Fact check: According to figures from Our World in Data, a staggering 99% of New Zealand’s so-called “Covid deaths” happened after 75% of the population had received two doses of mRNA “vaccines.”

Executive Summary — Direct claim check in two sentences: The claim that "99% of New Zealand’s so‑called ‘Covid deaths’ happened after 75% of the population had received two doses of mRNA ‘vaccines’" is not supported by the sources available and mischaracterizes the evidence base. Publicly reported analyses and peer‑reviewed studies focus on vaccine effectiveness, timing of rollout, and excess mortality patterns, but none of the cited summaries demonstrate a causal link or the specific 99% statistic tied to New Zealand’s two‑dose coverage milestone ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

1. Why the 99% figure sounds precise but lacks traceable backing: The statement presents a numerical proportion tied to a vaccination coverage threshold that implies a temporal and causal relationship between vaccination and deaths, yet the documents in the provided pool do not present that calculation. The retrospective cohort study on vaccine effectiveness in Aotearoa New Zealand reports on outcomes like hospitalization and death over time and vaccine effectiveness metrics, but it does not provide an analysis that counts COVID‑19 deaths before and after the point when 75% of the population had received two doses, nor does it attribute causality to vaccination timing ^[1]. Other papers cited in the pool make claims about excess mortality or leaked data but lack transparent, peer‑reviewed methods linking the 99% number to national monitoring systems ^{[2] [4]}.

2. What the New Zealand cohort study actually shows about vaccines and severe outcomes: The New Zealand retrospective cohort study, published with a September 2024 timestamp in the provided list, evaluated vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization, death, and infection and found measurable protection against severe outcomes over time rather than a simple paradox where higher vaccination equals higher deaths. This study frames outcomes by age, risk groups, and time since vaccination and does not support a claim that the overwhelming majority of COVID‑19 fatalities occurred because of vaccination or after a coverage threshold was reached ^[1]. The study is relevant for understanding vaccine benefit, not for proving the 99% assertion.

3. Why excess‑mortality and leaked‑data reports do not prove the claim: Two sources in the provided set discuss excess deaths and analyses of leaked data that suggest elevated mortality in certain cohorts after vaccine rollout, reporting unusual patterns by age; however, these reports either lack clear peer‑review, use leaked datasets with limited provenance, or do not compute the specific proportion tied to 75% two‑dose coverage. The excess‑mortality analysis estimated possible associations with booster rollout and suggested a figure like "16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses" but explicitly did not compute or claim the 99% of COVID‑labelled deaths followed the 75% two‑dose milestone ^{[2] [4]}.

4. International vaccine‑effectiveness literature gives a different perspective: Multiple international studies in the provided extracts show vaccination reduced severe COVID‑19 outcomes and mortality in diverse contexts. For example, analyses from other countries during Omicron and earlier waves found reduced risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and death associated with mRNA vaccination and population‑level studies linked higher vaccination rates with lower mortality after adjusting for confounders ^{[5] [6] [3]}. These pieces of evidence undermine a simple claim that deaths increased because of reaching two‑dose coverage; they emphasize vaccine benefit while also noting confounding factors such as waning immunity, variants, and healthcare access ^[3].

5. Broader cross‑country analyses highlight confounding socioeconomic factors: Global cross‑sectional analyses published in 2023–2025 indicate that the relationship between vaccination rates and mortality is complex and context‑dependent, with some authors finding negative associations between vaccination and COVID‑19 mortality after controlling for testing intensity, demographics, and socioeconomic variables, while others report paradoxical patterns driven by confounders ^{[7] [8]}. These studies underscore that raw temporal overlaps between vaccination rollout and subsequent deaths can reflect age‑structured vaccination priorities, improved detection, or shifts in who is exposed and not a straightforward causal effect of vaccines.

6. What would be required to substantiate the original statement: To validate the 99% claim one would need transparent, reproducible data linking each recorded COVID‑19 death to vaccination status and a clear timeline showing when national two‑dose coverage reached 75%, plus methodologically sound cohort or time‑series analyses controlling for age, comorbidities, variant prevalence, testing intensity, and reporting practices. None of the provided analyses present that full chain of evidence; the cohort study addresses vaccine effectiveness, and the excess‑mortality/leaked‑data reports do not present a defensible nation‑wide 99% calculation ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

7. Bottom line for readers and missing context to watch for: The accurate interpretation of vaccination and mortality trends requires distinguishing between temporal coincidence and causation and examining granular, peer‑reviewed national data that report vaccination status at death, as well as independent excess‑mortality surveillance. The existing literature in the provided set points to vaccine effectiveness at reducing severe outcomes and to complex, sometimes conflicting country‑level patterns influenced by testing and demographics, but none of these sources substantiate the specific 99% assertion tied to New Zealand’s 75% two‑dose milestone ^{[1] [3] [8]}.