A Contested Study on Excess Mortality Linked to Covid-19 Finally Unpublished

Scientific Controversy: A study on Covid-19, published in 2024 in the scientific journal “BMJ Public Health”, is accused of giving rise to vaccine skeptic theories

A study published in 2024 on excess mortality during Covid-19 just experienced a disavowal. Criticized for giving flank to vaccinosceptic theses, it was finally withdrawn, the editor of the journal where it was published announced on Wednesday.

Published in the magazine BMJ Public Health, this study was unpublished because it demonstrated “disinformation on the possible causes of excess mortality” and was only based “on a limited quantity of original work”, explained the BMJ group in a press release. BMJ Public Health is a journal specializing in public health. It is distinct from the prestigious British Medical Journal, one of the largest medical journals, which has the same publisher.

A study highly cited by vaccinosceptics

In 2024, the BMJ Public Health published a study which suggested that, in several regions of the world, excess mortality had remained abnormally high during the years following the peak of the Covid-19 crisis. This study had been cited by numerous online vaccine skeptic publications, which claimed that it directly linked excess mortality and vaccination against Covid-19. Even if the study did not explain any such link, its authors questioned the persistence of excess mortality “despite the implementation of containment measures and vaccines against Covid-19”, calling on political decision-makers to publish more precise data which would make it possible to explore a supposed role of these last two elements.

This ambiguity had sparked multiple criticisms, accusing him of giving in to unfounded attacks against Covid vaccines which have proven to have saved millions of lives since the start of the crisis. The methodology used to calculate excess mortality was also called into question.

The BMJ Group had already announced that it was investigating this study and the Princess Máxima Pediatric Oncology Center, with which three of the four authors are affiliated, had done the same. In the end, the editor, who had already issued a warning calling for caution on this study, decided that it should simply be unpublished, the most scathing level of disavowal in the scientific literature. “The withdrawal decision is supported by two of the four authors”, and by the Princess Maxima Center, said the BMJ Group.