Translation: you dirt people aren’t dying fast enough.
Yeah, uh-huh, right.
Ain’t that an interesting way to lower the standard of their vaccines. First it was 100% effective in stopping kung flu. Then 80 then 70 then 50, then useless. BUT NOW... They are claiming to prove something which can’t be proven. Just like Obamas “jobs saved or created.”
still going after the children
they want it on the child schedule
so their legal immunity will continue
There are still plenty of suckers, although I don’t know any of them.
So you’re kid is 80% less likely to go to the ER which what percentage of kids with normal metabolism ever need to go to an ER?
“… A main limitation cited by the researchers involved the relatively low virus circulation during the study period, which combined with the few hospitalizations in this age group meant vaccine effectiveness against more serious outcomes could not be evaluated.…”
******************************************************************
I’ve always felt that the COVID-19 vaccine could be beneficial for the elderly and those with impaired immune systems (for the initial shots but not for endless series of vaccines targeting new variants). For anyone else, the vaccine would be not helpful and could VERY potentially have adverse consequences.
NATURAL IMMUNITY WILL ALWAYS BE BEST.
For anyone else curious, on the parent company...
https://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=ZD
You’ll see the usual suspects.
And only an insignificant number of them die or are maimed by the new clot shot.
I just don’t believe those claims. Should I?
PING TO THREAD
Excerpt from filthy lying article implying it’s ‘safe and effective’:
“”However, few children had received a bivalent dose, so the estimate was imprecise,” the researchers cautioned in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reportopens in a new tab or window. “In addition, the median interval since receipt of the bivalent dose was only 58 days, meaning there was little time for waning to be observed.” “
ransomnote: What are they basing their efficacy on? VAERS? The CDC delayed entry of adverse reactions by months when the Covid ‘vax’ rolled out, so there could be reports of terrible adverse reactions received but not yet published to VAERS.
Even mild adverse reactions reported to VAERS are weaponized - the CDC says that any report to VAERS will not be updated. ALl those people who had ER visits for the original Covid vax? Well if they died, VAERS was not updated to reflect that. SO, if a child has a rash and it’s entered as a record into VAERS, according to CDC text, if the child’s condition worsens or the child dies, it won’t be updated in VAERS.
In the first Covid vax rollout, I was reading many records by pharmacies reporting that the vaxxed a child under the age limit required but specifying there was no negative reaction. I wondered why they did this when VAERS was underreported for COvid ‘vaccines’ in general. But then, if they vax people ‘too young’ and put a placeholder record in VAERS for that patient, according to CDC rules the record will not be updated. So who knows what happened to the kids?
If it’s a CDC study then you know the big pharm criminals bought them off.
Child abuse.
🙄
CDC aka Comical Dork Conglomerate
The Covid vaccines were very good for children, with the exception of those babies who died from SIDS, and the young teens who died of heart attacks. Oh, and let us not forget those children who have now been diagnosed with aggressive cancers. And the issues for women in menstruation and miscarriage problems that young females may have to deal with in the future. Other than those small medical issues, making sure your children are vaccinated for Covid is the best thing you can do for their health. /s
Scary!(/S)
"But vaccine uptake in this population has been paltry, with the researchers noting that just 6.1% of children in this age group had completed their primary series vaccination by May 2023, nearly a year since the two vaccines were first authorized."Translation: the public in general and parents in particular aren't "buying" the new shots. This alarms the manufacturer, so more studies -- mentioning "estimates," by the way -- are necessary to be announced and publicized.
"Paltry" must be fought against, says the Seedy Sea of bureaucrats.
80% against ER visits?
How’s it do against visits to the mortician?