The risk of Omicron infection increases dramatically with the number of vaccine doses, by up to 300% for three or more doses, a study has found, in one the most striking illustrations of negative vaccine efficacy yet to emerge.
The study, which is not yet peer-reviewed, gathered data on infection rates among employees of Cleveland Clinic in Ohio from September 12th to December 12th 2022. The primary aim was to study the effectiveness of the new bivalent COVID-19 vaccine, which it found to be just 30% effective against infection during the study period.
A secondary aim was to look at the effectiveness of earlier doses, and the results were, the researchers say, “unexpected”. There was an “increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses”, as illustrated starkly in the cumulative incidence plot below. Those who had three or more doses were around three times or 300% as likely to have a Covid infection than the unvaccinated. This is negative vaccine efficacy of minus-200%.
The authors address possible alternative explanations for the worrying results, but say they don’t think they account for what they see.
A simplistic explanation might be that those who received more doses were more likely to be individuals at higher risk of COVID-19. A small proportion of individuals may have fit this description. However, the majority of subjects in this study were generally young individuals and all were eligible to have received at least three doses of vaccine by the study start date, and which they had every opportunity to do. Therefore, those who received fewer than three doses (over 45% of individuals in the study) were not those ineligible to receive the vaccine, but those who chose not to follow the CDC’s recommendations on remaining updated with COVID-19 vaccination, and one could reasonably expect these individuals to have been more likely to have exhibited higher risk-taking behavior. Despite this, their risk of acquiring COVID-19 was lower than those who received a larger number of prior vaccine doses.
The dose-dependence of the effect would also seem to be a huge giveaway.
The authors note that “this is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19” and draw the conclusion: “It is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed.”
This is not the only study to find a possible association with more prior vaccine doses and higher risk of COVID-19. A large study found that those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving three doses of vaccine had a higher risk of reinfection than those who had an Omicron variant infection after previously receiving two doses of vaccine. Another study found that receipt of two or three doses of a mRNA vaccine following prior COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of reinfection than receipt of a single dose. We still have a lot to learn about protection from COVID-19 vaccination, and in addition to a vaccine’s effectiveness it is important to examine whether multiple vaccine doses given over time may not be having the beneficial effect that is generally assumed.
Results like these naturally demolish any notion that vaccines protect other people and thus any rationale for mandates, which some places, particularly in the U.S., continue to impose.
Unlike the vaccines, natural immunity is effective at preventing infection, the study finds – though less and less with each new variant and as time passes, as might be expected.
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.
“If this were a normal drug, it would be taken off the market.”
Exactly this. And here is the reason why it never will be;
“Because the mRNA vaccines fall under the PREP Act definition of “emergency countermeasures,” their production is not subjected to the same testing and quality control regulations as licensed pharmaceutical products. Their production and deployment resemble that of military products during World War II.
The legal framework for this bonanza was established by the PREP Act (Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness) of 2005. This authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services to deploy a wide array of “Emergency Countermeasures” in the event of an infectious disease outbreak. When invoked by the HHS Secretary, the PREP Act provides immunity for the “manufacture, testing, development, distribution, administration, and use of covered countermeasures.” On February 4, 2020, HHS Secretary Alex Azar declared COVID-19 an emergency and invoked the PREP Act.”
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/of-central-bankers-and-hhs-secretaries
Quality commentary such as this is worth a DS sub. by any measure.
Thanks Mogs.
Only a bit of fun Mogs. I know it’s over the top but the sentiment is genuine.
The hilarious dichotomy between Reps and Dems reg. its efficiency is a strong indication that we are basically just dispensing and dealing with a (toxic) placebo.
Worth noting that Republicans and Independents track reasonably well, it’s the Democrats that are the clear outliers.
Exactly. And one of the main reasons they will never take these death shots off the market is because now the floodgates have opened for other traditional vaccines to be changed over to an mRNA platform, as they can manufacture and get them to market way quicker, therefore proving to be more lucrative to Big Pharma. So if they removed the Covid jabs due to the major safety issues then this would be an admission that all future mRNA products are also unsafe. Sort of puts the kibosh on the whole thing really, especially the depopulation plan, which appears to be going swimmingly doesn’t it?
The mRNA system, now authorised is effectively a licence to kill.
007!
Government agencies are all-in on the mRNA clot shots, they wont change.
What is interesting is that here we have a major polling company openly admitting that they cannot publish the results of their own poll in full because they will face censorship. This is astonishing. The land of the free? Not so much.
“A 7% major side effect rate is unprecedented. We know from the V-safe data that this effectively means that the side-effect was so bad, they had to seek medical attention. If any drug had that kind of safety profile, it would be immediately pulled from the market. Would you take any drug with that kind of side-effect profile? Of course not. It’s off the charts! However, because we are told it is a safe and effective vaccine, people do what they are told despite the lack of safety. That’s how science works.” (My emphasis)
Note that the schools that did not properly teach logic and independent, critical thinking are also culpable in this shambles that has resulted in so many deaths and injuries. If they had, it would have been much harder for the corrupt drugs companies and their collaborators to pull this off.
Shocking, not shocked.
Many of use including myself, predicted this disaster. That is why we are unstabbinated.
41% minor and major injury. 150K dead in the US, I am guessing 50 K dead from the stabs in the UK.
Against what? 0.03% IFR….the same as the flu, average age of death 84. Not so with the stabbed dead and injured. Average age is in the 50s.
And yet Tards still want to play Rona. Diapers, more Quacksines, more LDs.
A friend’s husband (2 x AZ, 1 x Pfizer) had a major heart attack 3 weeks after the Pfizer booster and has now had another 5 months later 48 hours after having the ‘flu jab.
My friend says his brother is an NHS Consultant in A & E and they are seeing a lot of heart attack and myocarditis patients. So the NHS knows there is a serious problem ….. and they know why.
She has – finally – said they will not be having any more jabs.
“That’s how science works” is a bit pejorative, at least to those who actually have a proper understanding of the term. Something like “That’s how political abuse of science works”, or just “that’s how politics works” might be more accurate.
That said, there is no doubt that most products that had such bad results in reality would be withdrawn from the market, along with a serious risk of prosecution for many of those concerned.
This is poor science. The effectiveness and safety of vaccines can only be determined by Randomised Control Trials before they are approved. The trials were obviously inadequate and proved nothing. This is the message that needs to be repeated and those responsible need to he jailed. Because of the lockdowns and failure of health services it is difficult to determine what is causing the claimed increase in deaths and other issues. A survey of 1000 people is not reliable.
Agreed but surely it gives you a big red flag. Also when I did a Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA) course admittedly many moons ago we were told anything over 30 is a large sample.
Wow, just lovely. If the jab commercials were honest: “May cause fever, chills, blood clot, stroke, heart attack, sudden death….and runny nose”