Posted on 10/28/2021 11:39:57 AM PDT by Mount Athos
The swedes just did a large vaccine study using 842,972 pairs of people (1.7 million total). each pair had one vaxxed, one unvaxxed. it’s currently a preprint for “the lancet.” you can grab it HERE.
this was a retrospective study, but one in which the matching of cohorts was pretty good which improves the evidence quality quite a bit. it’s not a full RCT, but it’s a lot better than most of what’s getting published right now.
Vaccines start off reasonably effective, but they fade very quickly. This has long been a criticism and a complaint about the shortness of the drug trials on which their approval was based and the elimination of their control groups to prevent long term study.
Given these longer term results, it seems clear why they (Pfizer) chose to run short trials and then eliminate the control groups after about 90 days. because that’s when things start to go off the rails.
The downslope in efficacy against symptomatic infection is just starting right where pfizer and moderna ended their trials and vaccinated the control groups to make future comparison impossible.
The evidence that vaccines fail to stop spread has been clear for some time and not even the CDC argues it anymore.
What this study added that was terribly interesting was data on the prevention of severe covid. and this too drops rapidly.
At around 90 days, drop in efficacy is becoming noticeable. it’s under 50% by 6 months. by 250 days, it looks to be about 25%.
Hospitalization and death dropped as well. Worst of all, it drops most in the most vulnerable. the people who most need protection get the most rapid fade/least efficacy.
The efficacy of these vaccines wanes VERY rapidly. you’d need to boost every 3 months to keep it high and every 6 to keep it about about 30% on symptomatic infection and 45% on hospital/death.
so you’re rebuying immunity every 3-6 months, taking the adverse event risk again, and using it to avoid an outcome (getting covid) that is not terribly dangerous for most and thus getting very little absolute risk reduction (detailed discussion here). This was already a bad bet for most under 50 and pretty much anyone without comorbidities.
But having to make the bet, over and over, just to stand still means that eventually, it’s a bad bet for anyone because once you get covid, you rarely get it again and when you do, it’s mild. acquired immunity from recovery is FAR superior to vaccinated immunity and looks to be actually sterilizing as well so you’ll stop being a spread vector.
You cannot make a case for boosters by looking at efficacy alone, especially when “50% VE” actually maps to “half of 1% for under 50’s or 1/10th of 1% or less if under 50 and healthy.”
It does not take a lot of side effects to swamp that, especially if you have to keep running the risk over and over to avoid what is basically a one time outcome.
There is also an argument that leaky vaccines are causing superspread while at the same time actually making the virus worse by inverting its evolutionary gradient.
If those are true, the fact that efficacy fades here is the best news we have. We need to stop boosting and let it run down so we stop breeding for hotter strains that make us all worse off. (even the vaxxed)
The simple fact is this: rushing vaccines of a brand new type never before used in humans (but known to be problematic in animals) was always a deeply bad idea.
The trials were short and rigged to mask fade and side effects while overstating efficacy. VE was used instead of absolute risk reduction, and cost/benefit was not even considered.
The immunity was supposed to be sterilizing. it’s not.
The effects were supposed to be strong. they aren’t.
The efficacy was supposed to be durable. it isn’t.
They were supposed to protect the most vulnerable. but that’s who they work least well on.
And yet the one note flute of public health keeps pushing and mandating them despite all these new learnings that run counter to all the assumptions they made when proposing this policy.
The CDC told us it would stop spread.
Getting probably the most important salient of all totally wrong really ought to lead to a policy reassessment, not a doubling down.
The adverse events are FAR in excess of any other vaccines approved in FDA history.
Having called this safe should lead to a massive search for what else you missed.
Is there even a cessation condition here? is there any data that would lead the FDA to rethink or the politicians and health agencies to stop these programs?
Because it looks to me like “more boosters!” is the answer to every question.
That’s not the sign of evidence based medicine.
Not all current covid vaccines utilize mRNA.
Wow, below zero. A negative affect. Makes things worse. The depopulation theory sounds more plausible every day.
Remember “the Record Club”?
We’ll give you 10 albums for 2 cents, if you’ll buy one album a month for 220 years!
Part of the reason the immunity effects are short-lived is because the semi-vaccines stimulate only a partial response from the immune system. Natural immunity involves a much broader immune response. A concern is that vaccinated persons do not seem capable of mounting a proper natural response to infections subsequent to the vaccination; thus they are at a disadvantage to unvaccinated persons.
Lots of contrary arguments regarding your last statement there. The vax supposedly reduces the impact of getting hospitalized from the virus, but you can still get it. Some who did not get the vax have apparently died wishing they did, but many had commodities that already had them compromised. Age and immune system health are factors. Younger people in general not as susceptible. Successful recovery from the actual virus may lead to stronger natural immunity.
So everyone is trying to look at all this and make risk decisions for their own circumstance.
Seems to me if one is in the 'at risk' category, then getting a vax followed, after some vax recovery time, by actually contracting the virus, would be a low risk, high reward strategy. But that is just another guess on my part.
Which vax is best is a whole separate controversy with even more confusing data (or lack of data.)
co-morbidities, not commodities
I actually find some comfort in that explanation
“I just dont have an understanding of why a real vaccine can continue to produce antibodies years later where this one does not. “
The “real” vaccines stimulate a broader immune response, as I stated above, including “T” memory cells and others. So far, the covid vaXXes on the market apparently don’t.
Thanks for posting this. This ties in to Alex Berenson’s latest….(h/t Cathi)….
Alex Berenson
Oct 28
Comment
Share
So, yeah, way back in September, the Danes were in the happy vaccine valley and decided to drop all coronavirus restrictions.
Which led to an entirely predictable set of stories (they were identical to the stories written about Israel and Britain in the spring, because the media learns nothing, ever, about the ro).
Yay Denmark! Yay vaccines! Yay sciencey science! Boo red states! Boo mean no good very bad anti-vaxxers!
But virus gonna virus, and vaccine gonna vaccine - or more accurately stop vaccining - and now the Danes have reached the cliff at the end of the happy vaccine valley just in time for the winter ro season.
Which means their case chart looks like so:
Same thing is happening in the rest of north-central Europe, by the way.
The failure of their policy to work as promised has made the Danish public health authorities grumpy (rather than ashamed, which seems like a more natural response, but part of being a public health expert means never having to say you’re sorry, much less admit you’re wrong).
And when the public health authorities get grumpy, we all know what’s next on the horizon. Lockdowns, baby, lockdowns!
Meanwhile, the Danes will probably load up on boosters for the oldsters and (temporarily) suppress the per-case death rate, but make no mistake.
They are likely following Britain to the unhappy vaccine plateau, with a huge number of cases and a Covid death rate that - although lower than the January 2021 peak - remains stubbornly high and a not-insignificant contributor to the overall death rate. (Which itself is rising, for reasons that we don’t know but DEFINITELY has nothing to do with our population-wide experiment with a completely novel biotechnology rushed to market in less than a year.)
What comes after the unhappy vaccine plateau?
Stay tuned.
But no one - and I mean absolutely no one - could have predicted an 80-percent plus adult vaccine rate would not help Denmark achieve herd immunity or even save it from a massive spike in cases.
It was just impossible to forecast.”
~~~~~~~
(/s off, for those in Rio Linda)
—> Pfizer did a better marketing job
Likely a better job of lobbying and crony capitalism
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.