patrick.net

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/modeling-study-makes-false-conclusions

The COVID-19 vaccines have failed to stop the infection, do not prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among fully vaccinated individuals, and have not been shown to reduce hospitalization or death in prospective, randomized, double blind placebo-controlled trials. The consent form for COVID-19 vaccines indicates the only benefit occurred in the past with previous strains. As an epidemiologist, I was shocked when Watson et al, made the claim that vaccination helped prevent 14-21 million deaths in 2021. How can reviewers and editors allow an author group to make such a claim when no mortality benefit is granted by the US FDA who regulates the language of the consent form?

Watson relied on a the Epidemiological SEIR (Susceptible → Exposed → Infectious → Recovered) model previously referred to as “the science”, by many government leaders, such as the former German chancellor Angela Merkel. In a analysis by Klement and Walach, the SEIR model was found to be invalid because Watson assumed the vaccine would prevent infection and therefore in some individuals, COVID-19 would not occur and thus the progression to death would be avoided. This is not realistic. ...

Randomized trials by Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Novavax, and the killed virus vaccines all failed to show that vaccination prevents infection and thus reduces death during the trial observation period. ...

The preponderance of evidence is that the effect is in the opposite direction with more infections, COVID-19 deaths, vaccine injuries, disabilities, and fatal syndromes with the vaccination campaign.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/new-data-shows-why-covid-mrna-gene

In the Omicron period, compared to pre-Omicron periods, unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 positive adults <65 years old without comorbidity had reduced proportions of hospitalization and death overall.

The original article does a little pfellating of Pfizer in an attempt to stay out of trouble, but that is to be expected of the whores that "scientists" have become these days.

https://anandamide.substack.com/p/curious-kittens

As universities in the United States continue to mandate liability-free injections (COVID vaccines) for students at limited risk of contracting COVID, it becomes imperative that more public information be made available for the ingredients of these experimental vaccines. ...

Informed consent cannot be obtained with poorly characterized therapeutics. ...

The “Thailand study” (Mansanguan et al) implies even higher rates of cardiac risk for students, where 29.24% of students (n=301) experienced cardiovascular manifestations. Studies including 23 Million Nordic patients observed a significant rate of myocarditis in this age group as well. This study, while larger, was not as controlled as the Thailand study in that Mansanguan et al. took baseline measurements of the patients and explored more than just myo/pericarditis.

These risks are not seen with C19 itself. ...

On the flip side of this risk equation we find infection from C19 has been shown to provide more durable immunity than the narrow spike protein focused vaccines. Natural immunity provides mucosal antibodies and T-Cell recognition of the proteome derived from the entire 30kb viral genome where the vaccines are focused on a small ~4kb (1273 amino acids) region of the virus. ...

It is is well established that these vaccines do not stop transmission and recent studies from the Cleveland clinic (preprint) even demonstrate negative vaccine efficacy with each additional vaccine. ...

They also demonstrate a dose dependent effect or a ‘Biological gradient’ which is one of the tenets of the Bradford Hill conditions for causality. This implies the vaccines are weakening patients immune systems and making them more susceptible to C19 and other infections.

Thus the vaccination policies at universities appear to violate fundamental medical ethics as they are asking students to absorb a negative risk/benefit medical intervention to shield older faculty. This is using their student body as human shields while failing to inform that the shield has a ‘Russian Roulette’ price for its user. This is mis-informed coercion not informed consent.

This is particularly true for vaccines that do not stop transmission and in several studies show signs of negative vaccine efficacy (Barnstable Mass). The Barnstable Mass study run by the CDC showed higher infection rates amongst the vaccinated. Australia is now 96% vaccinated (16+ 2 Doses) and the hospitals are enriched above 96% for vaccinated patients. Excess mortality in Australia is higher post vaccination than during the pre-vaccination pandemic.

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/mrna-vaccines-fail-again

Moderna’s leading mRNA influenza jab has failed, the company said yesterday.

In a large clinical trial, the vaccine appeared LESS able to stimulate the immune system than older flu jabs for two of four flu strains, the company said. It also had far higher rates of side effects than the older shots.

The lack of efficacy was notable because flu vaccines have almost no real-world efficacy, as Dr. Anthony Fauci himself conceded in a paper last month.

https://slaynews.com/news/covid-deaths-fully-vaccinated-government-study-finds/

A bombshell new report has just been quietly published by the United Kindom government, revealing that “fully vaccinated” people accounted for a staggering 92 percent of Covid deaths last year.

The official figures show that those classed as “fully,” “triple,” or “quadruple” vaccinated accounted for nine in ten of all COVID-19 deaths in England over the past two years.

For the entirety of 2022, the fully vaccinated accounted for 92% of Covid deaths.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/92-what-92-united-kingdom-government

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/primary-series-and-boosters-no-impact

Primary Series and Boosters--No Impact on Maternal COVID-19 Test Positivity
Large Study Published in BMJ Ignored Safety, Found No Benefit with Dangerous Injections

zzyzzx says

I wonder how often this is made up as some excuse to take a few days off, avoid some event, or just try to scaremonger the plebs into thinking that covid is "still out there!".

Guys like newsom are craven liars, so you can never trust their public face. You want the truth out of them, you have to catch them on a hot mic when they think they aren't being overheard by the rabble.

https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/how-does-the-hub-get-missed-what

Obligatory reminder: at the county level, all apparent (mild) vaccine effectiveness is entirely explained by the Healthy User Bias (HUB).

How Does the HUB Get Missed?

Let us understand first that the HUB is not even a concept on the tips of the tongues or minds of many of us who have been employed in Statistics work outside of the medical field. It may also be the case that those who are familiar with the concept have not explored it well enough to have intuition about its presence. Add to that the conflict of interests associated with the biomedical field, and you have the makings of a memory hole.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/recall-ho-chi-minh-city-vietnam-study

Recall Ho Chi Minh city Vietnam study (Chau et al.) looking at vaccinated healthcare personnel during Delta variant; viral loads via PCR cycle threshold in vaxxed nurses were 251 times higher than in infected cases with the original strain in March/April 2020...

These are critical early studies that showed us clearly that the vaccine was failing and even was facilitating/enhancing infection and re-infection in the vaccinee.

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/great-texas-covid-19-tragedy

Despite all the hopes and aspirations for those pushing vaccine ideology, prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo controlled trials in 2020 never demonstrated reductions in hospitalization and death. As a result, no therapeutic claim of survival can be made by anyone. Reduction in the risk of death is listed in the “benefit” section of vaccine consent form. COVID-19 vaccines have never saved lives. ...

The real tragedy in Texas and all over the world was the absolute or relative lack of early combination therapeutics at home in high risk COVID-19. Gkioulekas et al concluded that by December of 2020, we had clear and convincing evidence (P<0.01) that early treatment was effective in reducing hospitalization death, a claim that could never be made for COVID-19 vaccines. Verkerk et al demonstrated the vast majority of hospitalizations and deaths occurred as a result of little or no access to early combination therapy. Failure to treat resulting in avoidable death is always a tragedy.

https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2022/12/05/jme-2022-108449

Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5–4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 1430–4626 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they:
(1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group;
(2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults;
(3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission;
(4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and
(5) may result in wider social harms.

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/covid-19-vaccine-efficacy-grossly

COVID-19 Vaccine Efficacy Grossly Overestimated from Non-Randomized Studies
Multiple Sources of Bias Created Illusion that Vaccines Worked as they Failed in the Real World

Proponents of COVID-19 mass vaccination will admit the products are not perfect yet claim they saved “millions of lives.” Major therapeutic claims such as mortality reduction with a single novel product can only be made on the basis of large, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trials with proper primary endpoints. Non-randomized studies have threats to validity that cannot be overcome.

Fung et al in a recent paper just scratch the surface in addressing this complex issue. They point out that background infection rates and cross-overs from unvaccinated to vaccinated early in the campaign were sources of bias that led to inflated vaccine efficacy. ...

For all of the above reasons, claims that the COVID-19 vaccines worked to reduce spread of infection, hospitalization, and death must be rejected. The burden of proof has not been met and threats to validity have not been overcome. All of the COVID-19 vaccines should be removed from the market and we should begin the investigative phase into how this massive program failed to stop COVID-19.

https://sukwan.substack.com/p/saturday-strip-272/comment/14135737

Thomas Lewis
Writes Told You So

Since The Vaccines Do Not Work ...

Technically ...

Everyone Is Unvaccinated.

Except Those Whose Bodies

- Developed Natural Immunity.

The Rest Are Just

Vaccine Victims.

https://www.eugyppius.com/p/another-day-another-loss-for-the?publication_id=268621&post_id=112659348&isFreemail=true

Another day, another loss for the mRNA jabs, as old-fashioned live attenuated virus vaccines are shown to provide superior immunity in hamsters
The bright and shiny new technology is not always the way. Fuck everybody who said otherwise.

Patrick says

https://sukwan.substack.com/p/saturday-strip-272/comment/14135737

Thomas Lewis
Writes Told You So

Since The Vaccines Do Not Work ...

Technically ...

Everyone Is Unvaccinated.

Except Those Whose Bodies

- Developed Natural Immunity.

The Rest Are Just

Vaccine Victims.

Injection Victims

Not Vaccine Victims, as it is not a Vaccine...

https://drpanda.substack.com/p/covid-19-deaths-in-2022-were-39-higher

COVID-19 deaths in 2022 were 39% higher than 2021
Media is silent

My personal experience so far is, "nothing to see here" regarding covid or the jab.

Patrick says

Could it be because the jabbed, on average, are older than the unjabbed?

GNL says

Patrick says

Could it be because the jabbed, on average, are older than the unjabbed?

Even if so, it shows the jab as ineffective.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/what-federal-public-health-in-canada

Gazit et alshowed that “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13-fold (95% CI, 8-21) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected.” When adjusting for the time of disease/vaccine, there was a 27-fold increased risk (95% CI, 13-57).

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/exploding-the-myth-that-covid-jabs

Exploding the myth that Covid jabs protect against death in two charts
The public health industry (yes, it's an industry) relies on bad math and worse data collection to argue the Covid shots work. But the truth is out there.

https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/on-friendship-with-self-righteous

Yes, the Aussies are paying funeral expensed for those who can prove death caused by jab:

https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccine-claims-scheme

https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/deceased-covid-19-vaccine-recipient-payments-and-funeral-costs-you-can-claim-through-covid-19?context=55953

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/sad-turtles-saturday-may-6-2023-c?publication_id=463409&post_id=119691312&isFreemail=true

Brilliant professor Norman Fenton published a simple spreadsheet analysis on YouTube explaining the reason the CDC didn’t count people as vaccinated until 2 weeks after their second jab.

It’s a statistical shell game.

I’ll give you the gist so you don’t need to watch the whole explainer video, but if you want to see the details, it’s all there, linked below. The basic idea is, if you shift forward the window of vaccinated infections (or hospitalizations) by calling jabbed people “unvaccinated,” you increase the unvaxxed numbers and reduce the number of vaxxed showing infected/hospitalized.

So far, we already knew all that. It was a way to make the unvaxxed look bad. But the statistical effect ripples forward for several months before the two groups catch up, so the numerical efficacy calculations falsely show a “scientific” benefit for the jabs. The jabs could just as well have been a placebo, and you’d see the exact same apparent benefit. By calculating efficacy this way, by time-shifting the vaxxed cohort, it created fake, artificially-high efficacy numbers.

No better than saline.

But eventually you get to a point where the time-shift doesn’t provide much statistical benefit, the numbers catch up with each other, but by that point, they just call it “waning efficacy,” and roll out the boosters, creating another 2-week time shift where — think about this — even people who’d already had two original shots suddenly became “unvaccinated” again for another two weeks, creating another time-shift and more fake inflated efficacy results.

Because of the time-shifting, it is entirely possible that the jabs had no efficacy at all, they were placebos with a bonus Russian-roulette feature. To figure it out, the efficacy calculations must be re-done, accounting for the time-shift. And while they’re at it, they could use absolute risk reduction instead of relative risk reduction.

But that would spoil all the fun, wouldn’t it?

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/potato-blues-wednesday-may-10-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=120494736&isFreemail=true

MedRxIV published a Cleveland Clinic study pre-print titled “Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Bivalent Vaccine.”

It should have been titled, the “NON-Effectiveness of the Covid Vaccine,” or “Risks of the Covid Vaccine.”

The short version is the prestigious researchers found that the more jabs a person took, the more likely it was they’d catch symptomatic covid.

https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/84118.html

THE RICHIE ALLEN SHOW MONDAY MARCH 13TH 2023

"Richie is joined by Professor Norman Fenton. Esteemed Professors Norman Fenton and Martin Neil launched a newsletter to challenge the credibility of the global response to covid-19 and expose how governments and their advisers use and abuse statistics to fit their narratives. ...

DR. NORMAN FENTON: Nobody I don't think anybody seriously believes the vaccines are effective at stopping infection transmission. We know that was a lie, right? We do know that's a lie and everybody kind of accepts that now, right? But what's remarkable is that they have sustained what is just as equally a big lie, which is that the vaccines, although they don't stop that transmission, infection transmission they stop people being seriously ill and dying of covid, right? How often do we hear that mantra? You know you get the, all of these media celebrities and politicians saying you know, oh, I'm really ill with covid but thank God for my five jabs whatever—

RICHIE ALLEN: Yeah, yeah.

DR. NORMAN FENTON: — otherwise it would have been so much worse, right? You get people like Julia Hartley-Brewer, right, who was supposedly you know one of the main challengers of the official covid narrative, she still bangs on even today about, you know, the jabs still stop you becoming seriously ill and dying with covid.* I mean it's, it's incredible. But that, that has been maintained because that one, that we have completely, we have completely destroyed that narrative. The idea that you can't become seriously ill, hospitalized and die after having been vaccinated, is the one perpetual myth that just they can't seem to let go of. And they can't let go of it because once you destroy, once you show that that's not true, the entire the basis of the continuation of the vaccine program, irrespective of any potential safety signals or actual adverse events, because I'm not talking about that, I'm just talking about whether or not you can die with covid after having been vaccinated. Because if you can, and you can die just as equally and maybe more likely as someone who's unvaccinated, then what the hell are we doing with these vac— what's the point of them? ...

DR. NORMAN FENTON: I did have a prestigious career and I was highly respected but the fact is it did all change as soon as I started to show that the entire covid narrative was driven by these sort of flawed and easily manipulated statistics. And then you know I was suddenly called a conspiracy theorist, a spreader of [mis]information, and from that point on all of my research papers on the subject were censored, I was treated like an academic pariah, you know, colleagues shunned me. ... It was horrendous, but the good news about it is that you do find out who your true friends and colleagues are, and what's more, I have discovered, you know, through the last three years, I have met in person and online people whose views I really respect.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/new-zealand-records-biggest-increase-in-registered-deaths-in-100-years/BQERSTKIANCKRNNA7IL42RD52U/

Why in Australia do we have excess deaths at an 80 year high and why in New Zealand are excess deaths at a 100 year high?? Just curious. It isn't COVID since they are all vaccinated and the vaccines keep you from dying from COVID, right? So what is causing this?

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/colossal-failure-around-world

The COVID-19 vaccines are so ineffective against COVID-19 that they have negative efficacy. This means that you have a greater likelihood of infection and/or hospitalization from COVID-19 after having received the vaccine than not receiving it. The COVID-19 vaccines have not only failed to reduce cases and hospitalizations from Omicron and COVID-19 generally, but they have actually increased the incidence of both. Results of negative efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines are seen all over the world.

Neither the Pfizer nor Moderna clinical trials addressed preventing transmission.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/public-health-scotlands-report-in

Public Health Scotland's report in January and February 2022 showed us back then (with UK data) that the VACCINATED (1 or 2 or 3 doses with dose response) compared to UNVACCINATED were at elevated risk of becoming infected and being a case (see Table 14 and Figure 13); this Scottish report was stopped soon after this report (as well as UK's) given the troubling vaccinated data

https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/autopsy-of-fatal-delta-variant-in

So the question on the table is: if the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines raised antibodies against the ancestral wild type Wuhan strain of SARS-CoV-2, would they cover the Delta variant? The only real way to know is to find a case who is fully vaccinated with “protective” antibodies in the bloodstream who contracts COVID-19. Recently such a patient has been reported from Catania, Italy.

Esposito, et al, published an autopsy of an 83 year old man who was admitted to the hospital with heart failure and was later diagnosed with acute COVID-19 and succumbed 18 days later. There is no mention of treatment with lifesaving medications in the McCullough protocol such as ivermectin, corticosteroids, or anticoagulants. Sadly his lungs were ravaged with SARS-CoV-2 despite having adequate antibody titers for the Spike protein generated from the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine.

Esposito, M.; Cocimano, G.; Vanaria, F.; Sessa, F.; Salerno, M. Death from COVID-19 in a Fully Vaccinated Subject: A Complete Autopsy Report. Vaccines 2023, 11, 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11010142

The important points of this paper are: 1) the original Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine failed to stop the Delta variant, 2) antibodies are an invalid surrogate of protection and should have never been used 8 times by the US FDA in EUA approvals for extended use of COVID-19 vaccines.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/most-infected-in-covid-outbreak-at-cdc-were-vaccinated-agency-confirms_5297678.html?src_src=ccpvnoe&src_cmp=2023-05-30&utm_source=share-btn-copylink

A COVID-19 outbreak unfolded at a conference held by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) despite most attendees being vaccinated.

About 1,800 CDC staffers and others gathered in April in a hotel in Atlanta, where the CDC is headquartered, for a conference focused on epidemiological investigations and strategies.

The CDC is the greatest threat to public health ever to exist in the US. It is completely captured by Pfizer money and will recommend that you inject feces if Pfizer can make money from that.

In such a case, doctors opposed to the injection of feces will lose funding. Doctors who find that the injection of feces is beneficial with have greatly increasing funding even as millions die from it.

The media will relentlessly promote the injection of feces as "safe and effective" in spite of all evidence.

All US politicians aside perhaps from Rand Paul will claim they have been injected with feces while secretly injecting saline.

All "public health" officials around the world will loudly support the injection of feces, afraid that the evidence against them collected by myriad Epstein clones will be made public.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/venomous-loretta-tuesday-may-30-2023?publication_id=463409&post_id=124791710&isFreemail=true

Last year we saw the first study, not peer-reviewed, claiming a class shift in antibody types in folks taking booster shots. Even covidians were distressed, commenting that, if it were true, it would be a disaster.

Now we have a peer-reviewed study confirming the IgG4 class shift.

The study was remarkable for more than just confirming the class shifting mechanism. I can’t say I’ve ever seen this kind of blunt criticism about the jabs in a study from a major journal before. Normally these studies always carefully parrot the magic words about the jabs’ safety and efficacy, and the ultra-rareness of any side effects.

But right out of the gate, this peer-reviewed study’s abstract stabbed the jabs right in their little myocardic hearts:

As the immunity provided by these vaccines rapidly wanes, their ability to prevent hospitalization and severe disease in individuals with comorbidities has recently been questioned, and increasing evidence has shown that, as with many other vaccines, they do not produce sterilizing immunity, allowing people to suffer frequent re-infections.
Oh boy! The study’s authors knowingly placed themselves squarely sideways with the world’s largest, best-funded, and most vindictive government health bureaucracy, the dystopian Centers for Disease Control, which continues to insist in spite of all evidence to the contrary that covid vaccination magically prevent death or even hospitalization for covid infections.

But it got even better. Next, the authors got to the point: the vaccine-induced IgG4 antibody class shift, which we’ve discussed on C&C before, is a problem, not a feature, a potentially deadly problem:

[R]ecent investigations have found abnormally high levels of IgG4 in people who were administered two or more injections of the mRNA vaccines… [E]merging evidence suggests that the reported increase in IgG4 levels detected after repeated vaccination with the mRNA vaccines may not be a protective mechanism; rather, it constitutes an immune tolerance mechanism to the spike protein that could promote unopposed SARS-CoV2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses. Increased IgG4 synthesis due to repeated mRNA vaccination with high antigen concentrations may also cause autoimmune diseases, and promote cancer growth and autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible individuals.
My goodness. What they’re saying is, the safe and effective jabs could make people’s immune systems respond with “tolerance” — ignoring the spike protein altogether, since the body can’t get rid of it, its own cells keep making the damned things — and tolerance of spike could lead to:

1) Autoimmune diseases,

2) Cancer growth, and

3) Autoimmune myocarditis.

By “autoimmune myocarditis” they mean that the body is attacking its own heart. That can’t be good. And it definitely wasn’t good news for people who have dormant cancers.

I wonder if all the people who took the safest vaccines ever created would have wanted to know about this potential teeny-tiny problem before making their decisions?

It’s a terrific study with massive implications, and I just don’t have time to do it justice. But here’s one of my favorite sections:

It is worth noting that there are conflicting pieces of information about the level of protection offered by these vaccines. Although the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States has stated that throughout the pandemic, mortality rates have been higher in the unvaccinated than in the vaccinated, the data in the United Kingdom contradict the CDC’s findings. Specifically, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) in the United Kingdom has reported that from April to mid-November 2021, deaths in unvaccinated people were higher in comparison with vaccinated people who had received a second vaccine dose. However, from the end of November 2021 to December 2022, this situation reverted: deaths were higher in vaccinated people who received a third vaccine dose compared with the unvaccinated.
Haha, the CDC’s statements were “contradicted” by UK data. Good one. They were really saying the CDC is useless. The researchers also suggested the IgG4 class shift as a potential explanation for the sky-high Western excess mortality rates — which is the first time I’ve seen any mainstream source suggest there might be a link between the jabs and the deaths.

In other words, some scientists ARE starting to grapple with the excess mortality problem and they ARE looking at the right potential cause.

https://palexander.substack.com/p/el-gato-malo-excellent-piece-by-el

I myself already had data from Riemersma, Shitrit, Hatemaki, Chao et al. showing vaccinated persons carried massive viral load e.g. and even could spread the virus. Data was showing us that PPE and double vaccinated nurses were transmitting virus and getting infected:

7) Chau et al.looked at transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among vaccinated healthcare workers in Vietnams. Of 69 healthcare workers that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 62 participated in the clinical study, all of whom recovered. For 23 of them, complete-genome sequences were obtained, and all belonged to the Delta variant. “Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020”.

8) Brown et al.In Barnstable, Massachusetts, Brown et al. found that among 469 cases of COVID-19, 74% were fully vaccinated, and that “the vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated who were infected.”

9) Hetemäli et al.Reporting on a nosocomial hospital outbreak in Finland, Hetemäli et al. observed that “both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections were found among vaccinated health care workers, and secondary transmission occurred from those with symptomatic infections despite use of personal protective equipment.”

10) Shitrit et al.In a hospital outbreak investigation in Israel, Shitrit et al. observed “high transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant among twice vaccinated and masked individuals.” They added that “this suggests some waning of immunity, albeit still providing protection for individuals without comorbidities.”

‘Given what we now know about the complete failure of covid vaccines to provide sterilizing immunity, stop infection, or stop spread as well as the fact that such issues were not even tested for in the drug trials that approved them, certain questions would seem to demand asking:

Just what was this “Data from the CDC today” that suggested that “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus?”




Was there, in fact, any data at all?

Or was this a completely fabricated claim used to underpin the mass rollout of a product that failed so spectacularly right out of the gates and:

Where the sorts of safety and inefficacy signals that would have pulled any other vaccine in history off the market were ignored

Where the data collection was rigged to make known adverse events difficult to find, report, and aggregate in the V-safe system by removing them from searchable database fields and placing them in free text response.

And where the mandated safety assessments were not being performed until long after problems were evident, allowing the CDC to miss the most blatant safety signal in history.

There seem to be an awfully large body of claims made by CDC that appear to have lacked foundation in fact or data. Both Dr Walensky and her predecessor Robert Redfield would seem to have a great deal to answer for here.

“The covid vaccine will make the vaccinated a dead end for the virus.”

This talking point was simply everywhere all at once.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla certainly pushed this narrative. Presumably, the fact that he was allowed to do so (itself quite an exceptional situation) implies the acquiescence of FDA, CDC, and other regulators.

Upon what was this seemingly widespread consensus based?

The matter appears to have never even been studied at the time the claims were made.

Why were the usually strict and fastidious US regulators so sanguine about such unusually aggressive and certain statements?

This is a most unusual situation and such an extraordinary outcome would seem to demand an extraordinary explanation.

Yet none seems forthcoming.