News
Featured Image
 Andrei Vasilev/Getty Images

(The Daily Sceptic) — Two doses of COVID-19 vaccine make you 44 percent more likely to be infected, a study from Oxford University has found, contradicting the basis of global vaccine policy, which assumes vaccination significantly cuts incidence and transmission.

The study, published in the Lancet, looked at all infections reported in England among adults registered at a medical practice from December 8, 2020, to November 17, 2021, meaning it spanned the alpha and delta periods. It used a case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness, allowing potential confounding factors such as age, sex, and underlying conditions to be controlled for, while individuals with prior infection were excluded.

The results for effectiveness against positive COVID test (i.e., reported infection), which were found buried away in the supplementary appendix, are shown below.

I’ve highlighted in yellow three key figures. The top two show that in the two weeks following the first jab, individuals were three to four times more likely to test positive for COVID than their unvaccinated counterparts. This is further confirmation of the post-jab spike in infections that has often been noted and which there is evidence it is a result of the vaccination temporarily reducing immunity.

The third figure shows that two weeks or more after the second jab – which during 2021 was regarded as “fully vaccinated” – individuals were 44 percent more likely to be infected than their unvaccinated counterparts. This is negative vaccine effectiveness (where infections are higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated) of minus-44 percent. This negative effectiveness is in line with what was seen in the raw data from England at the time and also in studies from other countries, but contradicts the government’s official estimates, which claimed effectiveness to be 60–85 percent against delta infection.

The new study indicates that the negative effectiveness was not just a result of confounding factors or a ‘catch-up’ effect, where the vaccinated have lower infection rates initially then higher infection rates as the effect of the vaccine wears off, as some have claimed.

Acknowledging the figures, the authors write: “Surprisingly, we observed a higher risk of test positivity after vaccination with one or two doses across all BMI groups, which is contrary to evidence reported by the U.K. ONS [Office for National Statistics].” What they don’t mention is that it is fully in line with data from the U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA), nor that the ONS is known to overestimate infection rates in the unvaccinated because it underestimates the population – the ONS puts the unvaccinated adult population at 8 percent whereas the NIMS database puts it at 19 percent (and surveys higher still at 26 percent).

READ: Young adults up to 100x more likely to suffer COVID jab injuries than be protected: Study

The authors state that the “hospital admission and death outcomes were considered more robust outcomes than infection” owing to “variability in testing” and a potentially “high proportion of asymptomatic infections.” The implication is that unvaccinated people were less likely to get tested when infected, suppressing the positive test rate in the unvaccinated. No evidence is provided for this claim, however, nor any attempt made to quantify the possible size of the difference.

The study was published in June but went largely unnoticed until Alex Berenson wrote about it last month. Alex also draws attention to the fact that vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization and death is much weaker than was claimed at the time.

Vaccine effectiveness against death 14 or more days after the second jab is just 61 percent (the first highlighted figure), well below the 90–99 percent claimed by the government. Note that the overall protection will be even lower owing to the vaccinated being more likely to be infected: the 44 percent higher infection rate mentioned above would reduce the 61 percent effectiveness to just 34 percent.

Oddly, the vaccine effectiveness against death in the week following the third jab (the second highlighted figure) jumps up to 97 percent from 61 percent following the second jab, despite this being before the effect of the booster should kick in. This oddity is not explained.

Looking at the hospitalization figures, there is a disturbing spike in the weeks following the first jab, hitting over twice as high (2.02) in the second week. Why are the vaccinated up to twice as likely to be hospitalized with COVID than the unvaccinated in the weeks following the jab?

The figures show that having two vaccine doses reduces hospitalization risk by 66 percent once 14 days post-injection (though once again there is an unexplained leap in efficacy from 19 percent 28 days after dose one, to 67 percent in the week after dose two). The 66 percent is markedly lower than the 90–99 percent claimed at the time, as shown below in the table from a UKHSA government report in September 2021.

UKHSA, September 2021
covidThe new figures are much more in line with what was observed in the raw UKHSA data. But it means we’re left without explanation as to why the clinical trials and government studies showed high efficacy for a two dose course, when observational studies of the real-world evidence now find negative effectiveness against infection and much lower than advertised effectiveness against serious disease. An explanation is clearly required. And given the earlier studies were used to inform both individuals’ choices and public policy, including medical coercion, serious lessons need to be learned.

Reprinted with permission from The Daily Sceptic.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

3 Comments

    Loading...