Three more studies show negative vaccine efficacy.

Supposedly if USSC rules feb 8th you’d need at least 2 shots. Insanity

quote:

---

Pfizer vaccine effectiveness at 53.8% and Moderna at 65% against Delta after three months. They reported that a third dose of Pfizer got vaccine effectiveness against Omicron back up to 54.6%, at least for a month.

---

And just like that - up to date means quarterly.

For now, until years of science tells us otherwise.

quote:

---

With Omicron, the reports of negative efficacy are becoming impossible to ignore

---

What’s the definition of unvaccinated?

Fully vaccinated made up more than 20% of Covid deaths in Louisiana on the current dashboard. So I think tigergirl might just be pulling it out of the rectal repository.

Dr Robert Malone…… he knows

quote:

---

Dr Robert Malone…… he knows

---

quote:

---

As the original “inventor” of mRNA and DNA vaccines… I am concerned about how the technology is being developed and implemented.

---

R Malone MD

quote:

---

When will health authorities face up to what the data is telling us?

---

Because the data is not saying what that blogger is claiming. As I learned long ago, always go to the source and don't listen to people's "interpretation." So I read the study. Lo and behold, the paper itself addresses the "negative" vaccine efficacy:

quote:

---

The negative estimates in the final period arguably suggest different behaviour and/or exposure patterns in the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts causing underestimation of the VE. This was likely the result of Omicron spreading rapidly initially through single (super-spreading) events causing many infections among young, vaccinated individuals.

---

The authors conclude the negative efficacy is an artifact and an "underestimation of vaccine efficacy" (their words).

Below they make mention of a British study which corroborates their study. The British study found that boosting brought the VE back up to about 75%:

quote:

---

A recent study from England (in preprint) found higher effectiveness against symptomatic Omicron initially after BNT162b2 vaccination followed by a rapid decline in protection, and that VE increased to 75.5% (56.1 to 86.3%) two weeks after booster vaccination using unvaccinated individuals as comparison.

---

They conclude:

quote:

---

Our study contributes to emerging evidence that BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 primary vaccine protection against Omicron decreases quickly over time with booster vaccination offering a significant increase in protection. In light of the exponential rise in Omicron cases, these findings highlight the need for massive rollout of vaccinations and booster vaccinations.

---

There you have it from the horse's mouth. The authors of the study the skeptics cite are not saying what the skeptics claim they're saying. The study authors themselves are saying more people need to get vaxxed and boosted.

(By the way, I am not arguing for or against the boost. I am just pointing out that you should not listen to bloggers without checking the primary source yourself).

quote:

---

What’s the definition of unvaccinated?

---

My takeaway was that they don’t know. And this is supposed to go Monday.

I’ve never watched USSC do this before so I was a bit lost with some of the jargon.

quote:

---

Why are they saying we need more vaccines and boosters when Omicron is less deadly than the flu?

---

I would say the urgency for more and more frequent boosters speaks directly to the short term effectiveness of the vaccines.