New Modelling Study concludes ‘Unvaccinated are a danger to the Vaccinated’; but Real-World Data proves COVID Vaccines INCREASE Risk of Infection by 400%

dailyexpose.uk ^ | APRIL 29, 2022 | THE EXPOSÉ

[ransomnote]

A new study which has been publicised by Forbes, makes the bold claim that “unvaccinated people increase the risk of Covid infection among the vaccinated”.

But with UK Government data showing the Covid-19 case-rate per 100,000 is significantly higher among the triple vaccinated population than it is among the unvaccinated population, and New Zealand Government data showing the Covid-19 hospitalisation-rate per 100,000 is also highest among the triple vaccinated, the conclusions of the paper don’t seem to match what’s happening in the real world.

So how have the authors of this eagerly publicised study come to their conclusion?

It could have something to do with one of the authors serving on advisory boards related to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for Seqirus, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Pasteur Vaccines.

By Guy Hatchard

Business magazine Forbes has published a story with the arresting headline:

“Unvaccinated People Increase Risk Of Covid Infection Among Vaccinated, Study Finds”.

Source

The work they are referring to is not in the normal sense a study but is actually a modelling exercise published by the journal of the Canadian Medical Association. Did the Forbes staff writer read the paper very well? I am quite sure they didn’t. At the end of paragraph one of the Method section of the original paper, it describes their model saying:

“A vaccine that is 80% efficacious would result in 80% of vaccinated people becoming immune, with the remaining 20% being susceptible to infection. We did not model waning immunity.”

Now I am sure you know that the mRNA vaccines do not stop infection and also wane in effectiveness. You only need to look at official Government data in the UK to see that –

Source

Source

In other words, mRNA vaccination does not confer immunity and its effectiveness does not remain constant as the paper assumes. So what use is this paper and to what do its conclusions apply? Apparently not to the mRNA Covid vaccines.

Conflicts of interest are at work

Lo and behold, one of the paper’s authors, David Fisman, declares competing interests:

“He has served on advisory boards related to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for Seqirus, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Pasteur Vaccines.…”

Another author, Ashleigh Tuite, was employed by the Public Health Agency of Canada when the research was conducted (aka the domain of Justin Trudeau).

So why would Forbes publicise this story which prima facie has little relevance to the real-world data of the current pandemic? Forbes magazine is 51% owned by a Hong Kong based company Integrated Whale Investments about which little is known. The Washington Post has suggested that Forbes editorial policy has been influenced as a result, but by whom no one really knows.

At this point in the pandemic, it has become clear that boosted individuals are becoming more vulnerable to Omicron than the unvaccinated. So I can only suggest that it might be advantageous for some scientists and politicians to blame the unvaccinated for everything in order to cover up their own mistaken ideas. Or perhaps there are commercial interests anxious to sell more arguably useless vaccines for billions of dollars. You decide.

The unwitting public are the victims here.

If the government and their compliant media friends are our one source of truth, as has happened in New Zealand (by decree), then you have no option except to blame the unvaccinated whatever happens. For our government, it is quite useful to be able to quote a study (???) that affirms just that, even if it is irrelevant and unrelated to the real world we are living in.

The actual NZ situation is quite different, the unvaccinated are currently less likely to be hospitalised than the boosted. Thank you to Grant Dixon for compiling and graphing NZ Ministry of Health data, below.

Carefully masked from reality

This morning my mask exempt friend entered a haberdashery shop, whereupon two other potential customers turned and fled. Yesterday she was turned away from a fabric store. I am sure many of you have had similar experiences. The fact of the matter is that almost the whole of the New Zealand population has become subject to fear-based government-sponsored group-think.

Are we all being conditioned to vote for Jacinda Ardern in next year’s election based on the carefully constructed myth that she is keeping us all safe? We should be keeping our feet on the ground. We should recognise that public relations experts and propaganda promoters are at work full time, but they are working out of touch with reality.

Is it the economy?

Meanwhile, our whole economy is becoming more and more dysfunctional. As people are too afraid to associate with one another in public, the whole basis of commercial activity is being undermined.

The two large supermarket chains are laughing all the way to the bank. As small businesses are forced to close and their monopoly grows, supermarket prices and profits are entering the stratosphere. Smart individuals are now ordering their vegetables and groceries direct from Australia (as far away from us as Moscow is from London) because they are so much cheaper.

This week in the UK the government was forced to intervene to control prices as the cost of tomatoes (mostly imported) rose from NZ$1.10 to $1.80 per kilo. The public were outraged and made their disapproval known in no uncertain terms, forcing the government to act. Here in New Zealand (where tomatoes are easily grown), Countdown is charging at this minute, as I write, on its website from $6 to $16 per kilo for tomatoes.

The government is clueless to control this rampant price gouging, as it is clueless about most things including the pandemic. The public is equally hoodwinked, we are queueing up fully masked and fully vaccinated to pay through the nose for everyday items without so much as a squeak of dissent.

The ten-year-old son of a friend asked his mother the other day “Which do you think our society is more like—Brave New World or 1984?” I doubt either Aldous Huxley or George Orwell could ever have imagined anything so incomprehensibly doublethink as 2022 New Zealand.

This is the state we have reached through our government’s careful rationing of information and saturation conditioning.

Time we reopened the flood gates of free speech and social media—hold your horses, we might endanger our one source of truth.

[ransomnote]

PING

[Bob434]

Bidens ministry of disinformation is busy hiding the facts and promoting the lie thatnthe unvaxxed are more of a danger.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

<“unvaccinated people increase the risk of Covid infection among the vaccinated

They seem to be admitting something....

[DSH]

"Modeling study"

No need to read past that point. The same applies to "climate modeling," as far as that goes. Garbage.

[Caipirabob]

Covid vaccine, applied every 4 to 5 months, including boosters, has a maximum efficacy of 10-15% after 14 to 15 months. One would need to continually get boosted or they would only have a slight advantage over an unvaccinated individual. This is according to UK studies on continuing efficacy. The science no longer supports vaccination. Perhaps a good reason why European nations, such as Denmark, have now suspended their vaccination programs.

[MtnClimber]

Just wait until the FR Branch COVIDians show up to comment!

[JimRed]

“unvaccinated people increase the risk of Covid infection among the vaccinated

They seem to be admitting something....

Yep. Vaxxing is useless at best, more likely harmful than helpful.

[Big Red Badger]

Covidiots,
We should pity them.

[Wuli]

“But with UK Government data showing the Covid-19 case-rate per 100,000 is significantly higher among the triple vaccinated population than it is among the unvaccinated population, and New Zealand Government data showing the Covid-19 hospitalisation-rate per 100,000 is also highest among the triple vaccinated, the conclusions of the paper don’t seem to match what’s happening in the real world.”

These statements are being made by people who have not done their own math.

To begin with the U.K. figures given on a per 100,00 population do not divide that into per 100,000 unvaccinated and 100,000 vaccinated - they are per 100,000 of the whole population.

But in every 100,000 people, in every age group in the U.K., the largest percentage of the population is vaccinated, so the vaccinated represent a larger percent than the unvaccinated in any 100,000 people.

Then if you consider that, and look at the raw humbers in each age group, and look at the tables for the % of that age group that is unvaccinated and the percent that is vaccinated, and do some math, you reach a different conclusion than the theme of the Expose.

What you see is yes the raw numbers of the vaccinated come out as infected or hospitalized than the unvaccinated, but in nearly every case the unvaccinated represent a larger percentage, infected or hospitalized, than the percentage that they are in that age group. If the unvaccinated are only 20% of an age group, then if they were doing radically better than the vaccinated in that age group, then less than 20% of them should be in an infected or hospitalized category for that age group. But the opposite appears to be true in most age groups. More of the unvaccinated, on a percentage basis compared to their percentage of an age group, are falling into an infected or hospitalized category than is true for the vaccinated in the same age group.

What seems more true to me is that while the unvacccinated are not doing radically better than the vaccinated, the vaccinated are not doing radically better than the unvaccinated. That comorbidities more than vaccination status are determining the rates of hospitalizations.

[sauropod]

.

[Wuli]

Do not take the Expose’s words at face value. They did not do the math and drew wrong conclusions from data they did not subject to their own analysis.

See my post #10.

[MtnClimber]

Covidiots, We should pity them.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a type of cognitive bias in which people believe that they are smarter and more capable than they really are. Essentially, low ability people do not possess the skills needed to recognize their own incompetence. The combination of poor self-awareness and low cognitive ability leads them to overestimate their own capabilities.1 The term lends a scientific name and explanation to a problem that many people immediately recognize—that fools are blind to their own foolishness. As Charles Darwin wrote in his book The Descent of Man, "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."

[Sirius Lee]

They seem to be admitting something....

Yup. Basically saying: "Hey our frankenshots gave you AIDS, but lets blame it on the purebloods, just the same." And why not? The masktards already proved that they will believe anything.

[EEGator]

True, but the vaccine isn’t a vaccine, and is garbage.

[mewzilla]

How's this, from 2021...

Nasal vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: Synergistic or alternative to intramuscular vaccines?

It is striking that all marketed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are developed for intramuscular administration designed to produce humoral and cell mediated immune responses, preventing viremia and the COVID-19 syndrome. They have a high degree of efficacy in humans (70–95%) depending on the type of vaccine. However, little protection is provided against viral replication and shedding in the upper airways due to the lack of a local sIgA immune response, indicating a risk of transmission of virus from vaccinated individuals....

Though striking is not the word I'd use.

[eyeamok]

In other words:

The Vaccine is useless, actually worse than useless since the un jabbed can cause the jabbed to become sick from the disease they took the jab to protect them from...

Why aren’t these people LOCKED up in a Sanitarium yet or Prison??

[MtnClimber]

What will get you in the most trouble if you say it in public?:

1. The VAX does not work.

2. Men cannot get pregnant.

[Tell It Right]

"'Modeling study' No need to read past that point."

Agreed. The only "modeling" I want to see is this model as First Lady again. LOL

[cranked]

“Unvaccinated People Increase Risk Of Covid Infection Among Vaccinated, Study Finds”

Yes, of course.
Bet these are the same folks who claim that wearing masks work too.