Journal of Clinical Trials
Open Access
ISSN: 2167-0870
ISSN: 2167-0870
Research Article - (2025)Volume 15, Issue 6
The article by Watson, et al., published in Lancet Infectious Diseases in September 2022 engages in a level of statistical fraud rarely, if ever, seen in the history of medicine. Not a single life was saved by the COVID-19 worldwide vaccination campaign, but many were lost. Statistical and clinical evidence confirms that COVID-19 vaccination caused many disease conditions, injuries, and eventual mortalities that show up in the rate of all-cause mortality when examined sensibly. In my view, the article by Watson, et al., should be retracted according to the published policy of Lancet and their alleged adherence to standards published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning even “possible misconduct”, because, as I show in this paper, the misconduct of Watson, et al., is real, blatant, and should have been noted by competent peer-reviewers examining the work before it was published. I argue here that the first task of peer-reviewers of articles on COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness is to see if the calculated results are consistent with publicly available statistical data. I assert and demonstrate that the reported “findings” of Watson, et al., amount to fraudulent deception of readers and researchers relying on Lancet and should, therefore, be retracted per Lancet policy and COPE guidelines concerning even “possible misconduct”. The same is valid for one article in Cureus and one article in Jama.
The research paper by Watson, et al., titled, "Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: A mathematical modelling study", published in 2022 in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal suggests that from the first COVID-19 “vaccine” administered on December 8, 2020 in England and subsequent injections up to December 8, 2021, that the COVID-19 vaccines cumulatively saved at least 14.4 million lives and possibly as many as 19.8 million [1]. These saved lives, however, do not show up in Our World in Data statistics when examined in a straightforward and reasonable way. Table 1 summarizes total deaths on a planet in a given year.
| Year | Deaths in millions | Average and excess mortality in millions |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 55.89 | 56.87 |
| 2016 | 56.2 | 56.87 |
| 2017 | 56.97 | 56.87 |
| 2018 | 57.35 | 56.87 |
| 2019 | 57.94 | 56.87 |
| 2020 | 63.17 | 56.87+6.30 |
| 2021 | 69.25 | 56.87+12.28 |
Table 1: Mortality according to Our World in Data for the years 2015-2021 [2].
In 2020 and 2021, we had the COVID-19 pandemic. The main difference between 2020 and 2021 is that in 2021, the supposed biggest medical intervention ever in the history of mankind occurred: COVID-19 vaccination, which, only according to Watson, et al., in 2021 alone, saved 14 million lives, see Figure 1. If COVID-19 vaccination had saved 14 million lives in 2021, then in 2021, around 49.5 million people should have died; 14 million fewer than in 2020. However, these saved lives are missing from Our World in Data statistics. In 2021, 5,98 million more people died than in 2020, see Figure 2.
Figure 1:Statistical fraud of 14 million lives saved in 2021 with COVID-19 vaccination.
Figure 2: Average mortality in blue, excess mortality in red, according to Our World in Data.
Mathematical fraud of saved lives with the COVID-19 vaccination
The unproven hypothesis of Watson, et al., is that without vaccination in 2021, 14 million more people would have died [1]. Vaccination, hypothetically, if the theory behind the COVID-19 campaign had any merit, could save the lives of the vaccinated part of the population. Watson, et al., did not present statistical proof, however, that the mortality of the vaccinated part of the population was smaller than that of the unvaccinated part, although in 2022 all the statistical data needed to enable such a calculation were readily available [1]. Clinical studies on the contrary confirm COVID-19 vaccination has damaging effects on health, which in 2021 increased the mortality rate of the vaccinated population in respect to the unvaccinated population [3-8]. In 2021 the mortality rate of unvaccinated people in the world’s population was 14.5% greater than in the unvaccinated population [9].
The article published in Cureus claimed that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19: “Evidence for mortality from COVID-19 infection by vaccination status was available from seven observational studies included a total of 21,618,297 patients. After rating down one level for study design, we considered the evidence to be low-quality for an observational study design. These observational studies suggest that COVID-19 vaccination may substantially reduce mortality (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.71 to 3.53; low-quality evidence)” [10].
Raw statistical data of Our World in Data showed the opposite, COVID-19 vaccination drastically increased mortality caused by virus COVID-19. “According to data from John Hopkins Corona Virus Resource Centre, until 10 March 2023, when they stopped collecting the data, at least one dose of vaccine was received by 4.2 % of the Papua New Guinea population, whereas in Australia at least one dose was received by 87.3% of the population. We see on the right chart that in Papua, after 27 November 2021, there was no boom in COVID-19 deaths. In Australia, the peak of COVID-19 deaths was between 28 December 2022 and 8 February 2023. This means that the COVID-19 vaccination in Australia made the COVID-19 virus more deadly than if there were no vaccination. The analysis above confirms that the COVID-19 virus’s long-term symptoms in Papua caused fewer excess deaths per one million people than COVID-19 vaccination side effects in Australia per one million people”, see Figure 1 [9]. The article in Cureus is equally fraudulent and that article along with Watson, et al., should also be retracted [1].
Watson, et al., of course, among the hundreds of papers about COVID-19 was not the only fraudulent one by a long shot [1]. All articles which claim that COVID-19 vaccination saved lives [10-14] are statistically fraudulent and should be retracted. Not a single one of them has ever proved that the mortality rate for vaccinated individuals was less than the mortality rate for those who were unvaccinated. The reverse is patently obvious to anyone who will carefully examine the data. Raw statistical data confirm that intensity of COVID-19 vaccination has temporal correlation with all-cause mortality ACM: “Unprecedented peaks in ACM occur in the summer (January-February) of 2022 in the Southern Hemisphere, and in equatorial-latitude countries, which are synchronous with or immediately preceded by rapid COVID-19-vaccine-booster-dose rollouts (3rd or 4th doses). This phenomenon is present in every case with sufficient mortality data (15 countries). Two of the countries studied have insufficient mortality data in January, February 2022 (Argentina and Suriname) Rancourt, et al., [15]. Raw statistical data of Our World in Data for 37 countries confirm intensity of COVID-19 vaccination in a given time period overlaps with excess mortality which confirms that vaccination increased excess mortality [16,17].
Any competent mathematician or statistician, who has given a legal oath to speak the truth, examining the evidence, would immediately recognize that the Watson, et al., article is fraudulent, as are all similar claims by other authors claiming a positive impact of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign [1]. Without using real statistical data showing the mortality rate of those who were vaccinated to be less than the mortality rate for unvaccinated persons which is, in fact, not true all theoretical speculations of how many more people would have died without vaccination have no scientific grounding whatsoever. They are fraudulent statements. The Lancet Infectious Diseases peer-review system must have used peer-reviewers that did not take into account the relevant facts, and, therefore, whatever peer-review may have taken place lacks scientific validity. Reviewers of the Watson, et al., article, and all those articles making similar false claims, should be exposed to the worldwide scientific community for what they are. Watson, et al., published their article in September 2022, when all statistical data were available to calculate the mortality of vaccinated and mortality of unvaccinated individuals for the year 2021 according to established mathematical modelling based on statistical data [1,9]. Instead of using available statistical data, Watson et al., wrote a theoretical article where they estimate how many more people would die without vaccination [1]. Our World in Data shows that the claim of Watson, et al., that 14 million lives were saved by the COVID-19 “vaccines” in 2021 is false [1]. In view of the numbers of persons who were subjected to the COVID-19 genetic therapies etc., the fraudulent misrepresentations involved, represent the most extensive statistical deceptions in the history of medicine.
The Watson, et al., article, however, is not the only fraudulent paper pretending to report on the false claim that the COVID-19 vaccine campaign saved many millions of lives [1]. Another article published in The Lancet-Respiratory Medicine, claimed that “a study of the global impact of the first year of [COVID-19] vaccination found that vaccination had decreased mortality by 63% globally” [18]. According to Our World Data, 58.4 million people died in the world in 2019. In 2020, when COVID-19 began to spread, 63.5 million people died. In 2021, when COVID-19 vaccinations were being administered throughout the entire year, 69.7 million people died, see the line of progress across the horizontal axis, the timeline, in Graph 2 above. The average number of deaths in the years 2015-2019 leading up to the supposed “pandemic” was 56.87 million people per year. In 2020, 6.6 million more people died in comparison to the average mortality for the years 2015-2019. These additional 6.6 million deaths, according to the mainstream narrative, represent “increased global mortality” due to the COVID-19 pandemic attributed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In 2021, 6.2 million more people died than in 2020. Our World in Data confirms that after the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in December 2020 and throughout 2021 a substantial increase in “global mortality from all causes” began to occur. In 2020, that increase was about 6.6 million and was increased by an additional 6.2 million in 2021. The claim that vaccination reduced global mortality in 2020 by 63% in 2021 is an absurd interpretation of the available data. By combining the increases in mortality in 2020 with those in 2022, it is apparent that at least 12.8 million more people died after the rollout of the COVID-19 “vaccines” than were dying in the years leading up to 2020. On page 717 of the Meslé, et al., article the authors proposed to measure the impact of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign by the following equation [18]:
The problem with the Equation (1) is that it has no mathematical meaning and also it has no statistical meaning. The only valid scientific evaluation of COVID-19 effectiveness is to compare mortality rate of Vaccinated (V) with the mortality rate of Unvaccinated (U).
(1) If the mortality rate for vaccinated persons (call that rate V) is equal to the mortality rate for unvaccinated persons (call that rate U) for some standard unit of population that is to say, if V=U it must be concluded that the vaccination campaign has had no impact on all-cause mortality;
(2) however, V
(3) if V>U, we must conclude that the vaccination campaign has only increased all-cause mortality.
Real statistical data confirm that in 2021 the mortality rate of vaccinated persons per unit of population (V) was 14.5% higher than the mortality rate for unvaccinated persons (U) per unit of population [9].
The scientific integrity of The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal in particular, and all of the Lancet journals, according to the Editors of the Lancet group, is on the line [19]. My re-examination of the facts here would seem to require a complete re-assessment by the world-renowned statistical experts in the Lancet Group of the works by Watson, et al., and by Meslé, et al., [1,18]. An outright retraction of both those papers is called for on the basis of the Lancet’s published criteria for policing their own publications. The redress demands a great deal more than the cryptic adjustments recently published as a “Correction to Lancet Resp Med 2024; 12:714-727” where the references to all the “corrections” that “were made June 23, 2025” are condensed into the following 91 words: “In this Article, changes have been made in the Summary (Findings section and first sentence in the Interpretation section), Research in context panel (second-to-last sentence of the Added value of this study section and last sentence of the Implications all the available evidence section), Methods (second sentence of first paragraph and the fourth paragraph in the Data analysis section), Results (paragraphs five and seven), figure 2 heading, and Discussion (paragraph five) to clarify the definition of the boosters doses and the authors’ interpretation of their differential role in saving lives” [18]. Can any researcher make sense of what “corrections” were actually made in the Meslé, et al., publication? Did they change their overall false conclusions regarding lives saved by the COVID-19 vaccines? Based on what I have already shown in this article, without any reasonable doubt, that group of editors should be obliged to demand retraction of the Watson, et al., article and of the Meslé, et al., paper in order to preserve the scientific reputation associated with all the other Lancet publications [1,18].
Recent article published in Jama Health Forum has the same estimative narrative as all other articles which claim COVID-19 vaccination saved lives: “Herein, lives and life-years saved worldwide among vaccinated individuals from the first licensing of vaccines in December 2020 until October 2024 were estimated. The number of deaths that might have occurred without vaccination and plausible reductions of mortality with diverse vaccines were estimated. Data were stratified by age, pre-Omicron and Omicron periods, vaccination before and after infection, and long-term care settings, using publicly available data” [20]. Ioannidis at al. claim if there would be no vaccination more people would die, which means that performed vaccination saved lives, which means that the mortality of the vaccinated part of the population was smaller than the mortality of the unvaccinated part of the population. Also, in their article, this only valuable statistical data on COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness is missing, which means the results of the article are fraudulent; they have no scientific validity. Article is deceiving public opinion on COVID-19 vaccination results and should be retracted. Undisputable proof that Ioannidis, et al., results are false is comparing the graphs of intensity of vaccination with the graphs of excess mortality which we done for 37 countries [20]. Below are the comparisons for Slovenia (Figure 3) and the USA (Figure 4).
Blue spot on the left is August 13, 2021, when vaccination was at its minimum. The blue spot on the right is in temporal correlation with the blue spot on the left and corresponds with the diminished excess mortality in the same period (Figure 3).
These temporal correlations are valid for 37 countries whose data have been analysed [16,17]. If Ioannidis, et al., claims were right, then vaccination in a given period should diminish excess mortality in the coming period [20]. The opposite is true. Ioannidis, et al., equations are not based on statistical data and do not have scientific validity [20]. We read in their article: “Total lives saved are estimated as:
Similarly, Life-Years saved (LYi) are estimated as proportional to Li, the stratum-specific Life Expectancy (LE) LEi, and to a factor fi that denotes how LE of those who died may have differed vs the general population LE; f takes smaller values when those who die are in worse health than the respective samestratum general population. Thus:
Total life-years saved are estimated as:
Figure 3: On the left is a graph of vaccination intensity, on the right is a graph of excess mortality for Slovenia.
Figure 4: On the left is a graph of vaccination intensity, on the right is a graph of excess mortality for USA.
We first calculate the benefits for people vaccinated before any SARS-CoV-2 infection. For those first vaccinated after having at least 1 SARS-CoV-2 infection, we then assume that PI*i×IFRi×VEi is lower by a certain R factor (mostly because of lower IFR in reinfection and lower PI*)” [20]. Authors use terms we estimate, we assume, but no real mathematics based on statistical data is behind their estimations and assumptions. If vaccination would diminish mortality as Ioannidis, et al., suggested, then the graph of mortality (Figures 3 and 4) should have the opposite values: with the intensity of vaccination, the mortality should diminish [20]. The case is opposite, the graph of the intensity of vaccination is in temporal correlation with the graph of the excess mortality. There is no scientific objection possible against these raw statistical data.
We see on Figures 3 and 4 that after the period of intense vaccination excess mortality increases. Following equation is valid:
where IVTx is the intensity of vaccination in a given time period Tx, EMTx is the excess mortality in time period Tx, and and EM Tx+ΔT the excess mortality in the time period Tx+ΔT which follows time period Tx, Eq. (3) is valid for all countries without exception and is an is an mathematical equation which is based on real statistical data. Mathematics about saved lives with COVID-19 vaccination is imaginary and is fraud. Eq.(1) of Meslé, et al., and Eq. (2) of Ioannidis, et al., are not related with real statistical data, they are fictitious, they are fraudulent [18,20]. Eq. (3) is based on raw statistical data and has a real mathematical and statistical meaning.
None of the numerous articles claiming lives were saved by COVID-19 vaccination used a proper mathematical model. The mathematics to calculate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination is based on the law of large numbers, see Eq. (4). The population is divided into five age groups: 0-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, and 80+. This division of the entire population is needed because elderly people are also dying from old age. Dividing the population into 5 groups, we avoid the well-known Simpson’s statistical paradox. In Eq. (4) below A represents the entire population, V represents the vaccinated part of the population, DV represents persons who die in a given month, and represents the persons who died and were vaccinated:
In the medical database of every developed country, all four elements in Eq. (4) for each age group are known. We calculate for each month DVP the as follows in Eq. (5):
DVP is the proportionally calculated number based on monthly statistical data. is the number that shows the number of deaths if vaccines did not have an impact on mortality. We compare this calculated number with the real statistical number of dead vaccinated persons. The following set of equations (6) is valid:
This standard mathematical model should be used by any researcher who studies the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination. How is it possible that Watson, et al., Ioannidis, et al., Meslé, et al., and the reviewers Lancet and JAMA are not familiar with it is a million-dollar question that should be explored by an international commission of mathematicians who should expose this mathematical fraud of the 21st century [1,18,20].
All fraudulent mathematical models on evaluation of the efficiency of COVID-19 vaccination start with the preposition that vaccines saved lives (preposition A). None of them has compared the mortality rate of the vaccinated part of the population with the rate of mortality of the unvaccinated part of the population, which is the only valid scientific method to prove the efficiency of COVID-19 vaccination. Their starting position (A) is theoretical and is not based on statistical data. From the methodological point of view, this is an inadmissible and irreparable error. The second methodological error of these studies is that they speculate on how many more people would die if there were no vaccination. This is a preposition (B). Their speculative calculations proving preposition (B) have no scientific validity because preposition (A) in their research was never proved by statistical data [21].
Medical authorities are hiding the key statistical data
All developed countries have data about how many dead persons in a given year were vaccinated in the following age groups: 0-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, and +80. These data can be used for an exact statistical evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness, which nobody who searches for the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination is willing to do. Medical authorities all over the world are deliberately hiding, so that the exact mathematical calculation of COVID-19 vaccination is not possible. They do this to preserve the scientific integrity of medicine. But they are destroying it. Public acknowledgment of the devastating consequences of vaccination on people's health is the only way to put medicine back at the service of the people and to regain people's trust: "Primum non nocere".
A group of medical doctors and scientists from Slovenia led by the recently deceased physician Dr. Vladimir Pirnat, Specialist in Internal Medicine, has been requesting NIJZ (National Institute for Public Health) to release the data for the past three years with no answer. The Administrative court of the Republica Slovenia has on the day 19. May 2025 issued a decision against which there is no appeal, that the National Institute of Public Health is obliged to publish the required data. The number of the document is II U 216/2024-21, signed by the Senior Judge Mojca Medved Ladinek Because of the immense pressure of big pharma on medical science to hide damage caused by COVID-19 vaccination, the world situation is such that only by the legal requests of the courts, the statistical data that will allow an objective scientific evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination will be released. Slovenia is a leader in this area, which confirms that the legal system of Slovenia is subordinate to the public interest and the well-being of citizens.
In COVID-19 vaccines ferromagnetic metals has been discovered: “The CDC claims that the three ferromagnetic metals consisting of iron, cobalt, and nickel, and the rare earth chemicals used in magnets cerium, hafnium, lanthanum, gadolinium, and erbium are not in the US approved injectables. However, a 2024 study using inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS), detected all these and many other undeclared elements in lots of Pfizer, Moderna, and five other brands of COVID-19 injectables” [22]. The chemical content of these vaccines should also be a subject of legal proceedings in the court. Statistical data confirm that five doses of COVID-19 vaccine are evidently lethal to nearly all medicare participants [23]. These findings are additional support of the inference that COVID-19 vaccines have been intentionally made to harm people's health.
Real statistical data, reliably reported in many parts of the world, confirm that COVID-19 vaccination campaigns increased diseases, injuries, and deaths. Only by accepting this fact andacknowledging the fiasco that COVID-19 gene therapies constituted does medicine in general have any hope of regaining the public trust and thus enabling medical practitioners to return to the honorable service of helping people enjoy health and well-being. Fraudulent math has been used to cover up the COVID-19 vaccination disaster. This is an unprecedented event in the history of science. Responsibility is of the peer reviewers. An undergraduate student is clear that the effectiveness of the vaccination should be proved by real statistical data and not by fanciful articles that estimate how many more people would die without the vaccination.
In memory of Dr. Vladimir Pirnat, Specialist in Internal Medicine, advocate of scientific integrity of medical science. In memory of Slovenian mathematician Peter Žurej, who introduced me to the mathematical model for the exact evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness.
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
[Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Citation: Sorli AS (2025). Mathematical Fraud of COVID-19 Vaccination Effectiveness and Ineffectiveness of Peer Review. J Clin Trials. 15:602.
Received: 01-Aug-2025, Manuscript No. JCTR-25-38362; Editor assigned: 04-Aug-2025, Pre QC No. JCTR-25-38362 (PQ); Reviewed: 19-Aug-2025, QC No. JCTR-25-38362; Revised: 27-Aug-2025, Manuscript No. JCTR-25-38362 (R); Published: 04-Sep-2025 , DOI: 10.35248/2167-0870.25.15.602
Copyright: © 2025 Sorli AS. 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 author and source are credited.