Buchan et al. 'Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron or Delta infection': it is very clear that these vaccines have failed to protect the upper airways and to stop transmission or work
Buchan et al. 'Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron or Delta infection': it is very clear that these vaccines have failed to protect the upper airways and to stop transmission or work
The vaccines have FAILED, are not properly safe; these vaccines don't sterilize the virus; original/mortal antigenic sin (OAS) is clear, vaccines primed to Wuhan strain MISSES Delta/OMICRON variant
Not sure what to think of the last graph. Seems like there WOULD be more cases in the vaccinated because there are so many more vaccinated vs unvaccinated
Look again. It's per 100,000, so the numbers of jabbed is irrelevant. And as it's across all age groups as well, they can't claim it's the elderly only.
I understand that. But the numbers aren't what you think they are unless there are equal numbers in the control group (unvaxxed). For example in a population of 100,000 people with a 1% death rate; if only 30 people were unvaxxed and ALL of them died from C-19 the rate of death for the vaxxed would still be higher.
1% of 100,000 = 1,000
1,000-30 = 970
Therefore,
Even though ALL of the unvaxxed died (n=30), it'd still look like the rate of death among the vaccinated was much higher (n=970).
Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. The chart above shows the vaxxed dying at a much higher rate than the unvaxxed. But this would be the case if you were examing the whole population where the vaxxed far outnumbered the unvaxxed. It's a clever way to manipulate statistics to make them show what you want them to. Unless you have close to equal numbers in each group, you can't really tell which group s better off. I'm on Dr. A's side here, but don't understand why he would include a graph that is misleading. It's just as wrong as the data manipulation the CDC does to convince us that something false is true.
(Admittedly immunocompromised) Neil Cavuto almost dying from COVID re-infection, but still claiming "vaccine" is working: likely case of OAS/ADE
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/vaccines-magical-thinking-and-neil/
And he was the guy who screamed not to take HCQ: "It'll KILL you!"
I showed this a year ago yesterday. How many people would still be alive and well if this information hadn't been suppressed?
https://www.primarydoctor.org/covidvaccine
Not just Buchan as I noted in this article a few weeks ago. https://www.theepochtimes.com/what-is-original-antigenic-sin-and-why-do-we-care_4212364.html Since that time the Accorsi study also found negative VE. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788485
Not sure what to think of the last graph. Seems like there WOULD be more cases in the vaccinated because there are so many more vaccinated vs unvaccinated
Look again. It's per 100,000, so the numbers of jabbed is irrelevant. And as it's across all age groups as well, they can't claim it's the elderly only.
Comparing 100,000 unjabbed vs 100,000 jabbed? Because if it's not the chart's information isn't so useful.
it's a rate per 100,000, not absolute numbers.
I understand that. But the numbers aren't what you think they are unless there are equal numbers in the control group (unvaxxed). For example in a population of 100,000 people with a 1% death rate; if only 30 people were unvaxxed and ALL of them died from C-19 the rate of death for the vaxxed would still be higher.
1% of 100,000 = 1,000
1,000-30 = 970
Therefore,
Even though ALL of the unvaxxed died (n=30), it'd still look like the rate of death among the vaccinated was much higher (n=970).
Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. The chart above shows the vaxxed dying at a much higher rate than the unvaxxed. But this would be the case if you were examing the whole population where the vaxxed far outnumbered the unvaxxed. It's a clever way to manipulate statistics to make them show what you want them to. Unless you have close to equal numbers in each group, you can't really tell which group s better off. I'm on Dr. A's side here, but don't understand why he would include a graph that is misleading. It's just as wrong as the data manipulation the CDC does to convince us that something false is true.