Protection against infection from a fourth Pfizer vaccine dose wanes to zero in just eight weeks, an Israeli study published in the NEJM has found.
The researchers looked at the records of all 1,252,331 people over 60 in Israel eligible for the fourth dose during the Omicron wave (January 10th to March 2nd 2022). They excluded various groups, including those with prior test-positive Covid to avoid confounding with natural immunity.
They compared infection rates and severe cases in the four-dose group to the three-dose group, and also to an “internal control” in the form of the four-dose group in the first week after the jab (excluding the first two days). They provided estimates of rate ratios (a measure of vaccine effectiveness) adjusted for age, sex, demographic group, and calendar day (to take into account the varying prevalence over the epidemic wave).
They found that although some fleeting protection against infection appeared to occur, it peaked two to three weeks after the injection (blue dots in the chart below) and was gone by the eighth week.
The adjusted rate of infection in the eighth week after the fourth dose was very similar to those in the control groups; the rate ratio for the three-dose group as compared with the four-dose group was 1.1 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.2), and the rate ratio for the internal control group as compared with the four-dose group was only 1.0 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.1).
Note that the apparent reduced risk in the first two days after the jab the researchers put down to “transient biases” such as people not getting vaccinated if unwell.
Enhanced protection against severe illness, on the other hand, persisted for the six weeks of the study (red dots above), the researchers observe. However, they sound a note of caution, pointing out that the effectiveness of earlier doses was found to wane quickly. A CDC study found that two doses were only 38% effective against hospitalisation with Omicron after six months, while another study found vaccine effectiveness against emergency department admission with Omicron waned to 41% with two doses after six months and to 48% with three doses after three months.
It’s worth noting that the four dose group in the Israeli study appears to be healthier than the three dose group, which means the vaccine effectiveness against severe disease in the chart above will be overestimated. Compared to the four dose group, the three dose group had 3.5 times the adjusted risk of severe Covid whereas the internal control group (i.e., the four dose group in its first week post-jab) had just 2.3 times the adjusted risk of severe Covid. This is a version of the healthy vaccinee effect, and means the vaccine effectiveness against severe disease above will be overestimated as it does not adjust for it.
It’s also worth noting that the raw (unadjusted) reported infection rate was higher in the internal control group than in the three-dose group (388 vs 361 per 100,000 person-days), which means the four-dose group experienced higher than average infection rate in the week after the jab (a phenomenon noted in many contexts previously). This means many of the susceptible may have been infected at that point, creating a survivorship bias in the four-dose group that lowers its infection rate and artificially increases reported vaccine effectiveness.
The study confirms that additional vaccine doses do little to nothing to reduce infection risk. They appear to have a positive impact on serious disease, though the follow-up time is too short to know how quickly this wanes. There is no reason, however, to think it will differ much from earlier doses, where it dropped to around 40% within six months.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
One of the reasons people haven’t woken up as much as they ought to have done is that people still believe there was a pandemic, because that “fact” keeps being repeated as if it were as plain to see as the sun in the sky.
There will never be a worthwhile inquiry into “covid” while those responsible (almost every powerful group, private or public, and most powerful individuals) are still alive and active. They were all more or less complicit in what happened. There was no opposition of any substance. So what possible incentive does anyone who controls what an inquiry would do have to hold such a thing? To discover the truth, or at least to properly consider what happened, you need something much more adversarial, where there is a team with broad remit to subpoena witnesses who would testify under oath, and seize evidence, and set their own terms of reference. That will not happen in our lifetimes.
In any case, other than the detail of whose hand was up whose jacksie, the “truth” is known by a great many now – it’s just that nobody wants to say it out loud. Why would you want to admit you’ve been had?
No. We need Nuremberg-style trials.
And subsequent deterrents.
I suggest a few action points:
The above would save money and get to the truth better and faster.
And increase the pressure on the MHRA to release all data on vaccinated and unvaccinated people.
I’ve sent it to all the “sceptical” contacts I have on Whatsapp who I know were unvaccinated (2), or I think they know that the inquiry is a farce (5). 7 is a depressingly small number of people…..
2 unvaccinated is pretty low. Maybe you don’t know many people or there are some but they’ve not made it clear to you. I thought I was doing badly with just 5 including Mrs ToF.
Among ones old friends the number is very low, but several of them will not be having anymore jabs (some after complications even told by their doctor not to) but have made several new friends in groups formed for the unjabbed
You’re right – and I know quite a lot of people. I really hope that there are more people in the unvaccinated camp – but it’s not a question (have you had the jab?) that I feel comfortable asking.
I’ve never asked anyone. I’ve been pretty clear on my views of “covid” and on my own “vaccination” status and other people have volunteered the information. I know most of my work colleagues and other people I talk to have been “vaccinated” because they all made a big song and dance about it at the time. There are a few people at work I am not sure about as they’ve never mentioned it, but that might just be because they are private people who don’t share that kind of information.
These days while I am happy to answer people if they ask me, I don’t make a point of talking about what the “vaccines” appear to be doing to people’s health because it feels awkward telling people they might have poisoned themselves. Always happy to discuss though how “vaccine” passports and any kind of coercion was and is wrong.
Your experience matches mine. It’s awkward.
A real CoVid enquiry would be the trial of those who committed crimes against Humanity.
“Nearly four years on since the onset of the pandemic”. Why the assumption that there was a pandemic?
I take care to only ever refer to the alleged pandemic.
Yes plandemic (it was certainly planned, many years in the making, patents on Sars II date back to the 90s).
Scamdemic. Certainly was a scam, a pilot project of Medical Nazism, a prep for what is still to come.
“We need real inquiries if we’re going to restore people’s faith in public authorities.”
I am sure I speak for the majority on here when I state that faith in public authorities is now non-existent and there is zero chance of it ever returning.
Public authorities exist but I aim to ensure I do absolutely nothing to assist with their works or continuance.