UK Government Caught Hiding COVID Shot–Death Data “To Prevent Distress or Anger”

They already shared the data with Big Pharma — but NOT with the public

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/uk-government-caught-hiding-covid

Source: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/uk-government-caught-hiding-covid

= = = 

Today, The Telegraph < https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/11/15/government-withholding-data-covid-jab-link-excess-deaths/ > revealed that the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has refused to publish anonymized data that would likely show strong evidence of a link between COVID-19 “vaccines” and mass deaths.

According to the report, UKHSA justified the secrecy by claiming that releasing the figures could cause “distress or anger” among bereaved families if a connection were discovered.

Even more concerning: The same dataset — mapping vaccination dates to dates of death — was provided to pharmaceutical companies but NOT released to the public. UKHSA also claimed that publishing the numbers could “lead to misinformation” or impact vaccine uptake.

For two years, the campaign group UsForThem fought to obtain the anonymised dataset through FOI requests. UKHSA refused every time. Ultimately, the Information Commissioner sided with the agency, allowing the data to remain hidden indefinitely.

MPs and peers had already sounded the alarm last year, urging the government to release the data “immediately,” noting that it had been quietly shared with vaccine manufacturers.

Intentionally withholding critical vaccine-safety data carries serious legal consequences, including but not limited to Misconduct in Public Office, Corporate Manslaughter or Gross Negligence Manslaughter, breaches of statutory duties under public-health and disclosure laws, and potential Fraud by omission or abuse of position.

 

= = = 

From the Telegraph article:

 

" if connection were discovered"

 

"could link"

 

 

 

 

Finally an answer to the big question. The authorities don't publish data because the truth is devastating. These shots have been catastrophic and it is becoming increasingly difficult to hide that fact.

4 hours ago, Bacon1 said:

From the Telegraph article:

 

" if connection were discovered"

 

"could link"

 

 

 

 

 

This is a notable semantic change. As a reminder, this is the same outlet which published this just a few short years ago:

 

 

Now we have moved on to "it could…" and "if it were to…" in order to shift the public perception in incremental steps. Moving from a categorical tone to a conditional one prepares the mind for the next stage, which will be the revelation that yes, this was, in fact, a disaster.

 

I'm willing to wager that this same Telegraph will be publishing opinion pieces, in a couple of years, saying "So this was a catastrophic mistake, how did we let it happen?" The 'conspiracy theorists' will be happy to answer that question.