The Vaccines Cannot Do What Is Asked of Them

The Vaccines Cannot Do What Is Asked of Them. By Eugyppius.

Every day our understanding of what the vaccines can do becomes clearer. It’s not nothing, but it’s much less than we were promised.

Some of our best evidence so far comes from this Swedish retrospective cohort study, which tracks outcomes in 1,684,958 individuals (matched vaccinated and unvaccinated pairs) from 12 January to 4 October 2021. …

Unfortunately, this protection [against infection] likely falls below zero — into the zone of negative efficacy — after 7 to 9 months. [For Pfizer and Astrazenica, maybe not so much for Moderna or Astrazenica followed by Pfizer]. This is one of multiple lines of evidence confirming that the vaccinated, sooner or later, achieve higher rates of infection than the unvaccinated.

Probably the vaccinated are always highly vulnerable to infection, but they’re not tested as rigorously and at first their symptoms are so mild as to be nearly unnoticeable. SARS-2 nevertheless lurks among them, mostly undetected, until vaccine protection against overt disease dissipates.

This would explain what happened in Iceland over the summer: A bunch of freshly vaccinated Icelanders went on holiday in the UK, where they promptly picked up SARS-2 and brought the latest Delta update back home with them. In the following weeks, energetic Icelandic testing uncovered rates of infection almost as high in the vaccinated as in the unvaccinated — and this well before we would’ve expected the vaccines to have faded. …

By now it is also clear that the vaccines cause a range of adverse reactions. The best documented is myocarditis in young men, a side effect observed most frequently after dose 2 of the mRNA vaccines. We probably won’t know the true rate of vaccine-induced myocarditis for many years. From excess mortality in younger cohorts and many anecdotal media reports, we can surmise that it is much more common than anybody will admit. …

How vaccines should be used:

It does not take a Ph.D. in public health to extract a sensible vaccination policy from all this:

1. There is just no question that vaccinating low-risk cohorts (including the recovered) is not only pointless, but also dangerous. …

2. All the vaccines are good for, is reducing the likelihood of severe disease among the old and the vulnerable. It follows that only the old and the vulnerable should be vaccinated.

3. In these groups, carefully timed annual vaccinations, like flu shots, might well provide good protection at the height of the winter coronavirus season and limit mortality. …

Of course, this is the opposite of what our pandemic ideology permits. Instead, almost all of our governments deploy the vaccines in the most reckless and counterproductive ways possible.

It would appear that the vaccinated are now on a treadmill of booster shots every 6 – 9 months. Because if they try to leave the treadmill, they are more likely to catch covid than if they had never been vaccinated. How much more likely, and whether this is significant, has yet be empirically determined, but will become obvious in another year or so of empirical data.

But that assumes that booster shots are as effective and “safe” as the initial shots. Everything about vaccines to date has been a disappointment, not as good as expected or hoped. (Except pharmaceutical profits of course.) So that assumption will probably be untrue too.

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific