COVID-19 vaccines' negative effectiveness all but confirmed, even for deaths?

Photo by Martin Sanchez on Unsplash

The trend continues, just weeks after our last batch of evidence from a proper academic article on the apparent negative effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines (the notion that the vaccine actually increases your chance of getting COVID-19, and even can increase your chance of dying from it), we have yet another journal article, this time from a team including medical researchers from the University of Oxford, appearing in the International Journal of Epidemiology (published by Oxford University Press), on COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths in the UK. With so much evidence now available on negative effectiveness regarding infection/transmission, and our limited time/resources, we can be barely bothered to report further on it, but this study is signifiant as it concerns negative effectiveness regarding hospitalisation and death.

Figures 2 & 3 from the article, comparing the ‘single-dosed’ with the unvaccinated, indicate that the effectiveness of both the AstraZeneca (DNA) and Pfizer-BioNTech (mRNA) vaccines turns dramatically negative, regarding hospitalisation and death, after around 65-75 days post-vaccination. Source.

Their analysis on the ‘double-dosed’ is harder to interpret, as it compares them with the ‘single-dosed’ rather than the unvaccinated, but Figure 4 appears to show that the negative effectiveness, regarding hospitalisation and death, with the AstraZeneca vaccine becomes even worse after the second dose.

With such results often buried in supplementary data of articles in respectable medical journals, these authors actually noted that their “estimates were lower than estimates of vaccine efficacy seen in clinical trials”, and, on negative effectiveness, entertained the possibility “that naturally acquired immunity provides more robust protection than vaccination”.

Okay then.

Note: Some questions you may like to ask. Are the risks, including deaths from cardiovascular issues, outweighed by the benefits, when the benefits are an increased chance of infection, an increased chance of hospitalisation, and an increased chance of death from COVID-19? If the conclusions by independent scientists a year or two later are substantially less positive (or outright horrifying) than the trials provided by the drug companies making the vaccines, is it safe to conclude that maybe we shouldn’t have blindly trusted the profit-driven organisations who might have a bit of a conflict of interest and waited a little longer, particularly for a disease that turned out to be far less deadly than initially feared, and even at its deadliest mainly affected those already near death? Between the harmed vaccinated and the persecuted unvaccinated, when do the lawsuits start?