, the Luxembourg,
UK, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain,
specific confounding factors should
Sweden, Switzerland, UKnot be overlooked.
(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 a
over 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,
way to compare excesscomparing
Evidently, deaths. major all-cause mortality peaks, countries need to
excess deaths in be
theclassified
Europeanat pandemic
least into two
havegroups:
never one group
exceeded the peak of early 2020. The general observation has allowed European governments, with the help of intervened
has members such as the US and UK which have
Evidently, flawed
comparing majorbased
research all-cause mortality
on flawed data, peaks,
to claimexcess significantly
that excess deaths arewith medical and
all explained clinical virus
by COVID protocols
and itsearly from
deaths in the European
variants. Ourpandemic
paper herehave never exceeded
has shown that the COVIDthe peakvirusthe
hadstart of thelittle
evidently pandemic.
consistentAnother
impactgroup has members
on excess deaths such as
of early 2020. UK.general observation has allowed European Australia and New Zealand which apparently had no such medical
in theThe
governments, with the help of flawed research based on flawed intervention until the rollout of COVID vaccination. (Australia
data, to claim that excess
Some deaths are
governments, withall explained by COVID
pharmaceutical virushaveallowed
funding, voluntary
speculated with assisted
computerdying only recently
modelling in most states,
that without
and its variants. Our paper
vaccination heredeaths
excess has shown
wouldthathavethebeen
COVID muchvirus except
higher, savingformillions
Victoriaof which first allowed
lives. Equally it in 2019,
unjustified are thebut also it
had evidently little consistent
opposite impact
claims that on excess
the data show thatdeaths in the UK.
vaccination happens
has cost to have
millions the highest
of lives. This paperAustralian COVID
has shown that 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
deaths would This paper
have beenhasmuch
shownhigher,
that for globalmillions
saving pandemic epidemiology,
of lives. countries
originate from need to be classifiedvirus,
the SARS-CoV-2 at leastbutinto two
originated from
groups: one
Equally unjustified are group has members
the opposite claimssuchthat asthethedata
US show
and UKMidazolam
which have use intervened significantly
in euthanasia with likely
and then medical andfrom mass
later
clinical
that vaccination hasprotocols early of
cost millions from theThis
lives. startpaper
of thehaspandemic.
shown Another groupThe
vaccination. hasmain
members such
findings as Australia
supporting thisand New are:
conclusion
Zealand which apparently had no such medical intervention until the rollout of COVID vaccination.
that neither may be the case for UK, because currently available • There were relatively few cases of infections in early 2020, (Australia
allowed voluntary assisted dying only recently in most states, except for Victoria which first allowed it in 2019,
Med Clin Res,but2024
also it happens to have the highest Australian www.medclinres.org
COVID deaths in 2020.) Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 18

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, the
absence of any “high consequence infectious disease”, denying the
existence 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 “a
systemic or structural dysfunction in hospital services” and the
widespread blanket use of “Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary
Resuscitation” (DNACPR) notices in care homes have contributed
to excess deaths in the UK.
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 the
confounding effect of Midazolam use in UK euthanasia.
A major finding of this paper is that the very high excess deaths
in 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 was
denied 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 SARS-
CoV-2 virus in the UK; the spike in so-called COVID deaths in
2020 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 by
vaccination status” and thus invalidating most UK studies based
on that flawed data.
The illusion that COVID vaccination was “safe and effective”
was caused by Midazolam injections in UK being very high in
2020 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 www.medclinres.org
pandemic have considered the relative impact of only two factors:
COVID disease and COVID vaccination. Due to the presence of
significant confounding factors, claims of observed correlation
between deaths and vaccination for many countries are illusory.
Only those countries such as Australia, which were apparently free
from euthanasia and other medical intervention, are suitable for
the epidemiological study of the impact of vaccination on excess
deaths.
Conclusion
The extraordinary spike in UK excess deaths in April 2020 was not
due 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 with
widespread 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.
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.
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 of
vaccination 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 in
some 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/
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 Im-
munol 8(2):542-556. https://www.opastpublishers.com/
open-access-articles/australian-covid19-pandemic-a-brad- 13.
ford-hill-analysis-of-iatrogenic-excess-mortality.pdf
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC 2019-Nov-
el Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnos-
tic Panel, FDA News Release. https://www.fda.gov/me-
dia/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 14.
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. 15.
net/publication/357778435_Official_mortality_data_for_En-
gland_suggest_systematic_miscategorisation_of_vaccine_
status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccina- 16.
tion
6. Sy W (2022) Data reporting flaw in plain sight distorting
COVID-19 mortality statistics, ResearchGate, 25 August
2022. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374587533_ 17.
Data_reporting_flaw_in_plain_sight_distorting_COVID-19_
mortality_statistics [accessed Oct 15 2023].
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 18.
Vaccine Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting
(Updated June 23, 2022), https://www.cdc.gov/coronavi-
rus/2019-ncov/php/hd-breakthrough.html#report (accessed
15 August, 2022). 19.
8. Neil M, Fenton N, McLachlan S (2021) Discrepancies and
inconsistencies in UK Government datasets compromise ac-
curacy of mortality rate comparisons between vaccinated and
unvaccinated, ResearchGate 20 October 2021. https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/355437113_Discrepancies_and_
inconsistencies_in_UK_Government_datasets_compromise_ 20.
accuracy_of_mortality_rate_comparisons_between_vacci-
nated_and_unvaccinated
9. Office for National Statistics (2023) Estimation method –
COVID-19 Un-vaccinated population. Release date: 30 May 21.
2023. https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgov-
ernance/freedomofinformationfoi/estimationmethodcovi-
d19unvaccinatedpopulation
10. Wallace AR (1898) Vaccination a Delusion, Official Evidence 22.
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/births-
deathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/monthlyfiguresondeaths- 23.
registeredbyareaofusualresidence
12. Rahmani K, Shavaleh R, Forouhi M, et al. (2022) The effec-
Med Clin Res, 2024 www.medclinres.org
tiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the incidence,
hospitalization, and mortality from COVID-19: A systemat-
ic 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
Sy W (2023) Simpson’s paradox in the correlations between
excess mortality and covid-19 injections: a case study of iat-
rogenic pandemic for elderly Australians. Medical & Clinical
Research 8(7):01-16. https://www.medclinrese.org/open-ac-
cess/simpsons-paradox-in-the-correlations-between-excess-
mortality-and-covid19-injections-a-case-study-of-iatrogenic-
pandemic.pdf
Office for National Statistics (2022) Excess deaths in England
and Wales: March 2020 to June 2022, 20 September 2022.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/
birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/excessdeathsinen-
glandandwalesmarch2020tojune2022/2022-09-20
UK Health Security Agency. Guidance: High consequence
infectious diseases. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-conse-
quence-infectious-diseases-hcid
Sy W (2023) Australian Excess Deaths: Moving the Goalposts.
Principia Scientific International, 29 August 2023. https://
principia-scientific.com/australian-excess-deaths-mov-
ing-the-goalposts/
Petersen E, Koopmans M, et al. (2020) Comparing SARS-
CoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics. The Lancet
20: e238-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30484-9
Naughton L (2021) Interview with Funeral Director, UK:
Deaths Jumped 250% When Injections Began, Interviews Fu-
neral Director John O'Looney. BitChute https://www.bitchute.
com/video/iopPf0YM6m7C/
Alexander P. 2 graphs of UK's data (2017 to 2022), one on
excess mortality, the other on the powerful sedative midazol-
am 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-of-
uks-data-2017-to-2022
OpenPrescribing. Items for Midazolam 10mg/2ml solution for
injection ampoules by all regional teams. https://openprescrib-
ing.net/analyse/#org=regional_team&numIds=1501041T0A-
AAAAA&denom=nothing&selectedTab=chart
World Health Organization. Model List Essential Medicines,
26 July 2023, 23rd List. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/han-
dle/10665/371090/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.02-eng.pd-
f?sequence=1
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. COVID-19
rapid guideline: managing symptoms (including at the end
of life) in the community, 3 April 2020. https://web.archive.
org/web/20200409054527/https:/www.nice.org.uk/guid-
ance/ng163/resources/covid19-rapid-guideline-managing-
symptoms-including-at-the-end-of-life-in-the-community-
pdf-66141899069893
MedlinePlus, Midazolam Injection. US Government National
Library of Medicine. https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/
a609014.html
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 20
24. Gamblin V, Berry V, et al. (2020) Midazolam sedation in
palliative medicine: retrospective study in a French center
for cancer control. BMC Palliat Care 19(1):85. doi: 10.1186/
s12904-020-00592-3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar-
ticles/PMC7305615/
25. Frazer JS, Frazer GR (2021) Analysis of primary care pre-
scription trends in England during the COVID-19 pandem-
ic compared against a predictive model. Fam Med Com-
munity 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 Dis-
charge Service Requirements. 19 March 2020. https://assets.
publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/up-
loads/attachment_data/file/911541/COVID-19_hospital_dis-
charge_service_requirements_2.pdf
28. Dyer C (2022) Covid-19: Policy to discharge vulnera-
ble 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 reg-
istered between week ending 20 March 2020 and week end-
ing 2 April 2021 Release date: 11 May 2021. https://www.
ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsand-
marriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecare-
sectorenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetweenweekending-
20march2020andweekending2april2021
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-beds-
than-normal/7027392.article
Med Clin Res, 2024 www.medclinres.org
View publication stats
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 sui-
cide, 12 July 2023. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/euthana-
sia-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 care
homes 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 Car-
diopulmonary Resuscitation decisions during the COVID-19
pandemic, Interim Report, November 2020, https://www.cqc.
org.uk/sites/default/files/20201204%20DNACPR%20Inter-
im%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf
38. Euromomo, Pooled number of deaths by age group. Graph
and maps, Last updated on week 44, 2023. https://www.euro-
momo.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.
Volume 9 | Issue 2 | 21