4th and Inches said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

The macro numbers are all you need to review. The studies are theories not confirmations. Statistical outcomes provide the probabilities and trends. This desperate clinging to vaccine efficacy on spread has become comical. Stick with the reductions in hospitalization and death which have statistical support. However we are on a slow regression to the mean there as the category of "breakthrough deaths" is increasing at a rate greater than non-vaxxed deaths which remain consistent comparatively.

---

There is no "clinging" here. It has been readily apparent for some time that omicron spreads much more easily in vaccinated populations than previous variants. However, there is still evidence that the vaccines, particularly among those with boosters, do reduce infections (and not just hospitalizations and deaths) compared with unvaccinated populations. This is what the data say at this point.

It is also apparent that, thankfully, Omicron infections tend to be less severe in general than previous variants, and may be even less severe among vaccinated individuals, as recent Swiss data seems to show.

---

It won't matter because you want to believe what you want to, but I'll give you a simple example, which you're welcome to see the multitude of additional examples in the US or globally. Despite Texas having a vaccination rate 20% lower than New York, Texas also has a 15% lower case (infection) rate than New York and even a lower death rate (significant). Now if you start the analysis from when vaccines began their effect, the case/infection rates remained similar, but the death rates changed comparatively. That's why I've said there has been a statistical impact to severe outcomes since vaccines, but nothing material on infections. See the forest not just some trees they want you to look at.

This includes pre Omicron.

---

It is not a matter of me "believing what I want to." The analysis of the numbers that you offer does not answer whether vaccines prevent infections. To answer that question, one needs to look at the case rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In Texas, it is clear that vaccination status is very strongly associated with infection status.

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/cases-and-deaths-by-vaccination-status-11082021.pdf

Jan. To Sept. 2021 saw case rate of 14,000 per 100,000 among unvaccinated individuals and 300 per 100,000 among vaccinated individuals. To explain these vastly different case rate by something other than vaccination status is going to be a task that your forrest cannot do. It is going to take some time to see what protection, if any, vaccines (whether two-dose or three) give against omicron infection, but it is clearly much lower than against previous variants based on early data.

---

delta.. early hot spots of delta are playing out much differently

---

…..and all that data occurred during the 6-8 month window where vaccines ARE effective at preventing infections. Ever increasing percentages of the population are now moving beyond that window.

What DC inexplicably insists on ignoring is the data which all show that vaccination INCREASES susceptibility to infection beyond that 6-8 window. That is consequential because it is infection rate which drives federal, state, local policies.

---

How can he ignore it if you won't post it?

---

I've posted the Israel data showing 6-27x greater infection rates among long-vaxxed (outside the 6-month protection window). Other countries are showing the same thing. It's even starting to be reflected in hospitalization rates.

The vaccines have very high protection against INFECTION for about 6 months, after which time they actually increase the odds of INFECTION. You and DC counter with the "long-lasting protection against serious disease" point, which is valid. Vaccines have saved lives. Possibly mine (as I am double-vaxxed). But "serious disease" stats are not driving policy. Infection rates are driving policy.

Data on what I'm referring to is widely available. There's no point in posting it again. You'll ignore it.

There is a reason other countries are starting to drop covid controls........

---

Am I reading this correctly? These studies say omicron infection rates and serious disease.

Third Dose of Pfizer, Moderna Covid-19 Vaccines Offers Strong Protection Against Omicron
CDC analysis shows that boosters are important in maximizing protection against Omicron and Delta variants
Hospitals are seeing significant differences in Omicron-era cases based on a patient's vaccination status.

Vaccines and booster shots offer superior protection from the Delta and Omicron variants, according to three new studies released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The data back up earlier findings supporting booster shots and offer the first comprehensive insight into how vaccines fare against the Omicron variant. In one of the studies published Friday, a CDC analysis found that a third dose of either the vaccine fromPfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc. was at least 90% effective against preventing hospitalization from Covid-19 during both the Delta and Omicron periods.
During the Delta period, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization from Covid-19 was 90% from two weeks until about 6 months after dose two, 81% from at least six months after dose two and 94% at least two weeks after a booster dose. When Omicron was dominant, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for the same periods were 81%, 57% and 90%, respectively.
"Those who remain unvaccinated are at significantly higher risk for infection and severe Covid-19 disease,"CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said. "Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible."
An additional study published in Nature Thursday also supports booster doses, and backs up previous findings from Pfizer and BioNTech showing that a third dose of their Covid-19 vaccine neutralizes Omicron but its two-dose regimen is significantly less effective at blocking the virus.
According to the study published Thursday, two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided little neutralizing antibody immunity against Omicron infection even at one month after vaccination, but a third dose offered more than 50% protection against Covid-19.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/omicron-wave-eases-in-parts-of-u-s-france-sets-plan-to-relax-curbs-11642770561?mod=Searchresults_pos7&page=1

---

What you posted in blue does not address the point you are contesting. Yes, the 2-dose regimen is basically ineffective against Omicron infection. It's also completely ineffective against infection by all the other strains 6-8 months after vaccination. (Pharma and policymakers knew this 12 months ago, but did not disclose, instead asserting vaccines would protect you forever....but I digress....)

2nd, your post also shows that the 3rd boost, necessary because of the half-life of the first 2 shots, does not return one to 90% protection levels. It has no impact on Omicron, and only bumps you back to 50% (again, from your post) against other strains. Further, the 3rd shot loses roughly 40% of its punch every month....ergo why we see the talk about quarterly boosters.

The vaccines have utility. They protect the old and the sick from infection for short periods of time. And they reduce death rates for everyone. BUT AFTER 6-8 MONTHS, THE DATA CLEARLY SHOWS VACCINES INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF INFECTION VERSUS PEOPLE WITH NATURAL IMMUNITY. that guarantees continuing high infection rates, which are the justification for all the federal, state, local controls on human activity.

Flail away, all you want, but you are in a cul-de-sac of diminishing marginal returns.

---

You appear to have some flawed logic and some incorrect information in you post above.

---

elaborate..

---

Well, vaccines do not "guarantee continuing high infection rates." He has been comparing second infection rates with first infection rates, and once a vaccinated individual is infected and recovers, they also get the "natural immunity" of someone who recovered from infection without having been vaccinated.

Also, the idea that the vaccines don't protect at all against omicron infection is not backed by data that shows a 70 percent effectiveness against symptomatic infection once booster takes hold (2 weeks after shot) that continues to be as high as 50 percent after three months).

It is useful to note that these facts do not mean that any particular policy with regard to vaccines or vaccine mandates or vaccine passports is a good policy, but they are the facts as they now stand.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Learn what "cite" means.

---

Learn what honesty means. DC and I have both used "cite" in a loose sense throughout the thread, and you've obviously understood and ratified the usage in your responses. It's hard to believe you'd want to further embarrass yourself with more semantic weaseling, but no doubt you will. The last word is yours.

Getting back on topic...nothing you've cited, quoted, or otherwise referred to supports your lie that vaccines have zero effect against Omicron. The Cell article states that boosters induce neutralizing immunity and that even the traditional two doses likely provide some protection. The other study involved only seven people and gave no indication of how many others might not have been infected. By its very design, there's no way it could prove what you claim. And of course what has gone unaddressed is the study I linked, an analysis of 78,000 patients, which found 30% effectiveness. As I said, this presents no contradiction. If the vaccine is only 30% effective, it's no surprise to find seven cases where it didn't work. But the weight of evidence presented on all sides here leads to one conclusion. Vaccines have an effect.

---

There's a saying about throwing stones from a glass house that comes to mind. Actually, yours is a glass mansion. You are as dishonest as they come. You regularly twist others words, and spin articles to suit your purposes. You constantly re-frame issues to win arguments. Other posters have pointed it out, so it's not just me saying it. All because of a narrative you have to support - a narrative based on cowardice. You would betray your own deeply held beliefs because of it. It's sad what you have become.

There is conflicting information on the effectiveness of the vaccine, but of this we know - the antibodies it produces provide no defense to Omicron whatsoever. I haven't had time to review the CDC article, but with all due respect, your source is suspect, and I suspect it's not a peer reviewed study.

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids, Sam?

D. C. Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It won't matter because you want to believe what you want to, but I'll give you a simple example, which you're welcome to see the multitude of additional examples in the US or globally. Despite Texas having a vaccination rate 20% lower than New York, Texas also has a 15% lower case (infection) rate than New York and even a lower death rate (significant). Now if you start the analysis from when vaccines began their effect, the case/infection rates remained similar, but the death rates changed comparatively. That's why I've said there has been a statistical impact to severe outcomes since vaccines, but nothing material on infections. See the forest not just some trees they want you to look at.

This includes pre Omicron.

---

It is not a matter of me "believing what I want to." The analysis of the numbers that you offer does not answer whether vaccines prevent infections. To answer that question, one needs to look at the case rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In Texas, it is clear that vaccination status is very strongly associated with infection status.

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/cases-and-deaths-by-vaccination-status-11082021.pdf

Jan. To Sept. 2021 saw case rate of 14,000 per 100,000 among unvaccinated individuals and 300 per 100,000 among vaccinated individuals. To explain these vastly different case rate by something other than vaccination status is going to be a task that your forrest cannot do. It is going to take some time to see what protection, if any, vaccines (whether two-dose or three) give against omicron infection, but it is clearly much lower than against previous variants based on early data.

---

delta.. early hot spots of delta are playing out much differently

---

…..and all that data occurred during the 6-8 month window where vaccines ARE effective at preventing infections. Ever increasing percentages of the population are now moving beyond that window.

What DC inexplicably insists on ignoring is the data which all show that vaccination INCREASES susceptibility to infection beyond that 6-8 window. That is consequential because it is infection rate which drives federal, state, local policies.

---

How can he ignore it if you won't post it?

---

I've posted the Israel data showing 6-27x greater infection rates among long-vaxxed (outside the 6-month protection window). Other countries are showing the same thing. It's even starting to be reflected in hospitalization rates.

The vaccines have very high protection against INFECTION for about 6 months, after which time they actually increase the odds of INFECTION. You and DC counter with the "long-lasting protection against serious disease" point, which is valid. Vaccines have saved lives. Possibly mine (as I am double-vaxxed). But "serious disease" stats are not driving policy. Infection rates are driving policy.

Data on what I'm referring to is widely available. There's no point in posting it again. You'll ignore it.

There is a reason other countries are starting to drop covid controls........

---

Am I reading this correctly? These studies say omicron infection rates and serious disease.

Third Dose of Pfizer, Moderna Covid-19 Vaccines Offers Strong Protection Against Omicron
CDC analysis shows that boosters are important in maximizing protection against Omicron and Delta variants
Hospitals are seeing significant differences in Omicron-era cases based on a patient's vaccination status.

Vaccines and booster shots offer superior protection from the Delta and Omicron variants, according to three new studies released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The data back up earlier findings supporting booster shots and offer the first comprehensive insight into how vaccines fare against the Omicron variant. In one of the studies published Friday, a CDC analysis found that a third dose of either the vaccine fromPfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc. was at least 90% effective against preventing hospitalization from Covid-19 during both the Delta and Omicron periods.
During the Delta period, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization from Covid-19 was 90% from two weeks until about 6 months after dose two, 81% from at least six months after dose two and 94% at least two weeks after a booster dose. When Omicron was dominant, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for the same periods were 81%, 57% and 90%, respectively.
"Those who remain unvaccinated are at significantly higher risk for infection and severe Covid-19 disease,"CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said. "Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible."
An additional study published in Nature Thursday also supports booster doses, and backs up previous findings from Pfizer and BioNTech showing that a third dose of their Covid-19 vaccine neutralizes Omicron but its two-dose regimen is significantly less effective at blocking the virus.
According to the study published Thursday, two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided little neutralizing antibody immunity against Omicron infection even at one month after vaccination, but a third dose offered more than 50% protection against Covid-19.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/omicron-wave-eases-in-parts-of-u-s-france-sets-plan-to-relax-curbs-11642770561?mod=Searchresults_pos7&page=1

---

What you posted in blue does not address the point you are contesting. Yes, the 2-dose regimen is basically ineffective against Omicron infection. It's also completely ineffective against infection by all the other strains 6-8 months after vaccination. (Pharma and policymakers knew this 12 months ago, but did not disclose, instead asserting vaccines would protect you forever....but I digress....)

2nd, your post also shows that the 3rd boost, necessary because of the half-life of the first 2 shots, does not return one to 90% protection levels. It has no impact on Omicron, and only bumps you back to 50% (again, from your post) against other strains. Further, the 3rd shot loses roughly 40% of its punch every month....ergo why we see the talk about quarterly boosters.

The vaccines have utility. They protect the old and the sick from infection for short periods of time. And they reduce death rates for everyone. BUT AFTER 6-8 MONTHS, THE DATA CLEARLY SHOWS VACCINES INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF INFECTION VERSUS PEOPLE WITH NATURAL IMMUNITY. that guarantees continuing high infection rates, which are the justification for all the federal, state, local controls on human activity.

Flail away, all you want, but you are in a cul-de-sac of diminishing marginal returns.

---

You appear to have some flawed logic and some incorrect information in you post above.

---

elaborate..

---

Well, vaccines do not "guarantee continuing high infection rates." He has been comparing second infection rates with first infection rates, and once a vaccinated individual is infected and recovers, they also get the "natural immunity" of someone who recovered from infection without having been vaccinated.

Also, the idea that the vaccines don't protect at all against omicron infection is not backed by data that shows a 70 percent effectiveness against symptomatic infection once booster takes hold (2 weeks after shot) that continues to be as high as 50 percent after three months). 3rd jab is only 40-60% effective against infection, because it was designed for Delta not Omicron. Ergo the discussion about a 4th jab (designed for Omicron). Half-life on 3rd jab is 40% decline, per month. Ergo the discussion about quarterly jabs. And all that, for a something which has evolved into benign disease, where vaccinated people beyond the protection window are MORE likely to become infected than the unvaxxed.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/01/20/triple-jabbed-over-30s-have-higher-infection-rates-than-the-unvaccinated-ukhsa-data-show/

It is useful to note that these facts do not mean that any particular policy with regard to vaccines or vaccine mandates or vaccine passports is a good policy, but they are the facts as they now stand.

---

The vaccines made a ton of sense, for a number of reasons, in the past. But the list of benefits is increasingly limited.

Given where we are, we should stop vaccinating anyone under age 65 (who do not have serious co-morbids), because doing so only facilitates spread of the disease over the long term (which of course continues to give rise to demands for an Escher staircase of quarterly vaccinations).

To paraphrase Jason Riley "STOP HELPING US"

whiterock said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It won't matter because you want to believe what you want to, but I'll give you a simple example, which you're welcome to see the multitude of additional examples in the US or globally. Despite Texas having a vaccination rate 20% lower than New York, Texas also has a 15% lower case (infection) rate than New York and even a lower death rate (significant). Now if you start the analysis from when vaccines began their effect, the case/infection rates remained similar, but the death rates changed comparatively. That's why I've said there has been a statistical impact to severe outcomes since vaccines, but nothing material on infections. See the forest not just some trees they want you to look at.

This includes pre Omicron.

---

It is not a matter of me "believing what I want to." The analysis of the numbers that you offer does not answer whether vaccines prevent infections. To answer that question, one needs to look at the case rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In Texas, it is clear that vaccination status is very strongly associated with infection status.

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/cases-and-deaths-by-vaccination-status-11082021.pdf

Jan. To Sept. 2021 saw case rate of 14,000 per 100,000 among unvaccinated individuals and 300 per 100,000 among vaccinated individuals. To explain these vastly different case rate by something other than vaccination status is going to be a task that your forrest cannot do. It is going to take some time to see what protection, if any, vaccines (whether two-dose or three) give against omicron infection, but it is clearly much lower than against previous variants based on early data.

---

delta.. early hot spots of delta are playing out much differently

---

…..and all that data occurred during the 6-8 month window where vaccines ARE effective at preventing infections. Ever increasing percentages of the population are now moving beyond that window.

What DC inexplicably insists on ignoring is the data which all show that vaccination INCREASES susceptibility to infection beyond that 6-8 window. That is consequential because it is infection rate which drives federal, state, local policies.

---

How can he ignore it if you won't post it?

---

I've posted the Israel data showing 6-27x greater infection rates among long-vaxxed (outside the 6-month protection window). Other countries are showing the same thing. It's even starting to be reflected in hospitalization rates.

The vaccines have very high protection against INFECTION for about 6 months, after which time they actually increase the odds of INFECTION. You and DC counter with the "long-lasting protection against serious disease" point, which is valid. Vaccines have saved lives. Possibly mine (as I am double-vaxxed). But "serious disease" stats are not driving policy. Infection rates are driving policy.

Data on what I'm referring to is widely available. There's no point in posting it again. You'll ignore it.

There is a reason other countries are starting to drop covid controls........

---

Am I reading this correctly? These studies say omicron infection rates and serious disease.

Third Dose of Pfizer, Moderna Covid-19 Vaccines Offers Strong Protection Against Omicron
CDC analysis shows that boosters are important in maximizing protection against Omicron and Delta variants
Hospitals are seeing significant differences in Omicron-era cases based on a patient's vaccination status.

Vaccines and booster shots offer superior protection from the Delta and Omicron variants, according to three new studies released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The data back up earlier findings supporting booster shots and offer the first comprehensive insight into how vaccines fare against the Omicron variant. In one of the studies published Friday, a CDC analysis found that a third dose of either the vaccine fromPfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc. was at least 90% effective against preventing hospitalization from Covid-19 during both the Delta and Omicron periods.
During the Delta period, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization from Covid-19 was 90% from two weeks until about 6 months after dose two, 81% from at least six months after dose two and 94% at least two weeks after a booster dose. When Omicron was dominant, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for the same periods were 81%, 57% and 90%, respectively.
"Those who remain unvaccinated are at significantly higher risk for infection and severe Covid-19 disease,"CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said. "Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible."
An additional study published in Nature Thursday also supports booster doses, and backs up previous findings from Pfizer and BioNTech showing that a third dose of their Covid-19 vaccine neutralizes Omicron but its two-dose regimen is significantly less effective at blocking the virus.
According to the study published Thursday, two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided little neutralizing antibody immunity against Omicron infection even at one month after vaccination, but a third dose offered more than 50% protection against Covid-19.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/omicron-wave-eases-in-parts-of-u-s-france-sets-plan-to-relax-curbs-11642770561?mod=Searchresults_pos7&page=1

---

What you posted in blue does not address the point you are contesting. Yes, the 2-dose regimen is basically ineffective against Omicron infection. It's also completely ineffective against infection by all the other strains 6-8 months after vaccination. (Pharma and policymakers knew this 12 months ago, but did not disclose, instead asserting vaccines would protect you forever....but I digress....)

2nd, your post also shows that the 3rd boost, necessary because of the half-life of the first 2 shots, does not return one to 90% protection levels. It has no impact on Omicron, and only bumps you back to 50% (again, from your post) against other strains. Further, the 3rd shot loses roughly 40% of its punch every month....ergo why we see the talk about quarterly boosters.

The vaccines have utility. They protect the old and the sick from infection for short periods of time. And they reduce death rates for everyone. BUT AFTER 6-8 MONTHS, THE DATA CLEARLY SHOWS VACCINES INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF INFECTION VERSUS PEOPLE WITH NATURAL IMMUNITY. that guarantees continuing high infection rates, which are the justification for all the federal, state, local controls on human activity.

Flail away, all you want, but you are in a cul-de-sac of diminishing marginal returns.

---

You appear to have some flawed logic and some incorrect information in you post above.

---

elaborate..

---

Well, vaccines do not "guarantee continuing high infection rates." He has been comparing second infection rates with first infection rates, and once a vaccinated individual is infected and recovers, they also get the "natural immunity" of someone who recovered from infection without having been vaccinated.

Also, the idea that the vaccines don't protect at all against omicron infection is not backed by data that shows a 70 percent effectiveness against symptomatic infection once booster takes hold (2 weeks after shot) that continues to be as high as 50 percent after three months). 3rd jab is only 40-60% effective against infection, because it was designed for Delta not Omicron. Ergo the discussion about a 4th jab (designed for Omicron). Half-life on 3rd jab is 40% decline, per month. Ergo the discussion about quarterly jabs. And all that, for a something which has evolved into benign disease, where vaccinated people beyond the protection window are MORE likely to become infected than the unvaxxed.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/01/20/triple-jabbed-over-30s-have-higher-infection-rates-than-the-unvaccinated-ukhsa-data-show/

It is useful to note that these facts do not mean that any particular policy with regard to vaccines or vaccine mandates or vaccine passports is a good policy, but they are the facts as they now stand.

---

The vaccines made a ton of sense, for a number of reasons, in the past. But the list of benefits is increasingly limited.

Given where we are, we should stop vaccinating anyone under age 65 (who do not have serious co-morbids), because doing so only facilitates spread of the disease over the long term (which of course continues to give rise to demands for an Escher staircase of quarterly vaccinations).

To paraphrase Jason Riley "STOP HELPING US"

---

The third jab was not "designed for Delta." The vaccine formulation predates Delta.

There's one question you should answer, and it's a pretty simple one. The source of the Daily Sceptic's data, which is the UK Health Security Agency, expressly warned against using it in this way. The reason is that the data is likely chock-full of confounding factors and was never meant to provide an accurate measure of vaccine effectiveness. At the same time, the UKHSA has provided a number of studies that were designed to measure vaccine effectiveness, and they all say the opposite of what you claim.

So the question is, why should we believe you and not the British health authorities?

Visualizing the UK COVID situation. Red mark notates July 1, 2021 on each graph.

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

whiterock said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It won't matter because you want to believe what you want to, but I'll give you a simple example, which you're welcome to see the multitude of additional examples in the US or globally. Despite Texas having a vaccination rate 20% lower than New York, Texas also has a 15% lower case (infection) rate than New York and even a lower death rate (significant). Now if you start the analysis from when vaccines began their effect, the case/infection rates remained similar, but the death rates changed comparatively. That's why I've said there has been a statistical impact to severe outcomes since vaccines, but nothing material on infections. See the forest not just some trees they want you to look at.

This includes pre Omicron.

---

It is not a matter of me "believing what I want to." The analysis of the numbers that you offer does not answer whether vaccines prevent infections. To answer that question, one needs to look at the case rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. In Texas, it is clear that vaccination status is very strongly associated with infection status.

https://www.dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/cases-and-deaths-by-vaccination-status-11082021.pdf

Jan. To Sept. 2021 saw case rate of 14,000 per 100,000 among unvaccinated individuals and 300 per 100,000 among vaccinated individuals. To explain these vastly different case rate by something other than vaccination status is going to be a task that your forrest cannot do. It is going to take some time to see what protection, if any, vaccines (whether two-dose or three) give against omicron infection, but it is clearly much lower than against previous variants based on early data.

---

delta.. early hot spots of delta are playing out much differently

---

…..and all that data occurred during the 6-8 month window where vaccines ARE effective at preventing infections. Ever increasing percentages of the population are now moving beyond that window.

What DC inexplicably insists on ignoring is the data which all show that vaccination INCREASES susceptibility to infection beyond that 6-8 window. That is consequential because it is infection rate which drives federal, state, local policies.

---

How can he ignore it if you won't post it?

---

I've posted the Israel data showing 6-27x greater infection rates among long-vaxxed (outside the 6-month protection window). Other countries are showing the same thing. It's even starting to be reflected in hospitalization rates.

The vaccines have very high protection against INFECTION for about 6 months, after which time they actually increase the odds of INFECTION. You and DC counter with the "long-lasting protection against serious disease" point, which is valid. Vaccines have saved lives. Possibly mine (as I am double-vaxxed). But "serious disease" stats are not driving policy. Infection rates are driving policy.

Data on what I'm referring to is widely available. There's no point in posting it again. You'll ignore it.

There is a reason other countries are starting to drop covid controls........

---

Am I reading this correctly? These studies say omicron infection rates and serious disease.

Third Dose of Pfizer, Moderna Covid-19 Vaccines Offers Strong Protection Against Omicron
CDC analysis shows that boosters are important in maximizing protection against Omicron and Delta variants
Hospitals are seeing significant differences in Omicron-era cases based on a patient's vaccination status.

Vaccines and booster shots offer superior protection from the Delta and Omicron variants, according to three new studies released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The data back up earlier findings supporting booster shots and offer the first comprehensive insight into how vaccines fare against the Omicron variant. In one of the studies published Friday, a CDC analysis found that a third dose of either the vaccine fromPfizer Inc. and BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc. was at least 90% effective against preventing hospitalization from Covid-19 during both the Delta and Omicron periods.
During the Delta period, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization from Covid-19 was 90% from two weeks until about 6 months after dose two, 81% from at least six months after dose two and 94% at least two weeks after a booster dose. When Omicron was dominant, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for the same periods were 81%, 57% and 90%, respectively.
"Those who remain unvaccinated are at significantly higher risk for infection and severe Covid-19 disease,"CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said. "Protection against infection and hospitalization with the Omicron variant is highest for those who are up to date with their vaccination, meaning those who are boosted when they are eligible."
An additional study published in Nature Thursday also supports booster doses, and backs up previous findings from Pfizer and BioNTech showing that a third dose of their Covid-19 vaccine neutralizes Omicron but its two-dose regimen is significantly less effective at blocking the virus.
According to the study published Thursday, two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine provided little neutralizing antibody immunity against Omicron infection even at one month after vaccination, but a third dose offered more than 50% protection against Covid-19.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/omicron-wave-eases-in-parts-of-u-s-france-sets-plan-to-relax-curbs-11642770561?mod=Searchresults_pos7&page=1

---

What you posted in blue does not address the point you are contesting. Yes, the 2-dose regimen is basically ineffective against Omicron infection. It's also completely ineffective against infection by all the other strains 6-8 months after vaccination. (Pharma and policymakers knew this 12 months ago, but did not disclose, instead asserting vaccines would protect you forever....but I digress....)

2nd, your post also shows that the 3rd boost, necessary because of the half-life of the first 2 shots, does not return one to 90% protection levels. It has no impact on Omicron, and only bumps you back to 50% (again, from your post) against other strains. Further, the 3rd shot loses roughly 40% of its punch every month....ergo why we see the talk about quarterly boosters.

The vaccines have utility. They protect the old and the sick from infection for short periods of time. And they reduce death rates for everyone. BUT AFTER 6-8 MONTHS, THE DATA CLEARLY SHOWS VACCINES INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD OF INFECTION VERSUS PEOPLE WITH NATURAL IMMUNITY. that guarantees continuing high infection rates, which are the justification for all the federal, state, local controls on human activity.

Flail away, all you want, but you are in a cul-de-sac of diminishing marginal returns.

---

You appear to have some flawed logic and some incorrect information in you post above.

---

elaborate..

---

Well, vaccines do not "guarantee continuing high infection rates." He has been comparing second infection rates with first infection rates, and once a vaccinated individual is infected and recovers, they also get the "natural immunity" of someone who recovered from infection without having been vaccinated.

Also, the idea that the vaccines don't protect at all against omicron infection is not backed by data that shows a 70 percent effectiveness against symptomatic infection once booster takes hold (2 weeks after shot) that continues to be as high as 50 percent after three months). 3rd jab is only 40-60% effective against infection, because it was designed for Delta not Omicron. Ergo the discussion about a 4th jab (designed for Omicron). Half-life on 3rd jab is 40% decline, per month. Ergo the discussion about quarterly jabs. And all that, for a something which has evolved into benign disease, where vaccinated people beyond the protection window are MORE likely to become infected than the unvaxxed.
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/01/20/triple-jabbed-over-30s-have-higher-infection-rates-than-the-unvaccinated-ukhsa-data-show/

It is useful to note that these facts do not mean that any particular policy with regard to vaccines or vaccine mandates or vaccine passports is a good policy, but they are the facts as they now stand.

---

The vaccines made a ton of sense, for a number of reasons, in the past. But the list of benefits is increasingly limited.

Given where we are, we should stop vaccinating anyone under age 65 (who do not have serious co-morbids), because doing so only facilitates spread of the disease over the long term (which of course continues to give rise to demands for an Escher staircase of quarterly vaccinations).

To paraphrase Jason Riley "STOP HELPING US"

---

If we continue to implement universal vaccine policy instead of the Great Barrington declaration, we risk driving the virus to a state where it will be more pathogenic and beat the average immune response.

High vaccinations will create vaccine resistant escapians, especially with a variant contagious as omicron.

It's like big pharma is purposely trying to make covid worse...and of course they are because it's access to billions of dollars.

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Must be pretty recent. Last time we talked you hadn't vaxxed them yet. What changed your mind?

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Must be pretty recent. Last time we talked you hadn't vaxxed them yet. What changed your mind?

---

That was a long time ago. I think I said I hadn't decided.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Must be pretty recent. Last time we talked you hadn't vaxxed them yet. What changed your mind?

---

That was a long time ago. I think I said I hadn't decided.

---

It was like 3-4 months ago, as I recall. What led you to finally vaccinate them?

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Must be pretty recent. Last time we talked you hadn't vaxxed them yet. What changed your mind?

---

That was a long time ago. I think I said I hadn't decided.

---

It was like 3-4 months ago, as I recall. What led you to finally vaccinate them?

---

Maybe the FauciFest got him into the jabbing spirit.

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

---

What do you consider to be "extremely low?" About half of Americans get flu shots regularly.

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Must be pretty recent. Last time we talked you hadn't vaxxed them yet. What changed your mind?

---

That was a long time ago. I think I said I hadn't decided.

---

It was like 3-4 months ago, as I recall. What led you to finally vaccinate them?

---

The fact that heart complications are more common and more severe from the disease than from the vaccine.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

---

What do you consider to be "extremely low?" About half of Americans get flu shots regularly.

---

The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

One wonders just how big your statue of Fauci is, Sam.

Desk-top for easy inspiration, or full-size idol by now?

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

Have you read solid evidence that this was a "lab made" virus? If Internet, the US intelligence take on this was split between a natural virus and a virus (natural or not?) that leaked from the lab, but even then I don't recall them having any particular level of confidence that it was a lab modified virus.

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

---

What do you consider to be "extremely low?" About half of Americans get flu shots regularly.

---

The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017.

---

And 51.8% in 2019-2020. Nevertheless, even 40 percent doesn't strike me as "extremely low."

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

Have you read solid evidence that this was a "lab made" virus? If Internet, the US intelligence take on this was split between a natural virus and a virus (natural or not?) that leaked from the lab, but even then I don't recall them having any particular level of confidence that it was a lab modified virus.

---

Not one case found in nature. Furin cleavage site.

I don't need bureaucrats to tell me what's extremely obvious.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

---

What do you consider to be "extremely low?" About half of Americans get flu shots regularly.

---

The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017.

---

And 51.8% in 2019-2020. Nevertheless, even 40 percent doesn't strike me as "extremely low."

---

So half the people take a single flu shot and nothing bad happens. I guess that's good enough evidence to completely put faith in getting 4 covid shots every year for the foreseeable future.

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

Seems like we've done mass flu vaccinations. Repeatedly. For many years.

---

We haven't done mass flu vaccinations. The percentage of flu vaccinations was extremely low.

---

What do you consider to be "extremely low?" About half of Americans get flu shots regularly.

---

The percentage of vaccinated adults each year has fluctuated, reaching a high of 43.6% in 2014 and a low of 37.1% in 2017.

---

And 51.8% in 2019-2020. Nevertheless, even 40 percent doesn't strike me as "extremely low."

---

So half the people take a single flu shot and nothing bad happens. I guess that's good enough evidence to completely put faith in getting 4 covid shots every year for the foreseeable future.

---

What makes you think we will have "four COVID shots every year for the foreseeable future?"

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

Have you read solid evidence that this was a "lab made" virus? If Internet, the US intelligence take on this was split between a natural virus and a virus (natural or not?) that leaked from the lab, but even then I don't recall them having any particular level of confidence that it was a lab modified virus.

---

Not one case found in nature. Furin cleavage site.

I don't need bureaucrats to tell me what's extremely obvious.

---

Do you have a background in virology or something? (Serious question).

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

We don't know whether it's natural, but the principle is the same.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

Have you read solid evidence that this was a "lab made" virus? If Internet, the US intelligence take on this was split between a natural virus and a virus (natural or not?) that leaked from the lab, but even then I don't recall them having any particular level of confidence that it was a lab modified virus.

---

Not one case found in nature. Furin cleavage site.

I don't need bureaucrats to tell me what's extremely obvious.

---

Do you have a background in virology or something? (Serious question).

---

i post without opinion
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32869021/

There are more article links in that link to other information in pub med which may help one form an opinion.

4th and Inches said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Why haven't you vaxxed your kids with this perfectly safe vaccine, Sam?

---

My kids are vaxxed.

---

Have you considered negative ramifications of viral evolution stemming from mass repetitive vaccinations?

---

I have. The fear is based on a misunderstanding of the science.

---

That's the opinion of one guy from a 6 month old article completely unaware of the massive amounts of breakthrough omicron infections.

The vaccines don't 100% prevent spread or viral replication. They have poor durability. If every single person in the US was vaccinated, we still couldn't get to herd immunity.

If even a tiny percentage of breakthrough infections occur, that can be disastrous.

---

One guy who led a seminal study on leaky vaccines and wrote the paper on which all of this fear-mongering is supposedly based. The predictions of disaster are a wild misinterpretation of his work.

---

This is no natural virus. It's lab made and we have no idea what it's capable of doing.

Why so much faith in big pharma?

---

Have you read solid evidence that this was a "lab made" virus? If Internet, the US intelligence take on this was split between a natural virus and a virus (natural or not?) that leaked from the lab, but even then I don't recall them having any particular level of confidence that it was a lab modified virus.

---

Not one case found in nature. Furin cleavage site.

I don't need bureaucrats to tell me what's extremely obvious.

---

Do you have a background in virology or something? (Serious question).

---

i post without opinion
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32869021/

There are more article links in that link to other information in pub med which may help one form an opinion.

---

That is interesting, but I lack the technical expertise to draw conclusions from it regarding whether the COVID-19 virus was modified in a lab.

Sam Lowry said:

---

There's one question you should answer, and it's a pretty simple one. The source of the Daily Sceptic's data, which is the UK Health Security Agency, expressly warned against using it in this way. The reason is that the data is likely chock-full of confounding factors and was never meant to provide an accurate measure of vaccine effectiveness. At the same time, the UKHSA has provided a number of studies that were designed to measure vaccine effectiveness, and they all say the opposite of what you claim.

So the question is, why should we believe you and not the British health authorities?

---

because public health authorities in several countries are mismanaging this pandemic, and the longer it goes, the wronger they get and the righter the Great Barrington Declaration becomes. Res ipsa loquitur. The more vaccinated a society is, the wilder the case loads become. Because you cannot keep 100% vaccinated 100% of the time......and vaccinated individuals outside the 6-8 month protection window are MORE likely to become infected than non-vaccinated individuals.

Here's a great post from Alex Berenson, whose reporting has been consistently validated by events (the post that got him banned from Twitter was, 4 months later, a headline article at Axios):

Something is rotten in Denmark.
And Australia.
And Israel.
Where nearly 1 percent of the entire population just tested positive for Covid.
Not in a month. Or a week. In one day.
You read that right.
On Saturday, Israel had 84,000 new infections, the equivalent of almost 3 million in the United States. Infections in Israel have risen unthinkably fast since late December. They're are up 100-fold in one month, driven by the collapse of booster protection and the arrival of the Omicron variant.
Israel is not alone. Denmark reported 42,000 cases yesterday, equal to almost 2.5 million in the United States. France, the second-largest country in Europe, reported the American equivalent of about 12 million new infections in the last week. Australia had a tremendous surge in cases earlier this month, though it seems to be subsidizing for now.
Daily new infections in Israel:

These countries have very different population demographics and previous exposure to Covid. They even have very different weather; it is summer in Australia.
What do they share, then?
Incredibly high Covid vaccination rates, mostly with the mRNA vaccines. Israel is among the world's most vaccinated countries. More than 90 percent of Israeli adults have been vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. Almost 80 percent have received a booster dose, and several hundred thousand have gotten a fourth.
Yet Israel had more coronavirus infections in the last week than in all of 2020, before it began mass mRNA Covid vaccinations.

Omicron is much milder than Delta or the original coronavirus. So the data from South Africa - which was the first country where Omicron spread quickly - seemed to show.
But South Africa is quite lightly vaccinated. The more recent data from the highly vaccinated countries has not been as promising. Yes, Omicron is milder.
Even so, hospitalizations and deaths are spiking in countries like Israel and Denmark. In Israel, the number of severely ill patients has risen eightfold this month, and almost fourfold in the last two weeks - even though the true spike in infections has come only in the last few days, and hospitalizations typically lag infections. In Australia, deaths are up tenfold since in the last four weeks, although from a low base.
Daily new serious cases in Israel:


In part the rise has come because Omicron infections have reached such stunningly high levels that even a relatively low risk can lead to a significant number of deaths. And yes, many Omicron hospitalizations are incidental - they are people in the hospital for other reasons who just happen to test positive for Omicron.
But other factors may be at play too. Here are four facts:
1: Both the within-country and the between-country data show that people who are vaccinated but not boosted are at higher risk of Omicron infection than the unvaccinated.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying. (emphasis mine).
2: Thus vaccines will actually make hospitalization or death from Omicron MORE likely unless they somehow protect against serious outcomes from Covid infections more than they increase the odds of infection. That's simple math.
At this point we have no way of knowing how those two factors interact. In other words, we do not know if Omicron is more dangerous to the unvaccinated than the vaccinated (putting aside any vaccine side effects).
Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
3: It is unclear whether the vaccines interfere with the development of long-term post-infection immunity in people who are infected with Omicron.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
4: It is clear that a third vaccine dose temporarily reduces the risk of serious illness or death from Omicron.
But it is unclear how long that protection will last, and whether when it ends people who have received a third dose will be less or more vulnerable than those who are unvaccinated or have received two doses.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
Put these four facts together and it is clear that to encourage booster shots for anyone - including the elderly - at this point is reckless, bordering on criminal.
I have not used language like this before. I did not discourage older people from the primary vaccination series. But the facts have changed and they continue to change, and not to face this reality is incredibly dangerous.
mRNA Covid vaccinations and boosters need to stop worldwide while we figure out what is happening. Not next week. Not tomorrow.
Today.