This will make some public health officers sweat
In Sweden, a new study followed 840,000 people who were double vaccinated for nine months which is longer than any previous study. The researchers matched them or “paired them” with another 840,000 people who were the same, age, sex and from the same area. Out of this 1.6 million pooled sample, 27,000 people went on to get infected, and most of them were unvaccinated (21,000). So that’s not surprising, but underlying this data was an extraordinary trend showing efficacy falling month after month. In the first two to four weeks, the double vaccinated were very well protected. But by nine months later, the efficacy was not just zero, but negative.
The study considered protection against severe disease too, which lasts for longer, but after 6 months, the older men and people most at risk of Covid (sadly) were more likely to catch Covid that the matched same-age unvaccinated controls they were paired with. Nine months after vaccination, the average person is still less likely to end up in hospital, but protection is trending downwards for everyone.
No wonder the word on the lips of most state health officers is “Booster”
If only they had something better to offer than just another dose of the same thing?
From the paper:
In this study, vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 [Pfizer] against symptomatic infection waned progressively from 92% during the first month, to 47% by month 4-6 and from 7 months and onwards no effectiveness was detected. Effectiveness waned slightly slower for mRNA-1273 [Moderna], whereas effectiveness of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZenica] was generally lower. Overall, effectiveness was lower and waned faster among men and older individuals. For the outcome of hospitalization or death, effectiveness (any vaccine) waned from 89% during the first month to 42% from month 6 and onwards in the total population. There was notable waning among especially men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities.
Not surprisingly, this means that for high risk people in states where all good alternative treatments are banned, booster doses are the *only* option.
The effectiveness against severe illness seems to remain high through 9 months, although not for men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities. This strengthens the evidence-based rationale for administration of a third booster dose.
The study, of course, tells us nothing about how well Booster doses work. But it does suggest that “Evidence based” is the most abused and misused phrase on Planet Earth.
The graphs (golly) suggest some trouble ahead:
The vaccines start off with impressive protection against symptomatic disease. However it falls quickly. By the eighth and ninth month the average vaccinated person appears to be more likely to catch Covid than someone who wasn’t vaccinated.
Swedish Vaccine, efficacy after 6 to 9 months. Graph.
In the graph below, protection holds up well against severe disease for four months. But by nine months the average person is only 20% protected. That can’t be good.
Cities which rely solely and completely on vaccination to protect them may appear to cruise for a while, but by five or six months post vaccination, things may unravel unless the population has managed to catch the disease, recover and gain natural protection, or sweep through the Deep State and stop bureaucrats telling doctors what they can and can’t prescribe.
Unfortunately the window to gain natural protection while being protected by the vaccine is just not long enough to avoid overwhelming the hospitals.
…
Swedish Vaccine, protection against severity after 6 to 9 months. Graph.
If only there was some other drug we could use, one that was cheap, safe, in large supply and also worked against Covid in many stages? Imagine how many lives that could save…
In our wildest dreams this hypothetical cheap out-of-patent drug might even have been tested for us on states with two hundred million people to show how well it worked. If only…
Notice in this graph above, protection keeps improving for six weeks after the second dose? Our immune system spends weeks tweaking the antibody profile — and selecting slightly better antibodies. A fully mature immune response is slow, another reason that testing vaccines is not a fast process. And perhaps giving a second dose while the first dose response is not even finished is not the best plan?
On the plus side, researchers tossed out anyone known to have caught Covid, so the study-groups didn’t have a large confounding slab of people with strong natural protection skewing the results — though a few people would have inadvertently or asymptomatically done that anyhow. (Swedish testing rates weren’t that great).
Maybe things are not as bad as these graphs look? (Boy do they look bad).
The problem with matched or paired studies is that whatever factors drive people to get vaccinated in the first place are the same ones putting them at risk of a poorer immune response. Obviously, people at higher risk of dying of Covid will be more likely to get vaccinated. The two groups don’t start out with the same risk. The negative “ratio” at the end may be exaggerated.
There are also behavioral unknowns. Do vaccinated people work in high risk areas like nursing homes? Are they more likely to stay home because they are the kind of person who worries a lot, or are they more likely to wander around ad lib post-vaccine, because they feel safe and protected?
And the group who got vaccinated nine months ago, are obviously not the same sort of people as put it off til September. High risk people were vaccinated earliest and they are the first to reach the “nine months” mark.
The Swedish study is large (to put it mildly) and they even tested a bigger cohort too. By relaxing the matching process they managed to put together a second sort-of-matched cohort of nearly 4 million people. That’s pretty much the whole population of Sweden and it largely confirmed the trends.
In other news, they found that mixing and matching vaccines appear to give a bit better protection than sticking with the same brand.
The real message though, that the authors didn’t say, was that we need to use the damn antiviral treatments we already have — and it’s a crime that we aren’t.
* * *
Unconnected with the study, someone somewhere put together a video that fits this occasion.
Possible Source: Instagram
h/t
REFERENCE
Peter Nordström et al (2021) Effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccination against risk of symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death up to 9 months: a Swedish total-population cohort study, Lancet, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3949410 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3949410
Anyone who ends up in hospital with Covid will be put on a course of antivirals that have been proven to be effective.
159
What antivirals will that be ?
Better to prevent hospital with antivirals, your oppinion ?
511
Opinion and blather. Or rather , blah, blah, blah.
81
GlenM, I welcome Simon’s opinion both covid and climate. I believe in free speech.
Have you not noticed that Simon’s comments invariably provoke long threads of rebuttals and counter arguments. Those threads often crowd-source scientific material that many “lurkers” would never otherwise be exposed to.
Isn’t this the better way?
211
Agree completely.
Simon’s comments are great at exposing the absolutely absence of scientific reality backing up the AGW agenda.
Please keep going Simon. 🙂
140
>”What antivirals will that be ?”
Here’s an option:
‘New International Ivermectin Report of 64 Studies Shows 86% Success as Prophylaxis and 67% Success in Early Treatment’
190
Why not give early treatment antivirals BEFORE people need to go into hospital ? That would be much more sensible but the Big pharma would not make much money from it, so it is not permitted.
630
Different medications are effective at different times. Initially those medications would be against covid infection but then they need to be targetted at immune systems over-reacting, and later on they need to address the consequences of that over-reaction. The speed at which a person goes through these stages varies greatly, as does the strength and speed of their immune system response.
70
Different medications are effective at different times. Initially those medications would be against covid infection but then they need to be targetted at immune systems over-reacting, and later on they need to address the consequences of that over-reaction
I-MASK+ Prevention & Early Outpatient Treatment Protocol for COVID-19
and
MATH+ Hospital Treatment Protocol for COVID-19
and
I-RECOVER Management Protocol for Long Haul COVID-19 Syndrome (LHCS)
https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-recover-protocol/
60
By the time someone ends up in hospital the virus has already run it’s course, all anti-virals will do is stress the liver and kidneys.
191
I guess you’re right, if you’re talking about Zimbabwe, Uttar Pradesh, Japan, or have won the lottery in USA. But here? No way.
Cheers
Dave B
220
No effective, safe and proven antivirals are allowed use in Australia so are you talking about the experimental big pharma ones and the go to ventilators that kill more patients through Hypoxia than the virus itself?
370
Remdesivir (antiviral)
when death is near
95
Remdesivir is a poison that killed 54% of Africans treated with it for Ebola till it was stopped from being used
so it would probably be a thoughtful thing to use and put someone out of their misery (satire)
130
Simon, which antivirals and in what country and why wait until someone is so sick they end up in hospital?
And in Australia the common antivirals are banned for COVID treatment because government officials regard them as “dangerous”.
Back in the day (before the Left took over everything), the way medicine used to be practiced was that early intervention was considered the best way to treat disease.
320
Simon >”Anyone who ends up in hospital with Covid will be put on a course of antivirals”
But wouldn’t prevention at the outset be the better approach?
‘Absolutely Astonishing Success Rate of Ivermectin in Indian State Shreds ‘Horse Dewormer’ Propaganda’
New Zealand, population 5 million, new cases reported during the past 24 hours 166 [reported 1pm 01 November 2021]
Total 1916 active cases.
The New Zealand approach has been brain-dead insane right from the first lock down in 2020 (which I worked in crowded confines). As a result, we have an antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) outbreak that is impossible to contain with lock downs and “vaccines” because the “vaccines” create the ADE in the first place and lock downs don’t work.
Your hospital is situated next to the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.
Meanwhile, at the top of the cliff well away from the edge, 100s of millions of people with the proper preventative treatment are leading normal lives.
280
Your PM can’t seem to handle a non pre-screened hard question and shuts down the questioning and runs away to the bathroom.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/11/02/for-the-first-time-ever-new-zealand-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-is-asked-a-tough-question-about-her-vaccine-position-she-melted-on-camera/
20
Buried a friend of mine today that went in the hospital with Covid and was immediately put on a ventilator. Died 2 days later. No other treatment was suggested or provided. He was 69 and previously in good health.
210
that’s very sad Wet Mountains
RIP to your friend and my sincere condolences to you and your friends family
110
l know of one family of nine who contracted covid, the only people l actually know that have had the virus
two of the family, one double jabbed who had diabetes was pretty sick with the virus and one being treated for cancer who did not really have symptoms were asked to go to hospital just in case instead of going home and seeing how they went under quarantine with no early treatment
they were both in over night and given intravenous injections then let go home the next day, both said the injection, whatever it was made them feel like they were super human but they did not know what it was
the cancer sufferer asked for Ivermectin but was told they could not give it to her as they would risk loosing their licence and big fines
so these vulnerable people were treated with something that made them feel very good but l dont know what it was
80
I seem to remember Donald Trump, early in the piece, being treated with ‘something’ that made him feel like superman. Even though that was obviously the Lefts big opportunity to do him in, the treatment seems to have been very effective. Missed their chance and they may yet regret it.
30
Trump seemed convinced it was the monoclonal antibody “cocktail” Regeneron that really helped him. I believe he made it available, free, to all Americans. But in many places they need to know to request it. Florida provides easy access by using mobile treatment vans where it is given intravenously.
40
But too late, Simon. The aim is to get at the virus early with easily obtained ( the official block is the crime), cheap therapeutic agents and keep out of the hospitals by this effective treatment.
To make you happier, no doubt – you seem to take a morbid pleasure from the blockage of what many nations see as effective early treatment using therapeutics – Rickwill over the last two days presented a paper from one of the major US institutions stating naturally attained immunity wasn’t lasting as long, or was as effective as the cover from the vaccines.
That, imo is a major blow if true. It really means we must become much more desperate to get those therapeutic agents into the fray because the virus keeps circulating, let alone mutating, whilest our immunity rapidly fails. The side issues of those vaccines for many of us means we can’t keep taking boosters every 6 months, especially if those issues are themselves due to our immune system responses where repeated exposure to the antigens generally result in increasingly severe responses.
40
Let’s hope this is successful then….
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/science/aussie-breakthrough-brings-a-universal-covid19-vaccine-closer/news-story/9d17e2afbbc6cf9bab4a795c158e5e34
10
Annual dose of ivermectin reduces Covid infection rate by 8% and mortality by 23%. Gee I wonder what the effects of more regular doses would be?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33795896/
40
Sorry, I posted incorrectly – the reduction in mortality is 28%
30
Anti virals? Perhaps. Boosters? Perhaps. Definitely we need much bettervversion 2 of vaccinations which greatly enhances its staying power and also assists better in ensuring those who are vaccinated have better protection from either catchmg covid or of passing it on.
103
My only complaint about this post is that it is two days late for Halloween.
122
And your point is CG?
00
“And your point is CG?”
Surely it is obvious but in case you missed it it is because the post is two days late for Halloween.
However what is a lot less obvious in this post is the confected “shock horror”element that is so vigorously pushed,
The article states;
“In the graph below, protection holds up well against severe disease for four months. But by nine months the average person is only 20% protected. That can’t be good.”.
No, it can’t be good but it is not confined to Covid vaccines. There is no mention anywhere in this article, which is so aghast at the decline in the effectiveness of Covid vaccines, is there any mention of the well documented decline in the effectiveness of ‘flu vaccines.
“The flu shot offers protection against the flu for at least 6 months. Healthcare professionals usually vaccinate most people in October, when flu activity typicallyTrusted Source begins to increase, so their immunity will last until the following April.
In people aged 65 years and over, the effects of the flu vaccine may wear off earlier than usual, leaving them at higher risk than younger people of severe illness. The reason for this is that as people get older, their immune response to vaccines weakens.
Once an individual gets the flu shot, it takes 2 weeksTrusted Source to start working. The vaccine stimulates an immune response, whereby white blood cells identify the flu virus and begin making antibodies.
These antibodies will only circulate a person’s body for about 6 months. However, after they break down, the B lymphocytes can make the antibodies quicker the next time they encounter the virus.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/how-long-does-the-flu-shot-last#when-does-it-work
The decline in the effectiveness of flu and Covid vaccines is similar but where is the outcry against the flu vaccines? Nowhere of course because it detracts from the “shock horror ” generated by the Swedish paper .
Flu vaccination has been in common use for years but because of the clamour for ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine and Vit D3 and zinc and other anti-covid treatments it is, very conveniently, totally overlooked in articles showing similarities in flu and Covid vaccines particularly in their declining effectiveness over relatively short time periods
And just in case anyone thinks I am confusing the effects on the fictiveness of flu vaccines of the changes in flu virus from year to year with the loss in effectiveness caused by the decline in antibody levels in the months following vaccination, I am well aware of the differences.
_______________________
[Sorry, belated response: The flu vax is nothing like the Covid Vax. Potential harm from mRNA is vastly greater than from old style traditional flu vaxes, and I have discussed the short lived protection from influenza vaccines here. Plus the risk they weaken our immunity to new strains of flu. A risk that is hardly comparable to the multiple entirely new risks from mRNA vaccines. – Jo
52
Another difference is that taking the flu shot is the choice of the patient, and is not required to be able to enter a coffee shop.
Cheers
Dave B
170
a friend who has been too ill of late to get the jab but wanted it and has had one jab was refused entry from two country town coffee shops
also on the same day when he went to get a massage the lady freaked out apparently when she asked what the band aid on his shoulder was from LOL
she kicked him out of the shop and told him he could not return for a week LOL
he said he just gave up and went back home to the farm
30
Will that change? Bearing in mind that tens of thousands of people here in the UK regularly die from flu will masks become mandatory or will the health police insist on vaccine passports as well?
10
I wonder if Pfizer is the culprit behind those dodgy influenza ‘vaccinations’.
00
How Pfizer bullies weaker governments with their contracts for the vaccine:
https://youtu.be/nYIJxoh7gqw
Are there confidential paragraphs stipulating that ivermectin will not be looked at or recommended?
290
Video is a plus ten
200
But, just a bit too fast.
10
I guess you get used to stuff seeming to be too fast in Brisbane.
50
This from the UK office of national statistics. The title says it all, although there are lots of caveats
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10152287/Unvaccinated-people-32-times-likely-die-catch-Covid-ONS-report-finds.html
024
Oops. More bad news week on week from the UK for the vaccine-addicts.
Hide the Vaccine Failure: UKHSA (U.K. Health Security Agency ) Caves to Pressure and Removes Chart Showing Higher Infection Rates in the Vaccinated – as Effectiveness Hits New Low of Minus-132%
https://dailysceptic.org/2021/10/30/hide-the-vaccine-failure-ukhsa-caves-to-pressure-and-removes-chart-showing-higher-infection-rates-in-the-vaccinated-as-effectiveness-hits-new-low-of-minus-132/
The new Vaccine Surveillance report, released on Thursday, has been purged of the offending chart showing infection rates higher in the double-vaccinated than the unvaccinated for all over-30s and more than double the rates for those aged 40-79.
In line with previous reports the numbers still tell their story.
The figures this week continue to worsen for the vaccinated, with unadjusted vaccine effectiveness against infection:
• Minus 31% for people in their 30s,
• Minus 132% for people in their 40s,
• Minus 113% for those in their 50s,
• Minus 114% for those in their 60s,
• Minus 104% for those in their 70s.
• Minus 30% for those over 80 (up from minus 34% last week.)
• Vaccine effectiveness remains positive for those under 30, though for 18-29 year-olds it slipped again to just 21%.
• For those under 18 it is still highly positive, though down slightly to 81% from 90% the previous week. (The most recently vaccinated cohort.)
• Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation and death remained largely stable this week, meaning there’s no sign yet of the sharp decline found in the Swedish study.
The article goes on to critique UKHSA’s efforts to downplay its own damning figures.
110
May be a serious misunderstanding – as so often – of the statistics.
The way the table is set up, if 100% of the population at any age was to be vaccinated, then it would show that being double vaccinated was responsible for all deaths, rather than the virus. The minus figures for effectiveness are clearly a nonsense.
Surely you realise that?
11
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/085/284/838/original/b77baae8ab60b848.mp4
The elephant in the room.
80
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (yellow card scheme). A reporting system for the adverse effects of medicines.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-vaccines-toll-on-mens-sexual-health/
Out of the 49.6million people injected the average rate of overall reporting rate for all vaccines combined is 1-in-131 people impacted.
Total fatalities – 1,738; Pfizer – 576, AstraZeneca – 1,111, Moderna – 20, Unspecified – 31
Men’s sexual/reproductive health specific data
Infections including epididymitis (swelling in one or both testicles), orchitis (inflammation of the testes) and prostate (gland located between penis and bladder)
• Pfizer = 13
• AZ = 13
• Moderna = 2
Penis injury or contusion (blood builds up under the skin and penis may become swollen and badly bruised)
• Pfizer = 1
• AZ = 4
Neoplasms (excessive tissue growth) including prostate, male breast, penile and testicular cancers
• Pfizer = 4
• AZ = 12
Erection and ejaculation disorders
• Pfizer = 78
• AZ = 135
• Moderna = 19
Penile, scrotal and prostate disorders
• Pfizer = 61
• AZ = 88
• Moderna = 9
Sperm and testicular disorders
• Pfizer = 72
• AZ = 180
• Moderna = 16
Gynaecomastia (swelling in men’s breasts)
• Pfizer = 3
• AZ = 9
30
This is alarming.
11
So birth rates will plummet. Not only because of the increase of first trimester miscarriages for 10% to 80% but the blokes are effected too.
20
“Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial”
https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635
30
Jo,
Found this online last week posted by a commenter on another website:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/10/comparison-reports-proves-vaccinated-developing-ade/
Makes for interesting reading. It would appear that increasing use of mRNA vaccination decreases not just the immune response to COVID but to all diseases. The article describes it as AIDS, but not HIV-mediated AIDS.
220
The real story is the *negative* protection.
This implies that, as suggested by knowledgeable vaccine heavyweights that these vaccines shouldnt be used widespread and could cause ADE.
The other unspoken thing is what appears to be an AIDS-like immune system impact ( the negative part of the graph ) that implies possible permanent loss of immune function…..
60
At least 10 months …
COVID-19 antibodies remain in body 10 months after infection
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-10-covid-antibodies-body-months-infection.html
via instapundit
121
From the article…
“…infected within the first wave of COVID-19, before they were vaccinated.”
Utterly insane to inoculate anyone who’s already had the disease. All the study can show is how inoculating an immune person against part of what they are already immune to can screw up the prior immunity.
Everything they are doing is wrong,
270
Covid has designed. Possibly the spike was specifically designed to make a vaccination based on the spike ineffective after a period of time. If this assumption is correct, we are going to need an alternative or we be forced to vaccinate twice a year. Forced vaccination twice a year, would be very disruptive and could create health problems.
We know the Vit D plus zinc supplements can defeat covid. The assumption is that our body’s cells when they are infected, create a zinc ionophore. The cell created zinc ionophore lets a tiny amount of zinc into the cell which makes the ACE-2 connector slightly positive which stops covid from connecting and replicating. The body’s evolutionary protection would protect against all viruses that must connect to the ACE-2 connector to replicate.
And we know that elderly people and all of the at risk young people are severely Vit D deficient. Vit D deficiency is dependent on intake and body mass. Vit D deficiency causes depression and depression is self treated by eating sugary stuff and drinking alcohol both of which cause complex multi organ problems which is called by the Medical industry metabolic syndrome. Vit D stops covid and it also is required by our immune cells to enable them to take action/function optimally/work.
China has the solution to covid. It is not vaccines as the Chinese were able to stop covid in their country before they ‘had’ a vaccination and the Chinese vaccination is not effective. This make sense, as a prerequisite for releasing covid, has having a method to protect their population.
181
What are you on about? China is introducing vaccination for ages 3 and up
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237372.shtml
20
Unearthed Wuhan lab docs show ‘Bat Lady’ Shi Zhengli isolating corona virus strains for ‘direct human infection’
https://thenationalpulse.com/exclusive/wuhan-report-boasted-of-human-infecting-covid/
130
Placebo vax.
‘A new CDC study (inadvertently?) finds 28 times more fully vaccinated patients (5,213) were hospitalized with COVID from June to September than the unvaccinated with prior infection (189) in nine U.S. states.’ (Notrickszone)
140
What were they hospitalised for (not with)? Vaccinated people with hypertension or chronic heart or lung conditions are often hospitalised if they catch any virus.
10
My first thought: Where did they find 1,600,000 people and the means to test them several times?
My second thought: Do we (some of us) not get a flu shot every year?
And: Maybe we should get a flu shot every 6 months.
And finally: I agree: “. . . we need to use the damn antiviral treatments we already have — and it’s a crime that we aren’t.”
[Fall back strategy: D3, red onions, potatoes, Multi-pill (Zinc), and red wine]
200
Someone’s probably already asked this, but how does effectiveness drop below zero?
And yes, less than zero effectiveness could be due to VIE (viral induced enhancement, a more general form of ADE), but that wouldn’t follow the same curve. It would start at zero, and have a different y axis, and probably different x, as well. And, you apparently need an autopsy to settle cause of death, but that doesn’t help if the effects aren’t fatal to the victims.
What a mess the politicians and pharmaceutical companies have made of this.
See here for COVID information gold!
https://evidencenotfear.com/tag/dr-robert-malone/
110
I wondered that too, perhaps your body creates the virus more than antibodies?
60
LOL
20
Yonason, the negative efficacy might be an artefact of different risk groups. Or it might be the start of ADE. Or Original Antigenic Sin, or a new deficit in the immune system, an autoimmune response, or a metabolic deficiency, a nutrient loss, a viral mutation, or some part of all of the above. There are many paths.
It could be the unvaccinated are looking after themselves better, getting fitter, or getting more Vitamin D, and so it’s not that the vaxxed are weaker, its that the unvacced got stronger.
If it is real, it may be temporary or the start of a real decline.
When they’ve done the 3 to 10 year studies, we might find out. 🙂
50
Jo –
I think you may find that effectiveness figures below zero are just an artifact. The way the numbers are constructed, the more people that are vaccinated, the more negative the figures become. The base population for the calculation is changing, so the figures cannot be compared.
20
“… the negative efficacy might be an artefact of different risk groups.” – JN
I hear you about it possibly being an artifact, as mothcatcher also observes.
My problem is that for none my professors or employers was a data plot like that ever acceptable.
This, however, is indeed (as you quoted from a tweet), “a killer summary.”
“ The real message though, that the authors didn’t say, was that we need to use the damn antiviral treatments we already have — and it’s a crime that we aren’t.”
No misinterpreting that!
10
You would be more vulnerable to covid19 than you were beforevaccination.
70
Your innate immune response has been attenuated.
60
I came across this article through your link:
https://evidencenotfear.com/i-have-been-through-this-before-ann-bauer/
‘I Have Been Through This Before’ – Ann Bauer
27 October 2021
“But by that point, almost 50 years of damage had been done, during which any clinician who came up with a different diagnosis or questioned Bettelheim’s practices suffered immediate and devastating professional consequences.”
—————
I always wonder if ‘Pfizer’ knew from the very start that we were going to need boosters…
It always seemed logical, even if you are not a scientist.
– I am vaccinated with Astrazeneca, it is my own choice,
but it seems a bad idea to start vaccinating 5 to 12 years old with a Pfizer vaccine based on the evidence of
such a small study….’The study, a Pfizer trial, found 91% efficacy for the jab among more than 2,200 kids
ages 5 to 11.’ What about the safety?
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-11-parents-covid-vaccine-kids.html
Tufts Now: We’ve had COVID-19 vaccines approved for adults for almost a year. How is the testing of vaccines different for children? Why has it taken longer to approve children’s vaccines?
Daniel Rauch: Kids are not simply small adults. We can see that with this disease because we know that kids react differently to COVID-19 than adults do. So it’s not surprising that we’re being careful about vaccine development for kids, as opposed to just saying the adult vaccine is good for everybody.
Probably the most important reason to take more time is that any long-term side effect that you’re worried about is going to be potentially longer in a kid, because they have more of their life ahead of them. So not only do you want to pay special attention to safety, but the duration of time you may want to watch is longer.’
(MUCH LONGER!!!)
– ‘Your unvaccinated friend is roughly 20 times more likely to give you COVID.’
The Conversation 3 days ago
I don’t like headlines like this.
– https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/public-health/2021/10/we-cant-vaccinate-this-pandemic-away/
‘The combination of safe and effective IVM with a vaccination programme will enhance viral clearance, reduce disease severity, reduce hospital admissions and reduce deaths.’
I really hope these vaccines will turn out to be safe for everyone in the long run.
In the mean time, let’s not forget that there are other compagnies with different approches as well!
30
Effectiveness in the sense used in these studies is a complementary measure of relative risk (a ratio comparing the treated group to untreated). A negative effectiveness implies the treatment increases the risk.
20
When a large for profit industry is given carte blanche to produce a product, forget the cost, and what little oversight there is, consists of former employees of said industry, expectations should be adjusted accordingly.
And noting that the purchaser has a infinite supply of other peoples money (at least until the matrix collapses).
Then considering, that both purchaser and producer have vested financial and political interests in the under performance of the product …
and said product turns out to under perform …
in the immortal words of Gomer Pyle … Surprise! Surprise!
120
Talking percentages hides the reality here. Of the 840k vaccinated people, 277 of them ended up in hospital. That is a low number; in fact 3 times lower than the unvaccinated who ended up in hospital.
To put this piece in context, Sweden currently has average Covid daily deaths of 4. Yes just 4 per day. Down from a peak of 137 per day back in February. Only 70% of the population have been vaccinated so there are still quite a few unvaccinated people who get Covid and have a tough time with it. As vaccination level increased, hospital demand dropped from 2,900 beds in January to just 179 beds now.
The message here is – GET VACCINATED and get a booster 6 to 9 months after. Boosters have been approved in Australia so make an appointment.
The main places feeding the virus are Russia and Eastern Europe where vaccination rates are very low – still under 40%. Russia now up to 1104 deaths per day and it continues to increase rapidly.
Slovakia is one of the dozen or so locations touted as having found the miracle cure, Ivermectin. Their cases are going vertical and now at 3,900/day. Deaths are also beginning to rise. They have 42% of population vaccinated and very low number per day so it is not enough to get the infection rate under 1.
328
Different conclusions can be made by picking different stats. There is not enough studies done to make a definitive conclusion about how effective the vaccines are and what the long term effects will be, which might even out way any benefits simply because we need several years to find out. In India where the vaccination rate is extremely low and ivermectin is widely used the death rate is very low. There are other countries with similar stats. So, take what you like from the figures but one thing is for sure. The vaccines are not working so well as one would hope in so many nations where the vaccination rate is very high compared to those where the vaccination rates are very low. The exact reason is not yet clear.
160
Check out how flu vaccines lose their effectiveness after about 6 months. No one seems particularly concerned
28
Flu shots are just variants of previous ones that have already been thoroughly tested. Anyway I never have taken them either. I have taken other vaccines for overseas travel purposes some time ago. I’m not travelling now so I don’t see the need for any shots.
70
“Flu shots are just variants of previous ones that have already been thoroughly tested.”
You have missed the point that there is no difference in the longevity of the antibody response to the Covid or Flu vaccines
06
And that’s the best you have?
The flu has a season that’s less than six months, it has a lower mortality rate, lower rate of spread, the community has more natural immunity, and few people are reporting side effects.
40
Except for the millions that dont take the flu shot…
80
Alternatively, couldn’t the message well be: get the two shots and then get infected with covid within 6 months – so the disease is not severe and your immunity is then stronger?
By staying isolated (hello Qld) we don’t have the chance to get infected until the shots have worn off completely.
This panicdemic has been handled wrongly.
60
Both NSW and Victoria are now going the right way with case numbers – today at 1162 from a peak of 2752 just two weeks ago. Within a month, Australians should have very low exposure. Just a matter of then limiting spread through international flights.
Most older Australians will require a booster before the world is rid of Covid; particularly if they are travelling overseas. If Russia and Eastern Europe get their populations vaccinated then being rid of Covid globally will be by March 2022.
Boosters with a different vaccine gives better protection than the original double jabs:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.10.21264827v1.full.pdf
Natural immunity also wanes. There are people who have had more than one dose of Covid. Getting a booster is predictable and probably lower risk than getting infected after some prescribed time.
Israels’ booster program is keeping their cases on a downward trend:
https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/?chart=countries&highlight=Israel&show=highlight-only&y=both&scale=linear&data=cases-daily-7&data-source=merged&xaxis=right#countries
216
Natural immunity remains largely the same throughout one’s life. The (vaccinated or unvaccinated) risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2, unlike virulence, doesn’t much vary across all age groups. I think you mean “naturally-acquired immunity”.
30
Naturally acquired immunity – depending on the virus can be anything from a few months (norovirus) to lifelong (influenza).
40
Of the 840k vaccinated people, 277 of them ended up in hospital. That is a low number; in fact 3 times lower than the unvaccinated who ended up in hospital.
If 21,000 caught covid and 3 X 277 ended up in hospital that is just under 4%. But how many were obese, had cancer, diabetes and were involved in car accidents?
30
The key point of this study is not the average numbers across nine months but the trends across that period.
40
Viruses that coexist in animals can never be cured. They have a major reservoir to mutate and that is COVID’s longevity. Just get used to this Virus as we do with Influenza.
70
I don’t see that an ‘animal reservoir’ is a reason for putting up with covid. We don’t need to be close enough to wild animals to breathe in their viruses. Bubonic plague still exists, but with few infections because our homes no longer have the rats and fleas. Domestic animals could be vaccinated. Covid can be really nasty, and not just for the obviously vulnerable but for young people and kids. It is sad that it may still be in wild animals but why should we give in to covid and keep it around us?
01
John, I think you mean eradicated not “cured”. And yes, usually an “animal reservoir” means we can’t eradicate it.
But wirebird is also right theoretically. We don’t have to live with it if we are determined. If we use Ivermectin etc on all close contacts we can reduce this to nothing much. It takes closed borders though for a while, with reopening only to clean states after they get to zero. When an outbreak occurs from an animal, as it will, we go back to step one briefly. Ivermectin and borders.
I doubt we will do that. Mostly because it will take effort, money and coordination and the WHO is useless. Unless there really is long term damage from infections, or long covid, or brain damage etc. Being cynical, the real obstacle could be that there are more profits in not eradicating it. Sigh.
On the up side, there may be a vaccine that really solves this virus one day. Rabies has animal reservoirs but we have found a way in the West to stop it coming in. Though the poorest in the world still suffer so much from it.
40
Interesting enough ivermectin is no longer used in Slovakia
00
Sweden – Unorthodox approach, vilified.
Lithuania – World’s strictest “vaccine passport” scheme.
Lithuania has a covid infection rate 16 times that of Sweden.
Sweden vs Lithuania
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCaoypDUYAAVJQQ?format=jpg&name=medium
So, who is the covid winner here?
131
It is proof of the efficacy of vaccinations and the difference between exponential growth and exponential decay. Sweden has 70% of population vaccinated while Lithuania 64%.
The difference is signifiant when you realise that an infection rate of 0.99 results in declining cases while 1.01 results in increasing cases. Both countries have similarly high death rates but Sweden has managed to get the infection rate solidly under 1 with a combination of natural immunity and vaccinations. Lithuania is not there yet. Mobility in Lithuania was higher than pre-Covid when cases started rising but is now 3% down on pre-Covid and the cases are levelling out.
Considering Sweden as the gold standard is really twisted – a sick and sad joke on a population that has suffered badly through Covid. Sweden has lost 0.14% of its population to Covid. By comparison Australia, 0.007% 20 times better than Sweden. The gold standard is Taiwan at 0.003% of the population. Mobility in Taiwan at 8% below pre-Covid is also higher than in Sweden at 15% down on pre-Covid.
Swedes should have their health official facing charges. And they may yet happen:
https://www.government.se/press-releases/2020/06/mats-melin-to-chair-covid-19-inquiry-in-sweden/
214
What makes anyone even think that health officials didn’t know this already? For all we know that’s the exact reason why they are increasingly pressuring those who have been vaccinated to be re-vaccinated a few more times if not forever. Why else would they? The [non-]vaccines are next to useless, and on top of that they might even be more deadly that the virus itself in the long run. We just have to wait a few years to find out. The risk/reward just don’t measure up, which is why I will continue to refuse to take any of vaccines until I am much more certain there is at least one vaccine that does the job properly and is relatively safe.
160
JO – again thanks for highlighting the huge issues with the gene mutation therapies.
Completely missing from the mainstream narrative are the vaccine injuries. AHPRA, to keep a lid on this absolute disaster, has to threaten doctors and nurses with the sack. I thought that health professionals were meant to advocate for patients and “do no harm”??? Seems AHPRAs model is the complete reverse, where doctors are vassals of the state and their actions are dictated by Leftist politics rather than health concerns.
Boosters will just cause ever more vaccine injuries, maiming and deaths. And we have no idea about the long term damage these death shots are causing.
Putting my Quality Assurance hat on, in the food industry we want to make it as easy as possible for people to report issues with products and its extremely serious if people have allergic reactions. A death will completely kill a brand or a company. But fast forward to the Pharma paradise we have entered, where nobody wants to investigate if bad batches of these concoctions are involved with deaths and injuries, where the vaxx is the answer to anything and everything – and we have MSM propagandists waving away any negative talk or hard questions as this may fuel “vaccine hesitancy”. WAKE UP PEOPLE this is completely and utterly wrong on all levels.
Gerard Rennick here in QLD is standing up for those injured, and its high time that we abandoned these death shots and used Ivermectin as the basis for covid treatment
210
I have heard the “Health” Minister Hunt several times talk about “mRNA vaccines” several times in the context that these are the vaccines that the government has decided will be the answer.
It makes no sense he would mention the “mRNA” part specifically unless he is excluding all other vaccine options such as Novavax (which they have contracted for) and two Australian proper vaccines under development, Covax and InGeneIC.
The mRNA vaccines chosen to the exclusion of all other vaccine and other treatment options will join other expensive disasters where the Australian Government has attempted to choose a technological winner. In this case it will be an expensive and deadly one.
100
I’d rate it more likely than not that Hunt has no idea what he is talking about.
At the moment all that matters is the happy clapping for injections. That will kick the can down the road and give the powers that be an escape route from the appalling restrictions they have imposed on daily life.
The next phase will begin with “we did all we could but the populace let the government down”.
100
Or another excuse will be “we were acting on the best available information”.
But the guilty will remain nameless and unpunished, as usual (e.g. hotel quarantine in Vicdanistan).
And the Sheeple will remain clueless, as usual.
And the media will not investigate, as usual.
And the Left will support the government claim, as usual.
90
The hotel quarantine fiasco really was a classic. Imagine even the inquiry not being able to identify who gave the command. Now THAT’s how you do it!
50
Yes Forrest, keep up the clapping and glad handing. All is rosy in the Pharma state of Australia… Greg Hunt received my report (courtesy of Gerard Rennick) on Ivermectin and he read it. The fact that he can, after doing that, stand idly by whilst the TGA, in a complete rejection of logic and morality, stops the use of Ivermectin shows how far we have fallen.
Leftist pseudo science and political motives rule the waves.
You I and the readers here see the ridiculous newspeak which rules and the abandonment of commonsense and science. The truth can be suppressed but it will win out in the end. And at that time I hope that Greg Hunt and the other spineless idiots who have enabled this horrific situation have to take responsibility for their decisions.
140
If immunology is leftist pseudoscience, what isn’t? Just stuff you understand maybe?
215
Be a better troll. Somewhere else.
80
”
You seem inordinately ond of that comment. Is it the only one you have when responding to a comment you don’t like/understand?
08
Strawman argument demonstrated perfectly by Gee Aye. PoD never said any such thing.
20
GHunt is a thoughtful human being.
12
You may be thinking of his brother Mike.
110
The same processes that you decry have been in use against the ‘flu virus for several years without any of the hue and cry surrounding Covid=19 vaccinations. Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with those processes
19
To seek the truth -n always follow the money trail
Joanne has posted on the amout Pfizer and others pay to lobbists and no doubt in direct political donations
50
I really like those Swedes- they seem to understand and do real science. This study with its large participant numbers and in a country with fewer lockdown interferences is gold standard. Up there with the DANMASK study. Now it’s back to risk management. If the mRNA vaccines are producing less than 50% efficacy after 6 months with all the adverse effects, the question is – are they actually worth it? During 2020 a lot of people wished for a vaccine solution but knew that good vaccines take years, if not decades to develop. This study seems to support that theory.
120
If the mRNA vaccines are producing less than 50% efficacy after 6 months with all the adverse effects, the question is – are they actually worth it? During 2020 a lot of people wished for a vaccine solution but knew that good vaccines take years, if not decades to develop. This study seems to support that theory.
Like many here you seem totally unaware of the similarities between vaccinating against Covid-19 and vaccinating against influenza. The former is the subject of considerable vilification especially from the right wing while the latter has been in progress for several years and has generated very few adverse comments in that time
011
It’s got nothing to do with politics Ian. Its a virus- you cant hide from a virus. A virus doesn’t recognise politics, curfew times, white lines on basketball courts or even the quality of your face mask. It will do what it likes or as much as it is allowed by more important natural forces such as seasonality, healthy immune systems, race, vitamin D status etc.
90
Influenza vaccines were not developed using new gene therapy techniques over the course of 3 months and only tested for 3 more months on screened healthy subjects before being unleashed on the unknowing public at large.
50
It’s a pity that Pfizer can’t be sued under various laws relating to false advertising.
Mind you, weren’t we told that the production of the vaccine could easily be tweaked to deal with other strains? That hasn’t turned out well either.
40
As I’ve said before I take the waning effect of the injections to be a good thing providing no lasting damage has been done to the body.
20
Time will tell – that is why vaccines take years.
30
Try Vacccine Induced AIDS as the cause
20
That’s a very scary scenario.
00
The suggestion is for a third injection.
But is there any limit as to how many “boosters” there should be?
Perhaps every three months indefinitely?
Keeping the population fully “protected” with a non-sterilising vaccine is going to end up in disaster.
Doesn’t 50 years of leaky vaccine experience with Marek’s Disease in chickens teach anything to the medical establishment, government and other assorted rent seekers?
From Wikipedia:
What could possibly go wrong?
140
The answer to your question about learning the lessons from Marek’s disease is NO.
The whole thing smacks of Rudd logic. We must do something. This is something. Therefore we must do it.
The big question is how the powers that be will try to excuse their banning of effective treatments.
110
But was the efficacy determined by antibody “counting”, by PCR testing (cost a fortune for 840,000 people), by statistics (based only on the number of people who caught covid) … ?
30
you’ll find out all your answers by reading the paper.
08
840,000 people X 2 =
20
But was the efficacy determined by antibody “counting”, by PCR testing (cost a fortune for 840,000 people), by statistics (based only on the number of people who caught covid) … ?
Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Swedish nationwide registries. The cohort comprised 842,974 pairs (N=1,684,958), including individuals vaccinated with 2 doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, mRNA-1273, or BNT162b2, and matched unvaccinated individuals. Cases of symptomatic infection and severe Covid-19 (hospitalization or 30-day mortality after confirmed infection) were collected from 12 January to 4 October 2021.
Interpretation: Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 infection wanes progressively over time across all subgroups, but at different rate according to type of vaccine, and faster for men and older frail individuals. The effectiveness against severe illness seems to remain high through 9 months, although not for men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities. This strengthens the evidence-based rationale for administration of a third booster dose.
There were two comments
Supplemental tables are broken and should be corrected.
Loosely matched cohort analyses are not good. Sample size is limited and results showed no significant diffefences. If you want to conduct analyses, you should gather data and match strictly.
“Homemaker service” is, I assume, the hemtjänst, which is a kind of home help service, primarily for the elderly.
Could the maker and brand names please also be used for clarity to all levels of reader.
It seems that the AstraZeneca vaccine has poorest durability yet, when followed with either Pfizer or Moderna as a 2nd dose, outperforms 2 doses of either (have I got that right?). Could this be an important clue as to what a truly effective vaccine (worthy of that name) might be comprised of?
The tables in the pdf file are very untidy and difficult to read. Would it be possible to reformat them?
13
Looks like I was onto a winner by getting AZ.
I think John’s comment about PCR shows that he didn’t read the paper and is confused as to what it actually does.
07
I don’t understand. Those Swedish figures must be wrong because Saint Fauci said the vaccines were “extraordinarily efficacious, 94 to 95% . . . virtually 100% efficacious” and he wouldn’t lie, would he? Much?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/QbWq47ij8bNz/
80
Never trust anyone who was responsible for cruel experiments on dogs.
40
Or deadly experiments on orphans. The man is pure filth (allegedly of course).
https://iccinvestigation.wordpress.com/
60
MEASLES-very infective, virus desease. Two vaccine shots and you get permanent immunity in 97-99 %.
41
Every chance you get remind politicians, public serpents, members of the medical establishment and Big Pharma of the Nuremberg Code. Ask them also to look up the “Doctor’s Trials” at the Nuremberg Trials and what happened to the defendants who were found guilty.
NUREMBERG CODE
1.The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill, and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
130
Why do the present ‘rona “vaccines” lose their effectiveness so quickly when proper vaccines last many years or even a lifetime?
61
Because it depends on the virus and the response to particular antigens. This has been known for a long time, even before HIV.
56
What the science brigade need to confess is that virology is probably one of the most “inexact” sciences. Knowledge of virus behaviour is many magnitudes less than our knowledge of bacteria or fungi etc for example. It’s only since we have been able to “see” viruses that the science of virology advanced. That was mostly due to the development of electron microscopes. It’s also a very small branch of science along with immunology. Now we have a situation where we have a virus’s response to mass vaccination. An even less studied area mainly due to lack of opportunity. There’s an analogy about a plane built with airframe, wings and an engine only which takes off and the fuselage is built while flying. Thats where we are with COVID and mass vaccination. Almost totally unexplored territory and hopefully were are not flying into a mountain. Any expert who professes to predict is very brave. Early 2020 we learned of the high survivability stats of COVID amongst the general populace. The basics of epidemiology was to isolate the vulnerable and let the rest of us get on with our lives. This tenet along with many others was ignored in the mad, political fuelled rush to placate the population. There are so many countries ( like Sweden) who took a lower COVID response and their stats are very comparable, if not better than those countries who implemented lockdowns etc. We need a multifaceted approach to COVID. That includes all early anti-virals, sensible general population responses (not mask mandates), high quality vaccines and a general emphasis on better health outcomes which in turn helps immune response.
72
Ross, our understanding of our immune system is immature because it is an enormously complicated computer-like AI and defense system. It trawls through hundreds of thousands of different molecules and has to learn and differentiate “self” from “non-self”. It runs 24/7 for our entire lives but can kill us at any point in minutes through anaphylactic shock if the feedback loops go wrong.
But virology is huge and very exact. It is a vastly bigger field than climate science. The industry of medicine and medical tests, for obvious reasons, is a magnitude or three bigger than climate studies. People care a lot more. There is a truckload of money. There are something like 20,000 – 30,000 medical journals. Think about that. The sheer volume of material published is massive.
The real advances in virology came with genetics. A virus is after all, just a bunch of genes in a shell.
Sadly Swedens stats were a failure in many ways. Fifty percent of swedes live alone, they are permanently “socially distanced” more than nearly every other population. They also fortify food with Vitamin D. With those two factors they should have done better than most nations rather than “the same”. The lessons from Sweden don’t translate to high density populations with crowded houses.
55
Sorry Jo, I have to disagree with you on Sweden. We can compare stats until the cows come home. Sweden took a very sensible middle of the road approach in their COVID response. Their biggest failure was in aged care hygiene which was where a lot of poorly educated migrant workers were employed. They quickly admitted their mistake and corrected it. Their overall mortality stats year on year are very good and they compare well with other European countries. Anders Tegnell never said his approach was the best, but he believed that when COVID “ended” all countries would be at very similar positions, but their route would have been different. I have seen live interviews with either he or his predecessor who stated the same.
82
Sweden’s per capita death rate is 20 times higher than Australia’s. We would have to kill another 35,000 people to reach the same rate.
Despite the UK population density being ten times higher (300/km2 versus 30/km2) the UK death toll was only 1.4 times higher.
I think the lock-n-rapid-vax policies in NSW and Vic have been a disaster but the solution is antivirals, not copying Sweden.
41
I’d copy Taiwan, not Sweden.
00
Philip, indeed. As I keep harping on through the full length of this pandemic the best way to manage bioweapons is 1. Hard Borders, and 2. Antivirals.
Sadly it isn’t realistic for all the smaller Australian states to lock out the larger ones now that Gladys, Scott and Dan allowed the virus in. But let us keep that virus out until we allow antivirals and our doctors to prescribe as best as they see fit.
00
Where did you get the idea that virology or immunology is small. If you count by money spent and publications they are huge. And for that matter that “seeing” the virus was the major step forward (not a bad step but no more major than genomics or coupling microscopy with immunology).
Otherwise, what Jo wrote.
13
And the obvious conclusion is that the spike protein was a convenient but poor choice as the antigen for a single antigen vaccine (which doesn’t consider other issues of the inherent toxicity of the spike protein nor the clotting and autoimmune effects inherent with the gene therapy techniques being used)
10
David, many many past vaccines didn’t work, had brief efficacy and crashed and burned on the lab bench. You just didn’t hear about them.
Some past vaccines caused harm and damage and for many viruses we still don’t have an approved vaccine despite decades of trying. Eg RSV, Common colds, HIV, Cytomegalovirus, Dengue Fever, Herpes Simplex, Epstein-Barr virus.
90
David’s point is that such failures either never made it to general use or were swiftly withdrawn.
His question is quite obviously rhetorical to provoke thought.
20
Let’s see some studies on All-cause Mortality, comparing the Vaccinated to the Purebloods.
(Pureblood == not had any mRNA vaccine jabs).
…and don’t accept any classification of Unvaccinated that includes people up to 3 weeks following their ‘first jab’.
NSW Health is guilty of this: they lump them in with the Unvaccinated purebloods; and call them “No Effective Dose” … Sneaky.
Let’s find out which group does better at surviving all diseases, not just COVID-19.
If the vaccines have NO association with increased risk of cancer, heart problems, stroke, autoimmune disease etc., we have to be sure about that.
80
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/another-professional-soccer-player-collapses-field-emil-palsson-suffers-field-cardiac-arrest-resuscitated-field/
40
What this paper does not investigage is Vaccine Induced Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)
It normally takes over a decade to fully test and approve a new vaccine and not 6 months. Any longer-term side efects should be discovered during such a lenghty period of clinical trials on animals and then human volunteers.
The decline in efficacy could also be a “red flag” that an injectee’s overall immune response has deteriated several months after being exposed to EXPERIMENTAL gene theropy.
The supply contracts of Pfizer admit that the longer-term side effercts of these new generation of ‘vaccines’ is unknown
100
A new international report of 64 studies shows Ivermectin has an 86% success rate as a prphylaxis and a 67% success rate in early treatment of coronavirus.
The results mirror the over 290 studies on hydroxychloroquine that have been reported over the past year.
https://ivmmeta.com/ivm-meta.pdf
70
My crystal ball has had a pretty good run lately.
It says that the powers that be have to allow the major drug manufacturers a chance to come up with something before known effective treatments are allowed.
20
PS: Sorry h/t to greggg added.
20
Just repeating my comment from Tues unthreaded.
Prof Nikolai Petrovsky of Flinders Uni ( where it looks like he has just lost his job because of the mandate) has developed a conventional vaccine agsinst covid 19. He explains a lot in his talk including the risks with mRNa injections and how his differs. Looks promising, has been doing trials in Iran.
https://youtu.be/VnkCA9V-1yE
The govt are not supporting them so a crowdfunding page has been set up.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/bringing-covax19-back-to-australia?utm_source=customer&utm_medium=copy_link_all&utm_campaign=m_pd+share-sheet
40
Repeat doing the same thing and expect a different result?
20
Item 1 : It is not at all clear to me which Covid 19 vaccines were used in this Swedish study. Do we know ?
Item 2 : The study conclides with this statement : “Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 infection wanes progressively over time across all subgroups, but at different rate according to type of vaccine, and faster for men and older frail individuals. The effectiveness against severe illness seems to remain high through 9 months, although not for men, older frail individuals, and individuals with comorbidities. This strengthens the evidence-based rationale for administration of a third booster dose. ”
Ummm Ok I’ll get a third booster shot.
But I’m still taking my daily D3 ( as recommended by Dr Kendrick.. To be sure, to be sure !
10
“It is not at all clear to me ”
That’s understandable.
21
Ahhhh !
You don’t know either Keith !
But rather admit to ignorance
You have a snark at me,
🙁
00
“…nearly 4 million people. That’s pretty much the whole population of Sweden…”
The population of Sweden is 10,4 million.
20
Fair point. I should phrase that better.
It comes from a comment in the paper:
They were fishing through the whole population for matched controls presumably they were mainly looking at the older, higher risk, half of the population, as the younger half may not have had as many vaccinated people.
00
“But by nine months later, the efficacy was not just zero, but negative.”
This strongly suggests to me that there is a wide margin of error in the study. I note that, like most climatology studies, there is no formal uncertainty associated with the claim, nor an explanation as to why people should be more susceptible to infection.
10
It’s a weird methodology … the diagram in Figure 1 shows that their initial group consisted of a mix of people who had been vaccinated and also people with natural immunity from a prior infection.
It’s not clear in the diagram how they keep those separated but right at the end of the report they throw in the comment “Moreover, although we excluded all individuals with a previous confirmed infection, it is likely that some individuals with a previous asymptomatic infection were still included.”
That suggests that anyone with prior confirmed infection was excluded, but that’s not make clear when they describe their methodology. I would have thought that since Sweden was pretty much open, without lockdowns, there would be a lot of people in this category.
30
I wonder, if they told the Australian people at the start, “the vaccine will give you 210 days protection” (rough figure), would they have taken it up so quickly?
30
[…] Swedish study of 840,000 shows vaccine efficacy at 7 months at, wow, zero […]
00
[…] Swedish study of 840,000 shows vaccine efficacy at 7 months at, wow, zero […]
00
How many of the vaccinated people have died, in comparison to the unvaccinated people who caught Covid? That’s the real question.
00
[…] Swedish study of 840,000 shows vaccine efficacy at 7 months at, wow, zero 11-02-2021 […]
00