How might Covid vaccines reduce mortality?
There are two possible mechanisms, thoughtfully explained in a thorough review and a recent article on Brownstone: Covid vaccines might reduce the risk of infection, or reduce the risk of death — if infected, or both. We can explain the mechanisms in words, with reference to ‘marginal and conditional probabilities’, or we can depict them in a causal diagram — a powerful methodological tool.
The first mechanism is simple: If a Covid vaccine reduces the risk of infection, it will also reduce the risk of death, because there is no doubt that getting infected increases the risk of death. Theoretical exceptions aside, if A affects B, and B affects C, then A affects C.
What if A does not affect B? What if a Covid vaccine does not reduce the risk of infection? Then it cannot reduce the risk of death through this mechanism. The causal chain does not exist. A link is broken.
By now we know that Covid vaccines appear temporarily to increase the risk of infection, and any subsequent benefit is nullified within months, if not turned again into harm (negative vaccine effectiveness). Therefore, according to the first mechanism, there is a short period when a Covid vaccine increases the risk of death, a limited period (a few months) when it decreases the risk of death, and a later period when the effect is null at best.
The second mechanism is more complicated. One aspect was explained in the Brownstone article and is related to a causal concept called ‘effect modification’. Like numerous epidemiological concepts, there are layers of complexity below superficial simplicity. I will keep it simple.
When two causes — Covid vaccine and Covid infection — operate on a single outcome (death), we may ask two causal questions:
- What is the effect of a Covid vaccine on the risk of death — if infected?
- What is the effect of a Covid vaccine on the risk of death — if not infected?
The second question is asking about vaccine-related death, the worst adverse effect. (A vaccine can be a cause of death even when someone is infected, but that’s another issue.)
Theoretically, the two types of effect could be different, in any possible way: magnitude and direction. Both might be harmful effects, yet of different magnitude. One might be beneficial and the other null, and so on. Add to that complexity time-varying effects, as noted earlier, and you can see how complicated causal reality might be.
Coincidentally, I encountered a relevant study at about the same time that I read the Brownstone article. That study provides insight into the two mechanisms by which Covid vaccines might reduce the risk of death, although the authors missed one aspect of their data (regarding reduced infections) and stopped short of the computation for the other (reduced mortality, if infected).
That’s not surprising. At times of biased media and biased science, we sometimes find insight from narrative-matched publications that missed interesting inference from the data.
Published as a ‘research letter‘, the study compared Covid mortality with mortality from seasonal flu. Using databases of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the researchers identified patients who were hospitalised with an admission diagnosis of Covid or influenza and ascertained deaths. Most patients were elderly, the age group where Covid mortality is concentrated and effective vaccines are needed.
Did Covid vaccines reduce infections? Although the design was a classical retrospective cohort, the baseline data in the first table may be viewed as data from a hospital-based case-control study. (I cannot get into a technical explanation of ‘propensity score weighting’, but it can be ignored for a basic case-control analysis.)
We may consider Covid patients as cases (numbering 8,996) and seasonal influenza patients as controls (there are 2,403). In a typical hospital-based case-control study, controls are selected from multiple disease categories, but I don’t see a major problem with this control group, and perhaps there are referral-related advantages.
Many complicated issues arise from a case-control study. Nonetheless, the basic analysis is simple. We visually compare the distribution of the suspected causal variable (Covid vaccination status) in cases and controls and compute odds ratios. If the vaccines meaningfully reduced the risk of infection, we should get odds ratios much smaller than 1.
We have no such evidence in these data. The odds ratios are close to 1 (close to zero vaccine effectiveness) and they line up in the ‘wrong’ (unexpected) order of magnitude: the larger the number of doses, the weaker the apparent effect. The causal chain from vaccination to reduced mortality through reduced Covid infections is not corroborated.
Interestingly, we may also view influenza patients as cases and Covid patients as controls and compare the distribution of flu vaccination status in the two groups. Check their table above. There is no meaningful association either.
Might biases account for near-null associations? Biasing paths typically lead to a statistical association when there is no real cause-and-effect relation. Random error aside, it is unusual for biases to turn strong effects into near-null associations.
Did Covid vaccines reduce mortality, if infected? We turn next to the second mechanism by which a Covid vaccine might reduce mortality: reducing the risk of death, if infected. That part was addressed in the original design. Every member of the cohort was infected, either by SARS-Cov-2 or by influenza.
The authors have focused on a comparison of Covid mortality with flu mortality, but they added a secondary conclusion:
The increased risk of death was greater among unvaccinated individuals compared with those vaccinated or boosted — findings that highlight the importance of vaccination in reducing risk of COVID-19 death.
How important is vaccination? What was the vaccine effectiveness — if infected? They don’t say.
If Covid vaccines no longer reduce the risk of infection, that’s the only source of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against death.
Below you will find their table and my computation:
VE of 30% or 40% in the vulnerable population is far from ‘highly effective’, a perpetuated claim. The incremental benefit of booster vaccine (one or more doses, per supplementary material) was even smaller (risk ratio 0.83, VE 17%).
Moreover, 30% to 40% is not necessarily the true effectiveness. We have clear evidence of ‘healthy vaccinee bias‘, a type of confounding bias, in both the U.S. and the U.K.. People of the same age who were vaccinated against Covid were healthier, on average, than their unvaccinated counterparts, as evident by lower non-Covid mortality. Therefore, the unbiased VE should be smaller. For example, a modest bias correction factor around 1.5 would drive VE of 40% close to zero.
Billions have been vaccinated under the slogan ”safe and effective’.
It was neither.
Dr. Eyal Shahar is Professor Emeritus of Public Health at the University of Arizona. This article first appeared on Medium.
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.
So a whitewash then as always seemed likely, and will presumably limit itself to such questions as whether Peking Piffle partied too hard and whether enough had been spent on health since 2010.
Just out of interest, is there any point in contributing to the enquiry (as radio adverts are now urging), and are any serious attempts being made to prevent it being a complete whitewash, and ensure that pharmaceutical companies, the media (including Oliver Wright and the Times muppets) and other collaborators (such as ICL, or the people behind the rigged vitamin D trials) are held properly to account for their actions?
If you’re referring to EveryStoryMatters then contributing is a good idea. Otherwise, it could be dominated by stories that may be critical of selective aspects of the government response but generally support the narrative.
Like any government consultation, it may not make any difference on the outcome but the point is to ensure the information is there so it cannot be claimed there was no criticism of lockdown, unethical use of psychology, bypassing of informed consent by coercion, computer modelling etc.
An alternative is to be less critical and put in a positive experience: how uplifting it was when you saw those around you start to shed their trust in the government and mainstream media.
“may be critical of selective aspects of the government response but generally support the narrative.”
I think this part of your statement says it all! This is the target the inquiry is already aiming for, the arrow is already heading for the bullseye!
I have never heard or seen any such advert. Perhaps their agency did not chose GB News or Daily Sceptic?
GBNews did an article on it but there doesn’t appear to be a link in the article.
https://www.gbnews.com/health/covid-lockdown-pandemic-rules-inquiry
Here’s the site:
https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/every-story-matters/
Interestingly enough, I just watched a film, Death Comes To School” (1953), a murder mystery about an unpopular teacher who was murdered. In the end, it turned out that it was one of her fellow teachers who did it, to protect a niece at the all girls (and all female teachers) school, from having her father forced into a divorce by this teacher (Miss Cooper) who was having an affair with him. Now I absolutely don’t condone murder, and accept that there is a legitimate debate to be had about affairs. However, the point stands that in general, those who are prepared to make great sacrifices to protect children are greatly to be admired (see the Birkenhead Drill) – the exact opposite, shamefully, of what happened with the lockdowns and their “obsessive safetyism” (Toby Young) – but not for the safety of children. Of course we know now (if we didn’t after Diamond Princess) that they didn’t make anyone safe. Put that in your “covid” enquiry.
As it happens, some of our people from the anti-lockdown church had a bit of a Christmas knees-up towards the end of December, 2020, and we make no apologies for it. Never forget, Peking Piffle’s crime was locking us down and the associated human rights abuses. The parties just rubbed salt in the wound.
Where are the reports of how many people were hospitalised or died as a result of civil service parties and lockdown gatherings? Would that not be the headline story? The event highlights the hypocrisy, the silence on the consequences highlights the fraud.
There are of course three genders – masculine, feminine and neuter ( der, die, das). I dare say though that he didn’t mean to bully the Germans…
let’s not be beastly to the Germans noel coward at DuckDuckGo
The Hallett Inquiry sounds like an (expensive) attempt by The Blob to lay down an “official” history of the Covid years. Probably won’t work these days quite as well as in former eras.
I suppose if a partially sighted person happened to spit at this particular junction, it would count as “hateful behaviour”. Maybe fines could be issued to such partially sighted people so that the council could recover some of their costs…
And where are the
child poverty crossing/disabled crossing/heterosexual crossing/abused women/mental illness crossing and many other underrepresented minorities (and unrepresented majorities) in the UK? all deserved of note, but, no, just gay crossings!
Diverse my @r$£!
And an insult to Zebras! Pelicans will be next, mark my words…
Federal judge rules MA student’s ‘there are only two genders’ T-shirt invades the rights of others
Clearly woke nonsense, the student’s right to wear the T-shirt is surely covered by the First Amendment.
Which organisation financially backed whoever took legal action against the student?
The student should claim to be a Christian, even if they aren’t, and being banned from wearing the T-shirt breaches their freedom of religion. Years ago when the woke mob wasn’t as powerful as it is now several students won the right to wear T-shirts saying “homosexuality is a sin” on a freedom of religion rather than freedom of speech defence.
According to the judge, wearing the shirt within the school is not covered by the First Amendment:
‘Citing multiple precedents, the judge ruled that “A school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission, [ ] even though the government could not censor similar speech outside the school.” So there was no constitutional violation that occurred.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12205705/Chinese-military-expert-filed-patent-Covid-vaccine-died-mysterious-circumstances.html
‘…in Wonderland, nothing is as it seems.’
‘“Curiouser and curiouser!” cried Alice…’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/17/smart-meters-are-a-trial-run-for-an-even-greater-heat-pump/
It increasingly seems to me that the net-zero fervour of the western world is looking like the deranged rantings of a demented and irrelevant cult. Meanwhile the rest of the World seems to be getting on with real life in the real world.
China has just donated 20,000 tonnes of fertiliser to the Philippines to aid rice production.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202306/1292736.shtml
Russia has sold a load of oil to Pakistan with the trade settled in Chinese yuan. A group of African leaders have met with Putin in Russia to discuss peace in Ukraine. The Russian and Chinese air forces are carrying out joint flying exercises over the Pacific.
I have a premonition of the UK in the future as a country of immiserated, hungry, cold people struggling to survive in our new net-zero third world status. Maybe by then the BRICS nations will have grown so prosperous and powerful that they will send us food parcels and blankets?
Totally agree
any country that holds on to cheap energy will rule the world, in some cases, they already do!
Or walk in an invasion force and use the country as a prison island.
A guy from Take That was cancelled from singing at a Pride event because he liked some Tweets. But that’s not the worst bit. The worst bit is his pathetic, arse-kissing apology for doing so. What a pitiful excuse for a man you are, Howard Whatsyername!
”Sharing his own statement to Instagram, Howard wrote: ‘I have made a huge error in my judgement liking social media posts that are derogatory towards the LGBTQIA+ community and for that I a deeply sorry and I know I have let everyone down.
‘I am really disappointed in myself and I am sorry for any hurt that I have caused by my uneducated actions I clearly have a lot to learn and it’s a priority for me that I do this.’
MailOnline has contacted representatives for both Howard and Nottingham Pride for comment.
Prior to his account being taken down, Howard had liked Tweets such as: ‘Only women have periods! Men cannot menstruate. Transgender ‘women’ cannot menstruate,’ according to PinkNews.
Howard had also liked a Tweet from Turning Point UK founder Charlie Kirk as he called for Disney to be defunded for holding a pride concert.
Other Tweets included anti-vax messages and conspiracies.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-12205931/Take-Thats-Howard-Donald-axed-Nottingham-Pride-liking-transphobic-homophobic-tweets.html
The equivalent of a conquered tribe being led through the streets of ancient Rome in chains. What an idiot! Then again, so many have suffered the same fate and done exactly the same thing. Like Clarkson grovelling and apologising on bended knee to the Sussexes (Windsors?). Where are the backbones? Of course, women are the only people who can menstruate! How daft do you have to be to not say the effin’ obvious? Since when did lies become truths? I would bear the fact of being cancelled at a Pride event for such tweets as a badge of honour – something to be really proud of. You know, speaking the actual truth and not being cowed into some subservient groveller agreeing with lies.
Totally, Aethelred. The guy has just demonstrated he has zero credibility or balls, thus is not worthy of our respect. It’s ”Howard the Coward” from now on from me. Somebody else we can not add to our list of allies in the fight against this madness. Hope he doesn’t have kids if this is his attitude to this extremely damaging ideology sweeping the world. What sort of message would he be instilling in them if this is the kind of person he’s proven to be? Everyone should be standing up for reality and biological facts, not pandering to the fantasies of the crazies just because you’re trying desperately to remain relevant now that your heyday is long past. Utter Woketard!
Howard the coward is an absolute canker.
See what I did there?
“There is still time for us to do right – and save Julian Assange from dying in U.S. dungeon” Perhaps in many people’s minds this is not the most pressing issue of our times yet still this is the metre by which we can judge our own society. Assange has still not been convicted anything yet he has been held in Belmarsh high security prison for 5 years now. Before that, he had a netherworld existence in a cramped space in the Ecuadorean Embassy because he knew that if he was arrested, he would be extradited to Sweden – on trumped up charges subsequently dropped – and from there to the US. This man has suffered. And for what? For exposing the crimes of the US government and NATO. All that power focused on this one man because they hate the fact that he briefly shone a light on their nefarious activities and broke the spell that the US is a force for good. The US is a gangster state disguised as a democracy. They are evil beyond understanding. Nothing the US government and its deep state string pullers does is for the collective good of humanity – they might think they do, in their twisted reasoning, but really they don’t. If Assange is extradited – and it looks like he will be – then it is an awful reflection of a system that doesn’t stand for truth, life, or liberty, if it ever did, but one that crushes, silences, censors, cancels, constricts, stamps on and kills to protect its veneer of respectability, patriarchal concern and quiet uncontested authority – and it is just a veneer and veneer peels off in the light and heat! Sadly, all truth seeking journalists will be just a little bit more wary in holding aloft the torch of truth and shining a light on the dark festering heart of the establishment.
Totally agree….do you remember Sunak on 3rd May ‘World Press Freedom Day’?
He talked about how important it is, and how he stands ‘shoulder to shoulder’ with the US on Russia’s detention of US journalist Evan Gershkovich…
..but on one of the most egregious arrests ever…crickets!!?
The fact that the UK is supposed to send him to a banana republic where the wannabe dictator is currently arresting his political rivals, is the cherry on the cake!
Great post, Aethelred – I agree with every word – and love your description of the US as “a gangster state disguised as a democracy”.
A quality post Aethelred.
So the New York Times thinks Russia blew the dam?…well they thought Russia bombed Nordstream initially as well….?
I have no more idea than anyone but I know that the UK have sent Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine, and lo and behold, one of the functions of the missile is that it can penetrate a structure before it explodes!……
Wikipedia…..
The Storm Shadow’s BROACH warhead features an initial penetrating charge to clear soil or enter a bunker, then a variable delay fuze to control detonation of the main warhead. Intended targets are command, control and communications centres; airfields; ports and power stations; ammunition management and storage facilities; surface ships and submarines in port; bridges and other high value strategic targets.
When engaging hard targets, such as Hardened Aircraft Shelters or bunkers, the missile will strike the target at the estimated optimum dive angle, selected during mission planning. On impact the detonation sequence commences. The precursor charge will perforate the target structure, and any soil covering, and the follow through penetrator warhead will continue to penetrate inside the target to be detonated after a pre-selectable fuse delay.
Just putting out there!!
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/twenty-four-reasons-why-net-zero-must-be-abandoned/
A pretty comprehensive take-down of the myths around Co2 and its impacts on non-existent anthropogenic climate change.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/blogs/truro-diocese-on-the-way-to-closing-churches
The destruction of English churches and in this article specifically Cornwall. Indicative of the systematic dismantling of the British way of life.
I don’t but doubt similar destructive practices are under way in other counties. All led by senior members of the clergy. Well I never. It’s almost as if Satan was taking over.