The real efficacy rates of the COVID vaccines

The Biden administration and the mainstream media have been pushing a mandate of the experimental COVID vaccines for the American people. Their talking point is that "COVID vaccines are effective and work against the pandemic." That's not true. I have been following the "U.K. vaccine surveillance report" since last September and have seen enough evidence about the real efficacy of the COVID vaccines to show that they're not as good as advertised.

My last essay revealed that more vaccinated people have been using the health care system in U.K. than unvaccinated people. Now I am going to talk about how the MSM and politicians use so-called "rates" to hide the truth and to misrepresent the actual data to further their narratives.

Here is an example of the "unadjusted rates" chart in the U.K. Vaccine Surveillance report, Week 51.

The chart is very easy to read. It shows the rate in each category of events, "COVID-19 cases by vaccination status," "COVID-19 cases presenting to emergency care (within 28 days of a positive specimen) resulting in an overnight inpatient admission by vaccination status," and "COVID-19 deaths (a) within 28 days and (b) within 60 days of positive specimen or with COVID-19 reported on death certificate." Instead of showing actual numbers, which are the "raw data," it calculated the unadjusted rate per 100,000 people in the population, based on the vaccination status. All the rates in each category except the cases show that the vaccinated people are doing better than unvaccinated people.

On the surface, it appears that using that unadjusted rate per 100,000 people seems fair because it compares vaccinated and unvaccinated from the same base number. But that's a deception.

“Maybe when there’s 5 years”

By then you will likely have had COVID, at least once.

Omicron looks like an easier ride, especially if you are not in a risk group. Delta is still going around, so if you come down with COVID, and qualify, I would pursue the antibody treatment ASAP.

RE: HOWEVER, when you look at total hospitalizations, the vaccinated comprise a majority (54%) of the cases (4,385 vs 3,693).

But, but, but... given that there are MORE vaccinated folks than unvaxxed in our population, the PERCENTAGE of vaxxed folks who are hospitalized are STILL LOWER than the percentage of UNVAXXED who are hospitalized.

The one other factor we should look at are the average ages of those taking the vaccine vs. The average ages of those unvaxxed.

I think the average age of the vaxxed population is much higher than the average age of unvaxxed, which makes the vaxxed more susceptible to being hospitalized.

Be that as it may, the entire assumption behind mandating vaccines to avoid transmission and hospitalization is based on probabilities, not certainty. It doesn’t sound like good policy to me.

Nope that is false.

Cormarity was approved, but it’s not available in the U.S. It will not even be available for a few years.

If there was a FDA approved drug on the market, then the EUA would be over. Per Attorney Robert Barnes by Federal law you can’t have a EUA if there is already an approved drug on the market. So you could not have a Moderna or a Johnson and Johnson if Pfizer already has one in the market being used.

Besides Big Pharma does not want a FDA approved drug because that would give them liability. They do not have it under the EUA.

Again if there was an approved FDA drug available, then the EUA would end.

Yeah I know you are being told other wise. Yep they are lying to you.

“dropped by up to 25% within 10 weeks”

So it says a particular type of vaccine was quite effective, and became somewhat less effective over some period of time, in the case of its third booster, against a particular strain (omicron) in a particular place and time (while disease rates and immunity levels constantly vary).

Every form of immunity has varying effectiveness and duration curves, against these many variables - natural immunity as well.

Natural immunity seems to be significantly better, but the vaccines are significantly effective, especially in protecting against severe illness and death.

Speaking of death, from June. Get a load of this...

https://www.fema.gov/press-release/20210629/fema-amends-covid-19-funeral-assistance-policy

“The new policy provides applicants, as well as medical authorities, coroners and jurisdictions, flexibility to attribute a death to COVID-19 without amending the death certificate.”

SNORT.

The stats are crap.

All of them.

“Nope that is false. Cormarity was approved, but it’s not available in the U.S.”

It is spelled Comirnaty, and it is the same vaccine that has been, and still is currently being used in the USA, and that is still authorized for emergency use for kids 5 years and older.

Almost 300 million doses have been administered in the USA.

Quibbling over the name change is not a real, or even a legal distinction.

“On August 23, 2021, FDA announced the first approval of a COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine has been known as the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, and will now be marketed as Comirnaty”

“Haha... Nope it’s not available per Pfizer.”

Pfizer just signed another contract in recent days, to provide 200 million more Comirnaty doses to the European Commission for its member countries (https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/news/eu-pfizer-biontech-comirnaty-doses/):

“These doses, to be supplied next year, are apart from the 450 million doses of Comirnaty agreed to be delivered next year under the deals entered earlier.”

“if it was available to the public then by law there is no EUA”

By that, I assume you mean that the other EUAs (like Moderna’s) would be invalidated.

That theory is not in effect in the real world either. Delivery and administration proceed apace.

“vaccines”

I seems that you question the reality of that word as well.

RE: Natural immunity seems to be significantly better, but the vaccines are significantly effective, especially in protecting against severe illness and death.

I agree with your statement about natural immunity. That is why in crafting health policy, Those who have recovered from Covid should be considered vaccinated.

Now regarding protection against severe illness and death, I too will accept this ON AVERAGE. It is not a guarantee because in some countries, the number of hospitalized who have been vaccinated still exceed those who are unvaccinated. I understand that as a percentage of population, they still are more “protected” ( note the quotes ) against severe illness than the unvaxxed, but still, as vaccines go, this are not really vaccines as we used to know vaccines.

The long term adverse effects are still not known, and there are tens of thousands of adverse effects and even deaths. To force this on the unwilling is bad ( and I would even say evil ) policy.

However, the one big underlying assumption behind the vaccine mandate, to prevent Covid transmission, is not supported by the evidence. Triple vaxxed Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and James Clyburn in Congress are just 3 WELL KNOWN examples.

The vaccinated STILL get infected and transmit the disease to both vaxxed and unvaxxed.

I see it happening in my personal life.

“Those who have recovered from Covid should be considered vaccinated.”

They are in many Western Countries. I would agree that they should be in the United States as well, for any Government purpose.

“as vaccines go, this are not really vaccines as we used to know vaccines”

I think they are. Perhaps more akin to the reliability and duration of flu vaccines, than a once in a lifetime home run vaccine.

“To force this on the unwilling”

I don’t think such mandates are reasonable, for something of this low risk. I don’t support them, except as a condition of employment, if it is pertinent to the job. Even then, I don’t think that the Government should mandate them, unless the Government itself is the employer. If it was super fast moving and highly fatal (like Ebola), and the vaccine was effective at stopping transmission, the door is open legally to such mandates.

“The vaccinated STILL get infected and transmit the disease to both vaxxed and unvaxxed”

Clearly yes, especially with Delta, and even more with Omicron.

I truly wish I was as gullible and out of touch as some of theses knee pads on FR these days. It’s approved and 98% effective and safer than taking a shower. I really wish I was that stupid or uninformed. Is it due to watching MSM or just the fool halfway in and can’t admit being fooled. I am so tired of this crap. If they have to threaten my life to do what they want, it’s probably not in my best interest to listen to them.

If it works then why do you need boosters?

If it safe and effective, then why does Big Pharma have no liability?

Here is the survival rate if you are not jabbed (see below). Why would you risk your life? No one knows the long term results.

The reason why I am reluctant to even compare what we have with the Flu Vaccines are:

1) The out of the ordinary number of adverse side effects being reported for these Covid vaccines.

2) The number of countries that are suspending the administration of these vaccines, especially for the younger folks (e.g., the Scandinavian countries and Japan ).

3) The frequency by which boosters are needed ( In Israel, they’re already talking about a fourth booster ).

This is not how vaccines are supposed to work. At least not how tens of millions of people see it.

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.