- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Study: MRNA Vaccines Increase Risk of Contracting COVID-19; Each Booster Shot Raises Risk
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:12 pm
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:12 pm
Before the usual suspects attack me I just copied and pasted the headline and I am just reposting the article. Read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions
LINK
LINK
quote:
A stunning pre-print study by the Cleveland Clinic published Monday at medRxiv shows that MRNA vaccines raise the risk of contracting COVID-19 and that each MRNA vaccine booster increases the risk of contracting COVID-19, while those who have not received any MRNA vaccine have the lowest risk of contracting COVID-19. While the increased risk was relatively minimal, the result is the opposite of how the vaccines have been sold and mandated by government authorities. The highest risk was for those who received more than three vaccines.
The study was reported by the Cleveland Clinic’s Nabin K. Shrestha, Patrick C. Burke, Amy S. Nowacki, James F. Simon and Amanda Hagen, Steven M. Gordon.
Quote from the study: “The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected.”
The study was conducted this fall of 51,011 Cleveland Clinic workers to see how effective the new bivalent MRNA vaccine was in preventing infections. Only 21 percent of workers received the bivalent booster which was seen to only have a 30 percent effectiveness. Overall, five percent of all workers in the study contracted COVID during the 13-week study period.
quote:
This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice
ABSTRACT
Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine protects against COVID-19.
Methods Employees of Cleveland Clinic in employment on the day the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine first became available to employees, were included. The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined over the following weeks. Protection provided by vaccination (analyzed as a time-dependent covariate) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression. The analysis was adjusted for the pandemic phase when the last prior COVID-19 episode occurred, and the number of prior vaccine doses received.
Results Among 51011 employees, 20689 (41%) had had a previous documented episode of COVID-19, and 42064 (83%) had received at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 occurred in 2452 (5%) during the study. Risk of COVID-19 increased with time since the most recent prior COVID-19 episode and with the number of vaccine doses previously received. In multivariable analysis, the bivalent vaccinated state was independently associated with lower risk of COVID-19 (HR, .70; 95% C.I., .61-.80), leading to an estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 30% (95% CI, 20-39%). Compared to last exposure to SARS-CoV-2 within 90 days, last exposure 6-9 months previously was associated with twice the risk of COVID-19, and last exposure 9-12 months previously with 3.5 times the risk.
Conclusions The bivalent COVID-19 vaccine given to working-aged adults afforded modest protection overall against COVID-19, while the virus strains dominant in the community were those represented in the vaccine.
Summary Among 51011 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine booster was 30% effective in preventing infection, during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine.
LINK
quote:
The risk of COVID-19 also varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19
quote:
The multivariable analyses also found that, the more recent the last prior COVID-19 episode was the lower the risk of COVID-19, and that the greater the number of vaccine doses previously received the higher the risk of COVID-19
LINK
This post was edited on 12/28/22 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:16 pm to stout
Have seen this in my workgroup.
Only about 70 ppl.
But, "vaccinated" are out sick more often than no shot people.
"Vaccinated" are overrepresented in those out with Rona.
Only about 70 ppl.
But, "vaccinated" are out sick more often than no shot people.
"Vaccinated" are overrepresented in those out with Rona.
This post was edited on 12/29/22 at 8:38 am
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:19 pm to Privateer 2007
quote:
But, "vaccinated" are out more often than no shot people
So, you think the unvaccinated are staying home because of covid risks?! frick no, they are just living a normal life, and not getting sick.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:22 pm to stout
quote:
Summary Among 51011 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine booster was 30% effective in preventing infection, during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were represented in the vaccine.
So the new booster is the most effective? Or at least that's how the study reads.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:23 pm to Privateer 2007
Wait till you see how many people were in the original clinical trials for the vax
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:23 pm to stout
Just on the side note, I do find it amusing that you discredit all the studies that don’t agree with your opinion, and then post the studies that do agree with your opinion.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:25 pm to stout
I got vaccinated early on because what was being published made it seem like the right thing to do. After the booster, I was done. When I’m constantly being told I need a third, fourth, etc booster I sense I’m being fed complete BS. I’ve also had Covid twice. It sucked, but nothing to be scared of—some chills and lethargy.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:28 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
quote:
Just on the side note, I do find it amusing that you discredit all the studies that don’t agree with your opinion, and then post the studies that do agree with your opinion
I’m sure you cheered on the “studies” that said Covid = automatic death.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:31 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
quote:It's far easier to fool a fool than it it so convince him that he has been fooled. --Mark Twain
Just on the side note, I do find it amusing that you discredit all the studies that don’t agree with your opinion, and then post the studies that do agree with your opinion.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:33 pm to stout
quote:
A stunning
I disagree with the word stunning.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:37 pm to Chef Curry
I haven’t championed any study. I also haven’t started Covid threads with a clear one sided opinion for the last 3 years like OP has.
And I’m not saying OP is right or wrong. I’m just saying it’s amusing to watch OP come on here saying “Look at the studies” after years of saying the science is fake news.
And I’m not saying OP is right or wrong. I’m just saying it’s amusing to watch OP come on here saying “Look at the studies” after years of saying the science is fake news.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:38 pm to stout
Crazy4lsu will be here shortly to call the Cleveland Clinic a bunch of slack-jawed quacks who don’t know anything about medicine.
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:39 pm to BluegrassBelle
quote:
So the new booster is the most effective? Or at least that's how the study reads.
Did any of these get FDA approval?
Posted on 12/28/22 at 6:39 pm to Vacherie Saint
Yeah but he is a complete mongoloid
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News