But still somehow this will be the fault of the unvaccinated for their failure to get onboard the Titanic (I mean life boat) for the good of the community (I mean drug companies).
It is a hard wind driven rainstorm. You (the jabbed) are carrying an umbrella. Me (the unjabbed pure blood with natural immunity) only have a short run to my car and park in a garage at home, so I am only wearing a raincoat. You obviously get soaking wet while outside waiting for your bus, while I am only slightly damp when I get home. But you blame me for not carrying an umbrella as the reason you got wet.
You'll say that crap until it's your family member or someone you care about. And if that doesn't change your turn, you're no better than those that are causing all this.
I already know I have family members and people close to me that are gullible and stupid. I tried to explain the danger. They couldn’t wait to get the shots. What more can I do beside cremate them when the time comes.
I am far better than the evil who is doing this. I can call it evil because it is, because I can see it. I can not fathom how one can be complicit in this. They must have some kind of deep hatred. Perhaps we are just “irredeemable deplorables”.
Yep, it's criminal that they haven't informed the masses that there is a lot of study data pointing toward vaccine doses and booster doses making a person MORE susceptible to infection in the 2 weeks post-vaccine dose, even more susceptible than the unvaccinated. It seems like a terrible time to be giving people booster doses!!!
What I'm seeing where I live is worse than vaccine failure, actually. Lots of boosted people catching covid right now and suffering worse symptoms than expected from omicron. Not mild. Is my sample skewed (I live in an area with high vax uptake) or are the vaccinated faring even worse than the data suggests?
Can you type up their stories? No personal details, but something like Male, 63 years old, vaxxed on _, boosted on _, had diabetes, caught Omicron on _, has symptoms like ___ and ___ etc?
I cannot confirm these are omicron, only that they started in the last week. Mining group emails, none below are obese or have comorbidities that I know of:
Your interpretation of figure 7 is incorrect. This is understandable as it is a confusing graph that shouldn't have been approved (but I would say that as I misinterpreted it the same way at first). Anyway, the only booster data point is the one on the right of each graph -- the others are for two doses of vaccine.
Of course, your general interpretation of what is going on is correct -- the vaccines are performing spectacularly badly and are almost certainly responsible for the very high case numbers seen for Omicron in the west (that's what you get when you've got negative vaccine effectiveness). They're a disaster but governments have to keep up the pretence because the masses will be rather cross when they find out they've been duped.
Why is the conclusion more of the same? “In light of the exponential rise in Omicron cases, these findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations”
Dec 24, 2021·edited Dec 27, 2021Liked by Igor Chudov
Because official dogma is TINA - There Is No Alternative.
Seriously, the data suggest some value compared to no treatment, and the vaxes buy a few more months with nice and expensive therapeutics starting to hit the market (so far efficacies seem very poor - but they are profitable).
There also is an assumption of no long term OAS or ADE damage from the vaccine (and that vaccine damage is less than Covid). This is made easier by preventing discussion of any cost-benefit analysis.
short duration "protection" is what darpa intended in the 2013 project with moderna. whay they did not get was safety and responsiveness to new pathogens so the tech went on the shelf until pfizer found the profitability key.
And that's still *relative* risk reduction. Max Absolute Risk Reduction is 1.3% for any of the experimental drugs, according to published documentation.
Yet, I just read that they are mandating vaccines for everyone in Ecuador (over the age of 5, I think)...are governments this willfully blind or just all being controlled by Pfizer et al?
¡No problemo! Schedule the 4th jab 4 months after the 3rd and enjoy your iron-clad vaxx protection again. Rinse and repeat. Then after3, 2, and 1 month. Altogether 10 more months of this nonsense is baked in. Incidentally, that takes us into 7 busters - a nice occult number all by itself. Go into your bunker and come out then - the world will look drastically different then.
Dec 24, 2021·edited Dec 24, 2021Liked by Igor Chudov
Igor, when you say “protection” am I correct in assuming that you are referring only to the vaccine’s efficacy in preventing infection?
In the new NYT article about Israel considering a 4th dose it states “There was no clear indication of reduced efficacy against severe illness.” So have the original 2 doses have not waned in efficacy? That’s what Fauci was saying when they started selling the public on boosters. Plus the vaccine trials did not even assess their ability to prevent infection!
Me thinks they have purposefully muddied the waters in regards to the world “protection” by using it to mean both protection against infection and protection against severe disease so that you never know quite what they are referring to. In regards to boosters it’s as if they want people to think they are talking about the ability to prevent severe illness and death when in reality they are talking about their ability to prevent infection. If your vaccinated and the vaccine works and your not in an extremely high risk group why would you care about getting infected???
There is barely any data about protection from severe disease. I wrote my article today based on a pretty small UK sample. It does not seem like boosters help much but they might provide marginal protection around 25%.
when you say "protection around 25%" are you referring to preventing infection or preventing severe disease? The language around this is so confusing and muddled. sigh
Pfizer et al defined vaccine efficacy as antibody/antigen formation. It is not with respect to protection against infection as that would require a control group which big Pharma in their wisdom decided to disband (and we now know why), and not by comparison with the unvaccinated who may have natural immunity. Its a shit show.
I recall that based on Israeli data that real world vaccine efficacy was significantly lower - my interpretation is VE from antibody > VE against infection, maybe 30% for Alpha (I think) for Pfizer. The likelihood is a greater discrepancy for Omicron
I wrote this comment on another stack, but it applies here as well. While the boosting campaign in the UK seems to have had a positive effect against cases, there does not seem to be a death benefit for the older boosted cohorts...at least not yet.
***********************************
Keeping in mind the high vaxx rates, even among the younger cohorts, I don't think there is evidence of a Marek's effect. The majority of people who have died are fully vaxxed...and some might have been boosted (over 85% of those age 70 and older were boosted by week 50). There are many confounders (pre-infection health status, vaxx fade, Omicron vs Delta). The percentage of death in each age cohort by vaxx status is very similar to the week 39 report. If there is a significant death benefit from the boosters to the older cohorts, it is not yet evident.
==================
Per the latest UK Health Security Agency week 50 report...
C19 deaths within 28 days of a PCR+ with COVID-19 reported on death certificate, by vaccination status between week 47 and week 50 2021 (Table 10a, page 38)
Age 40-49
Fully vaxxed: 40.7% (46/113)
Unvaxxed: 53.1% (60/113)
Age 50-59
Fully vaxxed: 45.9% (112/244)
Unvaxxed: 47.5% (116/244)
Age 60-69
Fully vaxxed: 65.8% (298/453)
Unvaxxed: 31.1% (141/453)
Age 70-79
Fully vaxxed: 72.4% (525/725)
Unvaxxed: 23.3% (169/725)
Age 80+
Fully vaxxed: 78.2% (1055/1350)
Unvaxxed: 17.9% (241/1350)
===============
Per the UK Health Security Agency week 39 report...
C19 deaths within 28 days of a PCR+ with COVID-19 reported on death certificate, by vaccination status between week 35 and week 38 2021 (Table 4a, page 16)
Reminds me of how many people (including medical professionals) are unaware that a landmark study showed that the flu vaccine does not prevent flu deaths in the elderly.
The percentages here add up to almost 100%. To evaluate the true effects of the vaccines, we would need to compare all 1+ vaccinated individuals with the vaccine naive (0 doses).
I'm a bit put-off by the fact that Denmark study's VE calculations are adjusted (age, sex, etc) and relevant person-days and infection counts for unvaccinated not given. Also weird that VE against Delta is still higher than 0 in the 91+ group, for example. I think they must have gotten some of the math wrong with the rapidly shifting denominator due to rampant "boosting" in Denmark; trying to figure out how the vax works in the middle of a booster-frenzy is not a good idea in general.
I still don't get how it makes sense to eventually kill or disable every single person. I guess it just wont make sense, but seems to be what is wanted.
It makes little sense to me also. If there was a "DESTROY THE WORLD" button, would you and I press it? I would not and you would not. But I can imagine that someone would press that button and die gloriously with the rest of us.
But still somehow this will be the fault of the unvaccinated for their failure to get onboard the Titanic (I mean life boat) for the good of the community (I mean drug companies).
I use an umbrella analogy.
It is a hard wind driven rainstorm. You (the jabbed) are carrying an umbrella. Me (the unjabbed pure blood with natural immunity) only have a short run to my car and park in a garage at home, so I am only wearing a raincoat. You obviously get soaking wet while outside waiting for your bus, while I am only slightly damp when I get home. But you blame me for not carrying an umbrella as the reason you got wet.
The stupidity is astounding.
They were always stupid... Covid is one of those moments when you find out who was swimming naked.
Yes, Covid exposed the stupids
Your life jacket analogy made me think of these hilarious (and lunacy-exposing) videos by JP:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GukIoZ8d3Ew&t=1s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omrVpA14FpY
I almost exploded laughing watching one yesterday
🤣 Yes!! Love how brilliantly he uses humor/satire to reveal hypocrisy, cognitive dissonance, corruption, and doublethink.
Clearly the vaccines are 100% effective.
They will clear the population of the most gullible and stupid amongst us, and their offspring
Safe for big pharma
Effective against sheep
You'll say that crap until it's your family member or someone you care about. And if that doesn't change your turn, you're no better than those that are causing all this.
I don’t think so.
I already know I have family members and people close to me that are gullible and stupid. I tried to explain the danger. They couldn’t wait to get the shots. What more can I do beside cremate them when the time comes.
I am far better than the evil who is doing this. I can call it evil because it is, because I can see it. I can not fathom how one can be complicit in this. They must have some kind of deep hatred. Perhaps we are just “irredeemable deplorables”.
Brainwashing is very powerful, unbelievably powerful.
You would have to admit the vaccine does not work. Herd immunity is best. That at this point only the stupid would take the shot.
So the leaders are telling People to get booster shots during a wave in COVID cases will make them highly vulnerable just at the wrong time.
Categorize under:
“Never vaccinate during a pandemic. It only makes things worse…”
Yep, it's criminal that they haven't informed the masses that there is a lot of study data pointing toward vaccine doses and booster doses making a person MORE susceptible to infection in the 2 weeks post-vaccine dose, even more susceptible than the unvaccinated. It seems like a terrible time to be giving people booster doses!!!
What I'm seeing where I live is worse than vaccine failure, actually. Lots of boosted people catching covid right now and suffering worse symptoms than expected from omicron. Not mild. Is my sample skewed (I live in an area with high vax uptake) or are the vaccinated faring even worse than the data suggests?
Can you type up their stories? No personal details, but something like Male, 63 years old, vaxxed on _, boosted on _, had diabetes, caught Omicron on _, has symptoms like ___ and ___ etc?
I cannot confirm these are omicron, only that they started in the last week. Mining group emails, none below are obese or have comorbidities that I know of:
1. Boosted couple mid-40: joint pain, painful dry eyes, burning sinuses, fatigue, headache, coughing & wheezing
2. late 40s male, boosted in October: headache, aches, chills, fever, fatigue
3. late 40s woman, healthy, boosted last month: fever and chills, aches, wheezing
4. early 40s female, boosted in October: stomach cramps, sore throat, cold sweat
5. early 40s female, boosted: dry cough and wheeze, sinus pain, chills, fever, trembling
Thank you so much for posting your update!
Please keep putting your observations here. I too am seeing a lot of positives, but not sickness in a high vax population and I am awaiting Omicron...
Delta variant is still infecting folks too so possible they have Delta rather than Omnicron?
Good point, thank you-- I took this into account with my latest post.
Which country are you living in?
U.S.
Your interpretation of figure 7 is incorrect. This is understandable as it is a confusing graph that shouldn't have been approved (but I would say that as I misinterpreted it the same way at first). Anyway, the only booster data point is the one on the right of each graph -- the others are for two doses of vaccine.
Of course, your general interpretation of what is going on is correct -- the vaccines are performing spectacularly badly and are almost certainly responsible for the very high case numbers seen for Omicron in the west (that's what you get when you've got negative vaccine effectiveness). They're a disaster but governments have to keep up the pretence because the masses will be rather cross when they find out they've been duped.
You are correct about figure 7: it did not provide longer term (weeks) perspective.
But the next figure from the UK that I signed "Booster: Hero to zero in 20 wks" does. Maybe my wording is confusing?
" rather cross when they find out they've been duped." - Indeed.
Why is the conclusion more of the same? “In light of the exponential rise in Omicron cases, these findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations”
So his article is approved for publication?
Because official dogma is TINA - There Is No Alternative.
Seriously, the data suggest some value compared to no treatment, and the vaxes buy a few more months with nice and expensive therapeutics starting to hit the market (so far efficacies seem very poor - but they are profitable).
There also is an assumption of no long term OAS or ADE damage from the vaccine (and that vaccine damage is less than Covid). This is made easier by preventing discussion of any cost-benefit analysis.
And falsifying the stats. And not collecting the stats that coulda-shoulda been collected.
short duration "protection" is what darpa intended in the 2013 project with moderna. whay they did not get was safety and responsiveness to new pathogens so the tech went on the shelf until pfizer found the profitability key.
Do you have a link to that?
https://www.modernatx.com/ecosystem/strategic-collaborators/mrna-strategic-collaborators-government-organizations
scroll to "darpa". and:
https://www.genengnews.com/topics/translational-medicine/moderna-therapeutics-scores-up-to-25m-darpa-grant/
what i have not found is any outcome from the $25 million 2013 effort, which implies ??
Back in 2013 this was called strictly therapeutics - no one ever thought of calling this “a vaccine”. Fast-forward to 2020... warp speed my ass!
And that's still *relative* risk reduction. Max Absolute Risk Reduction is 1.3% for any of the experimental drugs, according to published documentation.
Agree
Yet, I just read that they are mandating vaccines for everyone in Ecuador (over the age of 5, I think)...are governments this willfully blind or just all being controlled by Pfizer et al?
¡No problemo! Schedule the 4th jab 4 months after the 3rd and enjoy your iron-clad vaxx protection again. Rinse and repeat. Then after3, 2, and 1 month. Altogether 10 more months of this nonsense is baked in. Incidentally, that takes us into 7 busters - a nice occult number all by itself. Go into your bunker and come out then - the world will look drastically different then.
Igor, when you say “protection” am I correct in assuming that you are referring only to the vaccine’s efficacy in preventing infection?
In the new NYT article about Israel considering a 4th dose it states “There was no clear indication of reduced efficacy against severe illness.” So have the original 2 doses have not waned in efficacy? That’s what Fauci was saying when they started selling the public on boosters. Plus the vaccine trials did not even assess their ability to prevent infection!
Me thinks they have purposefully muddied the waters in regards to the world “protection” by using it to mean both protection against infection and protection against severe disease so that you never know quite what they are referring to. In regards to boosters it’s as if they want people to think they are talking about the ability to prevent severe illness and death when in reality they are talking about their ability to prevent infection. If your vaccinated and the vaccine works and your not in an extremely high risk group why would you care about getting infected???
There is barely any data about protection from severe disease. I wrote my article today based on a pretty small UK sample. It does not seem like boosters help much but they might provide marginal protection around 25%.
when you say "protection around 25%" are you referring to preventing infection or preventing severe disease? The language around this is so confusing and muddled. sigh
Specifically protecting from hospitalization
Pfizer et al defined vaccine efficacy as antibody/antigen formation. It is not with respect to protection against infection as that would require a control group which big Pharma in their wisdom decided to disband (and we now know why), and not by comparison with the unvaccinated who may have natural immunity. Its a shit show.
I recall that based on Israeli data that real world vaccine efficacy was significantly lower - my interpretation is VE from antibody > VE against infection, maybe 30% for Alpha (I think) for Pfizer. The likelihood is a greater discrepancy for Omicron
Why don't we ever hear about Moderna's trial data? In my county almost everyone was vaccinated with Moderna.
Good question.
I wrote this comment on another stack, but it applies here as well. While the boosting campaign in the UK seems to have had a positive effect against cases, there does not seem to be a death benefit for the older boosted cohorts...at least not yet.
***********************************
Keeping in mind the high vaxx rates, even among the younger cohorts, I don't think there is evidence of a Marek's effect. The majority of people who have died are fully vaxxed...and some might have been boosted (over 85% of those age 70 and older were boosted by week 50). There are many confounders (pre-infection health status, vaxx fade, Omicron vs Delta). The percentage of death in each age cohort by vaxx status is very similar to the week 39 report. If there is a significant death benefit from the boosters to the older cohorts, it is not yet evident.
==================
Per the latest UK Health Security Agency week 50 report...
C19 deaths within 28 days of a PCR+ with COVID-19 reported on death certificate, by vaccination status between week 47 and week 50 2021 (Table 10a, page 38)
Age 40-49
Fully vaxxed: 40.7% (46/113)
Unvaxxed: 53.1% (60/113)
Age 50-59
Fully vaxxed: 45.9% (112/244)
Unvaxxed: 47.5% (116/244)
Age 60-69
Fully vaxxed: 65.8% (298/453)
Unvaxxed: 31.1% (141/453)
Age 70-79
Fully vaxxed: 72.4% (525/725)
Unvaxxed: 23.3% (169/725)
Age 80+
Fully vaxxed: 78.2% (1055/1350)
Unvaxxed: 17.9% (241/1350)
===============
Per the UK Health Security Agency week 39 report...
C19 deaths within 28 days of a PCR+ with COVID-19 reported on death certificate, by vaccination status between week 35 and week 38 2021 (Table 4a, page 16)
Age 40-49
Fully vaxxed: 32.6% (30/92)
Unvaxxed: 56.5% (52/92)
Age 50-59
Fully vaxxed: 43.4% (109/251)
Unvaxxed: 49.8% (125/251)
Age 60-69
Fully vaxxed: 65.2% (273/419)
Unvaxxed: 28.9% (121/419)
Age 70-79
Fully vaxxed: 77.5% (623/804)
Unvaxxed: 18.8% (151/804)
Age 80+
Fully vaxxed: 84.1% (1288/1531)
Unvaxxed: 12.5% (185/1531)
================
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
Reminds me of how many people (including medical professionals) are unaware that a landmark study showed that the flu vaccine does not prevent flu deaths in the elderly.
Do you have the link?
Look about halfway down in this piece:
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/more-on-original-antigenic-sin-and
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080829091323.htm
The percentages here add up to almost 100%. To evaluate the true effects of the vaccines, we would need to compare all 1+ vaccinated individuals with the vaccine naive (0 doses).
I agree that the partially vaxxed are part of the treatment arm, but we can use their definition of fully vaxxed and still reveal the lie.
IT'S BEGINNING TO LOOK A LOT LIKE....https://www.bitchute.com/video/WYkohcm9VRfv/
I'm a bit put-off by the fact that Denmark study's VE calculations are adjusted (age, sex, etc) and relevant person-days and infection counts for unvaccinated not given. Also weird that VE against Delta is still higher than 0 in the 91+ group, for example. I think they must have gotten some of the math wrong with the rapidly shifting denominator due to rampant "boosting" in Denmark; trying to figure out how the vax works in the middle of a booster-frenzy is not a good idea in general.
Yes, it is possible, science is hard especially when it is politicized
91+ group consists of a patriarch of the royal family that took a saline solution in the first place. All other 91+ are no longer around.
I mean the 91 days from 2nd dose group...
I still don't get how it makes sense to eventually kill or disable every single person. I guess it just wont make sense, but seems to be what is wanted.
It makes little sense to me also. If there was a "DESTROY THE WORLD" button, would you and I press it? I would not and you would not. But I can imagine that someone would press that button and die gloriously with the rest of us.