IMAGINE Jane is found dead after being shot in the heart from behind by a known violent criminal, Victor. While we know the shot would have killed Jane, it is theoretically possible that she could have died of a coincidental heart attack immediately before the bullet entered her heart. Now imagine further that a judge rules that Victor did not murder Jane because ‘on the balance of probabilities’ she died of a heart attack before the bullet struck.
While that sounds like an extreme horror/fantasy story, a not-too-different scenario has been played out in a claim to the vaccine damages payment scheme.
In December 2024 I was asked by the family of a previously healthy woman to estimate the probability that a stroke she suffered within minutes of a covid vaccination (in November 2021) could have happened purely by chance, i.e. was not caused by the vaccine. I wrote this article with my analysis. (2) Suffering a stroke 15 minutes after Covid vaccine dose
The woman, whom we will call Jane, was unconscious for two weeks after the vaccination and has since been immobile, right-side paralysed and unable to speak. Sadly, but not unsurprisingly, Jane’s application and subsequent appeal to the vaccine damage payment scheme have both been rejected. The most recent rejection stated that ‘on the balance of probabilities, the vaccine did not cause the disability in question’:
Jane’s family have decided to make another appeal and asked if I could provide a formal statement to support this. Because some additional/different information about the case has become available, the analysis here is somewhat different (and actually simpler) than that produced in the previous article. The (redacted) summary of my formal report states: On 4 November 2021 at 3:45pm X (referred to subsequently as ‘Jane’) received a Pfizer Covid vaccine booster jab having previously had two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine earlier in 2021.
- At some time within the next 20 minutes Jane, who was then a 72-year-old healthy and very active woman, suffered a stroke (a catastrophic intracranial haemorrhage) leaving her unconscious for two weeks and since then immobile, right-side paralysed and unable to speak.
- I have been asked by Jane’s family if it is possible to determine the probability that Jane’s injury was caused by the vaccine.
- It is not possible to provide a definitive answer to this question, but we can estimate the expected number of women aged 65-75 in England suffering a stroke coincidentally (i.e. not caused by the vaccine) shortly after a covid vaccine in a year. Then we can compare that number with the incidence of actual reported strokes of women aged 65-75 shortly after a covid vaccine in 2021.
- Based on historical data about strokes in England, there is about a 1million in 1.2million probability that a randomly selected woman aged 65-75 who takes three covid jabs in a one-year period would suffer a stroke coincidentally within 20 minutes of receiving one of the jabs. That is, therefore, an incredibly unlikely event. But, because there are about 3million women aged 65-75 in England, if they all took three covid vaccines in a 1-year period there is about a 92 per cent probability at least one would suffer a stroke coincidentally within 20 minutes of a jab. However, it is highly unlikely (less than 5 per cent probability) there would be more than five such women. We would expect (statistically) between one to five. That means Jane could have been one of the one to five such extremely unlucky women.
- However, while it is difficult to get an accurate estimate, based on reports of adverse reactions to systems such as the [UK] Yellow Card Scheme and [the US] VAERS, it is likely that at least many dozens of women aged between 65-75 (far more so than men) suffered strokes within 24 hours of a covid vaccine in England in 2021. Even without clinical evidence to determine if these cases could have been caused by the vaccine, the fact that there have been many more than the one to five expected coincidental cases, suggests that the vaccines significantly increase the risk of strokes.
- Hence, I believe there is sufficient statistical evidence to conclude that the stroke was several times more likely to have been caused by the vaccine than by chance.
- There is also evidence to suggest that there is a 1 in 800 probability of a serious adverse reaction following a covid Pfizer vaccine. While low, this probability is much higher than the 1 in 3.5million probability of a coincidental stroke within 20 minutes of a covid Pfizer vaccine. Hence, there is no question that ‘on the balance of probabilities’ it is far more likely that Jane’s injury was caused by the vaccine.
- Moreover, there is additional evidence which strongly supports the hypothesis that the vaccine was a causal factor in Jane’s injury. Specifically, it is known that the Pfizer batch number FH0114, from which Jane received the vaccine, was especially problematic. There are 1,970 separate adverse reaction reports for that batch alone, of which there are 73 within 24 hours with a diagnosis that relates to clots (strokes, pulmonary emboli, DVT, clots in eyes etc). The batch comes from a factory in Belgium.
My full (redacted) report, which contains the details of the above calculations, can be linked to here.
In conclusion, taking account of basic analysis of historical stroke data, reports of adverse reactions following covid vaccines and the specific problems of the Pfizer batch from which Jane was injected, it is far more likely that the vaccine was a causal factor in Jane’s injury than the coincidence hypothesis. So it seems the decision-makers on the vaccine damages payment scheme do not understand what ‘balance of probabilities’ means.
I acknowledge the help of Dr Scott McLachlan in accessing VAERS data.
This article appeared in Where the numbers? on March 31, 2025, and is republished by kind permission. (3) Vaccine damage payments scheme: a remarkable rejection
