Vaccine effectiveness against Omicron drops to zero within six months but natural immunity remains robust for at least a year, a new study from Qatar has found.
The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, looked at all symptomatic PCR-positive Covid infections in Qatar during the Omicron wave from December 23rd 2021 to February 21st 2022. As can be seen in the chart below, it found that protection from natural immunity (the blue dots on the left) endured at a level of around 50% for at least a year, meaning the infection rate in the previously infected was half that in those not previously infected. However, two vaccine doses of either Pfizer or Moderna (light green dots in middle) dropped to zero effectiveness or below within six months. A third dose (dark green dots on right) appeared to restore some protection in the short term, but it was dropping fast even during the short follow-up period. The authors, aware of the short follow-up time, explain that “most persons received their third dose less than 45 days earlier, perhaps explaining the relatively high effectiveness”.
The study was a test-negative case-control study, a type of study known to exaggerate vaccine effectiveness (owing to, for example, the vaccinated being more susceptible to Covid-like illness that isn’t Covid, such as colds and flu). This means the true picture may be significantly worse than found in this study. Recall that an earlier Qatar study on the Delta variant had already found vaccine effectiveness wane to negligible levels within seven months, and Omicron is much better at evading vaccine protection than Delta.
The cases were matched to controls to take into account differences of age, sex and epidemic phase. The study only included symptomatic positives, which is a plus as it avoids most false positives. It also excluded any tests that occurred within 14 days after a second dose or seven days after a third dose rather than counting them in another category, which avoids miscategorisation issues. There will however be some survivor bias as anyone vaccinated who gets infected in the post-jab exclusion period doesn’t count towards the vaccinated case total, leaving fewer susceptible people in the vaccine arm.
One point of note is that the authors observe that the protection offered by being both vaccinated and previously infected turns out to be exactly equal to the protection you would expect if the two forms of protection had an independent effect:
Because previous infection reduced the risk of infection by 50% and booster vaccination reduced it by 60%, the reduction in the risk of infection for both combined, if they acted fully independently, would be 1−(1−0.5)×(1−0.6)=0.8, which is an 80% reduction, just as observed. Although this effect needs to be further investigated, this finding may suggest that the combined effect of these two forms of immunity against omicron infection reflects neither synergy nor redundancy of the individual biologic effects of each.
One interpretation of this is that the vaccines and previous infection give different, independent forms of immunity, with the vaccine form waning quickly and the previous infection form enduring.
Another interpretation, however, is that the vaccine protection is an illusion created by survivor bias (the exclusion of those infected during the post-jab period), which is why it quickly fades and is wholly additive to natural immunity.
Meanwhile, the U.K. Government has updated its official estimate of vaccine effectiveness against Omicron. The latest UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance report shows Pfizer third-dose vaccine effectiveness dropping to negligible levels within 20 weeks (five months; see below).
This, again, is a test-negative case-control study, so is generous to the vaccines – we know the raw data, back when UKHSA used to publish them, showed infection rates many times higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated in many age groups. So when even this study shows negligible vaccine effectiveness you know they’ve accepted they can’t hide it anymore.
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.