This will make some public health officers sweat.
In Sweden, a new study followed 840,000 people who were double vaccinated for nine months, which is longer than any previous study. The researchers matched them or “paired them” with another 840,000 people who were the same, age, sex and from the same area. Out of this 1.6 million pooled sample, 27,000 people went on to get infected, and most of them were unvaccinated (21,000). So that’s not surprising.
But underlying this data was an extraordinary trend showing efficacy falling month after month. In the first two to four weeks, the double vaccinated were very well protected. But by nine months later, the efficacy was not just zero, but negative.
The study considered protection against severe disease too, which lasts for longer, but after 6 months, the older men and people most at risk of Covid (sadly) were more likely to catch Covid than the matched same-age unvaccinated controls they were paired with. Nine months after vaccination, the average person is still less likely to end up in hospital, but protection is trending downwards for everyone.
No wonder the word on the lips of most state health officers is “Booster”. If only they had something better to offer than just another dose of the same thing? …
Applies to Pfizer and to Astrazenica. The Moderna vaccine was found to still provide 59% efficacy at 6 months, and Astrazenica followed by Pfizer still provided some protection at six months.
Cities which rely solely and completely on vaccination to protect them may appear to cruise for a while, but by five or six months post vaccination, things may unravel …
Unfortunately the window to gain natural protection while being protected by the vaccine is just not long enough to avoid overwhelming the hospitals.
Or the administrative state can get out of the way and let us have ivermectin.
We’ve run this before, but it’s so highly appropriate — compare the numbers in the headlines to the first graph above: