Monday, March 21, 2022

CDC says vaccine efficacy after 7 weeks is 31%, which CDC spins as not only effective, but hints it provides evidence favoring boosters, too

The study I am about to describe was published in the March 18, 2022 issue of CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Review (MMWR).  Once upon a time it appeared to be a high quality publication, and also carried useful editorial comments and criticisms of the articles, which have now disappeared.

This study is based on a relatively small group of children collected in parts of 4 states, but surprisingly 76% of the children live in Arizona.  1,052 of the children are aged 5 to 11. They are swabbed weekly for COVID. Half the Omicron infections were asymptomatic. I wonder if CDC distinguished the variants by anthing but timing.

This group is not representative of the entire US, in which a bit over 30% of children in this age group are vaccinated (and by February 14 only 22% in Chicago).  In CDC's group, 65% were fully vaccinated, 7% had had one dose and 29% of the children were unvaccinated.

There were a total of 381 COVID infections in this group:  137 in the fully vaccinated and 184 infections in the unvaccinated.  Which leaves, per my calculation, 60 cases in the singly vaccinated, for whom few data are presented.

Now, there is no way to check CDC's calculations, since each child had a unique number of days in which they were "enrolled," starting 2 weeks after their second dose.

But what CDC states is that the median duration of enrollment in the study for the vaccinated kids is 53 days, and for the unvaccinated kids 41 days.  You would have thought the unvaccinated would have participated for a longer period, since they don't have to wait two weeks until after the second shot to join the ranks of the officially vaccinated. I have no explanation for this.

So how well did the vaccine work during a bit less than 2 months after being considered fully vaccinated?

CDC says that after adjustments, the vaccine was 31% effective at preventing "symptomatic and asymptomatic" COVID in this age group.  At under two months.  Wonder what it is at four or six months? How long till we are in negative efficacy territory?

What are the media going to look at?  The final paragraph, of course, when they are trying to get their story out fast.  In fact, they probably are working off a press release.  What does that final paragraph say?

This study provides evidence that receipt of 2 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is effective in preventing both asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron variant among children and adolescents aged 5–15 years. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

Now we understand why FDA had the manufacturers vaccinate the placebo group at 2 months in all the COVID vaccine trials.  FDA had established a 50% efficacy standard to issue an EUA, and the longer the trials went on, the lower the efficacy would be.  But now FDA and CDC can't even get the 5-11 year old efficacy above 31% in Arizona, and in New York, at 7 weeks efficacy was 12% in this age group. This does not meet the EUA standard.

Here is the NY DOH preprint, fyi

I wonder how they can possibly spin the benefits of vaccination for the 6 month through 5 year olds?   But I expect our federal health authorities will find a way.  


Anonymous said...

With professional charlatans like Sten H. Vermund, the Anna M.R. Lauder Professor of Public Health, and Dean of the Yale School of Public Health, how can the FDA not find a way? Vermund, Professor in Pediatrics, Yale School of Medicine, pediatrician, infectious disease epidemiologist.

[Even with the availability of safe and effective coronavirus vaccines in late 2020, anti-science sentiments from burgeoning anti-vaccination movements made partisan the public health efforts towards universal immunization in diverse nations such as the USA or Brazil], Vermund says at NIH "editorial".

These beasts say something is safe and effective, even if it's neither, then accuse those disagreeing, based on actual scientific evidence, of being Partisan!

Vermund editorial is "on the interface of the HIV/AIDS and COVID-19 pandemics".

This Yale public health menace cites another Yale paper to promote his own 'safe and effective coronavirus vaccines' ritualism, written largely by the partisan Political "Scientist" Scott Bokemper.

Bokemper's "Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions", in a rational society, would be something we would only be watching happening in a horror movie, and say to ourselves, this is only a movie.

Alas, Yale man's "Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions" -- fronted by Yale post doc Erin K. James, and Yale's Alan S. Gerber, Saad B. Omer and Greg Huber--did not meet University ethics code; but this horror movie research proceeded -- via an ethics 'waiver'.

"4.1. Ethics statement -- The experiments reported here were fielded under an exemption granted by the Yale University IRB," it says at end of the paper, -- which brags about: effectiveness of using deception to trick unsuspecting people to succumb to mRNA COVID-19 shots -- despite their known failure to prevent infection, many thousands dead, maimed, sterilized, immune systems destroyed, after the shots.

Yale has this to say about "IRB" -- [IRB=Institution Review Board]: "Why is the IRB necessary? -- Yale has made a commitment to ensure that all Yale research complies with federal and state regulations, University policy, and the highest ethical standards" and "to make sure that you are being as ethical and responsible as possible in your methodology and approach."

The horror movie called "Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions" does not explain either why they needed an Ethics Waiver, nor on what grounds Yale broke its own rules, and granted one, anyways. Did Yale commit crimes and might they be prosecuted?

Yale says: "Exemption must be applied for and can only be granted by the IRB."

Huber in a November interview stated: “It also was interesting that emotional appeals, such as evoking embarrassment, motivate people to reach out to others. That second-level effect — encouraging others to get vaccinated — is likely very important to increasing the vaccination rate.” How liable is Yale, now, for many thousands of after-shot deaths, injuries, lives totally destroyed?

Omer told “Vaccine acceptance research requires the same level of rigor and creativity as vaccine development research.”

“This is one more example of faculty from various parts of Yale coming together to address a set of high priority questions in this pandemic,” Omer. Can Omer be sued personally?

Bokemper's "ABOUT ME" says his goal is "increasing vaccine acceptance". With scum like this, who needs Nurse Ratchet?


Anonymous said...

Our Government Is So Corrupt!
CDC, NIH, FDA, Puppets Of Big Pharma, Gates, Clintons, Soros.

'Pls. Bump & Share How The 2020 Election Was Stolen!'

The Jig Is Up!

'Maria Zack's Earth Shattering Testimony - Kansas Senate Hearing '!

Anonymous said...

"Robert Kennedy Jr: CDC is a privately owned Vaccine company"!


'Nowhere in the Constitution is there a "Virus" Exemption.!'

Anonymous said...


'Dr. David Martin’s 'Lawsuit Against Biden': The COVID Injection is a Bioweapon'

Anonymous said...

"Regardless of 'CDC Definition Change', Injections Are Treatments, Not Vaccines"