https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/15/covid-delta-variant-live-updates/
A new study of breakthrough infections among military veterans found that vaccine protection against the coronavirus had declined by mid-August, when the highly-contagious delta variant emerged as the dominant iteration in the country.
Using data from the Veterans Health Administration, the largest health system in the United States, researchers compared coronavirus infections by vaccination status among 620,000 veterans — representing 2.7 percent of the U.S. population — from Feb. 1 to Aug. 13.
Although the report has yet to be peer reviewed and evaluated, it indicates that virus immunity decreased over time and that its decline was different for each of the three vaccines available in the United States.
According to the study, the greatest waning was presented by the Johnson & Johnson product, with protection falling from 88 percent in March to 3 percent in August. In the same period, it declined for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from 91 percent to 50 percent. For Moderna, protection fell from 92 percent to 64 percent.
With breakthrough infection patterns remaining consistent in relation to time, age and vaccine eligibility, researchers pinpointed the delta variant as the “primary determinant of infection.” This virus mutation led to a surge of cases throughout the summer — resulting in overwhelmed hospital systems and stretched resources for treatment in some states.
Hoping to stave off any potential decline in the vaccines’ ability to prevent hospitalizations and deaths, authorities have begun administering booster shots to certain segments of the population. However, researchers warned that breakthrough infections have continued to emerge in vaccine recipients despite the shots’ sustained protection.
“These results demonstrate an urgent need to reinstate multiple layers of protection against infection, such as masking and physical distancing, while also bolstering current efforts to increase vaccination,” they said in the study.
After 5 months, the J&J vaccine was only 3% effective. Not 30%, but 3%!
For the J&J to be an effective tool against COVID, one would think you'd need a booster (from a one-and-done vaccine) every 2 or 3 months.
How was J&J FDA approved? Oh, wait. It hasn't been.
But, the FDA did just unanimously approve boosters for J&J (did they have a choice with 3% efficacy after 5 months? It's either that or just pull it from the market.).
However, according to an article just released by Fake News CNN, J&J says that after boosting at 2 to 6 months, effectiveness jumps to 94%, and doesn't wane like the Pfizer vaccine:
Vaccine advisers to the US Food and Drug Administration voted unanimously Friday to recommend a booster dose of Johnson & Johnson's vaccine at least two months after people get the first dose.
The FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee voted 19-0 to recommend the extra dose for all recipients of the J&J Janssen vaccine, 18 and older. They asked to simplify the original question being posed by the FDA, which had asked the committee to say whether the data showed that waiting six months or longer after getting the first shot would provide an even stronger immune response.
Johnson & Johnson says studies have shown boosting at two or six months can bring that effectiveness up to 94% and it says its effectiveness does not wane over time in the same way that effectiveness from Pfizer's vaccine does.
And the CDC's Dr. Amanda Cohn told the meeting that various studies suggested real-world efficacy of J&J's vaccine was anywhere between 50% and 68%.
Basically, they have no idea what they're even talking about. They just throw numbers out there and the public either gobbles them up, or is like "WTF?"
If you sequestered these "experts" into several different groups, and told them to come up with the efficacy of these vaccines, you would end up with all different conclusions. And they really wouldn't even be "conclusions" as much as they would be differing hypothesis.
At this point the "experts" (the pharmaceutical companies themselves) could just say their vaccines are 95% effective for 9 months when they're actually only 46.7% effective for 3 months and nobody would know the difference.
These pharmaceutical reps are just like your local drug dealer who tells you his shit is the best. Then you go down the road to the next one who tells you his shit is the best.
This is what makes the whole "vaccine mandate" thing so ridiculous. They're like the boy that cried wolf. How anyone could trust these "experts" at this point is beyond the pale.
Even if you think they're acting in good faith, and really care about you, they've proven themselves to be incompetent time-and-time again. That's not a knock on them, per se. I'm sure this bio-engineering is complicated stuff. But we've devolved into this state of statistical probabilities that is irrational and hypothetical. Individuals don't view themselves as statistics. Governments do that.
Censorship creates "misinformation" in the same way that the truth exposes a lie.
No comments:
Post a Comment