How can you tell if a vaccine for a bug is effective? It’s not so easy; indeed, it can be excruciatingly difficult.
At the individual person level you’d need to measure all kinds of things, like the level of antibodies and other immune cells present before vaccination, and then again after and through time.
Then you’d demonstrate, in that person, the exact mechanism by which the vaccine was able to boost immunity, and whether this boost was sufficient to quell the infection, by looking at severity of illness (due to the bug and other existing conditions), how long it took for the infection to abate, and things like that. And that is only a hint of the complexities.
The analysis is made harder because the vaccinated person may never come into contact with the virus. People he meets may have already had priors infections, and so are now mostly or completely immune. Or those people have had a vaccine that was effective to varying degree.
As difficult as all that sounds, it is not impossible in highly controlled circumstances to discover the extent and to quantify vaccine effectiveness. But it is a slow and painstaking process.
One way you cannot learn, not with anything approaching certainty, is looking at group-level comparisons, where people are not individually counted and compared, but where averages across groups are contrasted, and where you have no idea what the status of any individual is.
This is a popular kind of analysis because it’s cheap and easy. But it can, and often does, lead to huge over-certainties.
A prime example is from the paper “Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study” by Oliver J Watson, Gregory Barnsley, Jaspreet Toor, Alexandra B Hogan, Peter Winskill, and Azra C Ghani, in Lancet Infectious Disease.
They used a “mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission and vaccination” for both “reported COVID-19 mortality and all-cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories” to assess vaccine efficacy in preventing deaths. This is as group-level an analysis as they come, especially with its “excess” deaths portion.
Read the rest at the BROKEN SCIENCE INITIATIVE PAGE.
I mean it, now. Go over there. Your mother would want you to. It’s free. And easy. And necessary.
Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. Or use the paid subscription at Substack. Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs. For Zelle, use my email: matt@wmbriggs.com, and please include yours so I know who to thank.
When the vaccinated drop dead —> it’s effective.
What was and is effective against viral infection is vitamins+ionophores+zinc and in severe cases antibiotics+steroidal inhalers. Sometimes attenuated virus particles can inspire immune system resistance, but not with rapidly mutating single-strand RNA viruses (like flu and corona).
What is not effective is intracellular MRNA spike protein synthesis. The spike protein is not the whole virus, and immune systems are overwhelmed by chronic spike waves.
All this was well known prior to the China-Fauci Designer Pandemic, which would have fizzled out rapidly if not for the suppression of virologists, doctors, and epidemiologists by a cabal of dysanthropic authoritarians — who are still in power by the way.
Which is not to say that crappy self-referential models are not hokum. They are. But the depth of evil displayed by these monsters is woefully understated with modelling criticisms alone.
The vaccines are for fertility reduction. Gates has stated this many times.
I remember how the UK COVID reports would include information on “cases” for the vaxxed and unvaxxed. The rate would usually be much worse in the vaxxed population, which would lead to a negative effectiveness against infection in any sane world. However, the reports always contained a warning to not trust your lying eyes and instead listen to what models said about the effectiveness.
One explanation they gave was that if you assume that most of the unvaxxed got COVID before the data was being tracked AND that the vaxxed got tested much more often than the unvaxxed AND that the people who got vaxxed were all from the population most vulnerable to getting infected AND that people who were vaxxed were more likely to ignore safety regulations about social distancing and the like THEN the vaxx could still have 95% effectiveness even with the actual case rate being about twice as high in the vaxxed population. None of these things were actually measured, and the idea that the vaxxed would engage in highly risky behavior flies in the face of what we’ve all observed with people excited to get the vaxx. (I’m sure we all know at least one person who is triple boosted and still wears a mask even to this day.) Since the reasoning was that the vaxx must be 95% effective, it wasn’t necessary to measure these things. If they were the only way that the numbers could happen with an effective jab, then they had to have happened.
Same business in Brazil. Meanwhile, if you plot the number of doses of the Pfizer Pediatric vax for covid since 2022, and the number of hospitalizations of kids with sudden acute respiratory syndrome SARDS, the curves match almost perfectly.
Fauci lied, millions died.
Well, for some vacciness you can tell simply by observing the obvious. Like polio. Where’s polio? And when did it dissapear? Or better yet smallpox.
Here’s a rule of thumb: if you don’t need statistics to see the difference, you can tell if a thing is effective. xD
A strong case can be made vaccine “efficacy” rode in on the back of improved public health measures such as clean water, improved sewage and drainage, improved childhood nutrition, and in general access to timely medical care for illness. It’s absurd to imagine all diseases respond to vaccination such that vaccination is some kind of magic bullet. We’ve been conned for the longest time, the coof debacle made it blindingly obvious to those with eyes to see.
There is only one sure way established by science: if you stick a magnet to the vaccination site, then the vaccine is effective (and safe).
Tatyana Golikova and her husband Viktor Hristenko, can tell us more.
There is only one sure way established by science: if you stick a magnet to the vaccination site, then the vaccine is effective (and safe).