Experts wrong again on COVID jab, booster worse than original?
Last month we noted that while we are constantly told to trust the science, the experts, the authorities, on the ‘safe and effective’ COVID-19 jabs, the FDA, effectively a branch of the US government, approved the bivalent vaccine boosters despite not having access to the relevant data. The data was expected in January, and here we are.
Now CNN reports that “Some vaccine advisers to the federal government say they’re “disappointed” and “angry” that government scientists and the pharmaceutical company Moderna didn’t present a set of infection data on the company’s new Covid-19 booster during meetings last year when the advisers discussed whether the shot should be authorized and made available to the public.” With the new booster “given to more than 48.2 million people in the US”, CNN reports that the “data suggested the possibility that the updated booster might not be any more effective at preventing Covid-19 infections than the original shots.” In fact, the data “found that 1.9% of the study participants who received the original booster became infected. Among those who got the updated bivalent vaccine – the one that scientists hoped would work better – a higher percentage, 3.2%, became infected.” Source.
Okay then.
Extra: Does it fill you with confidence that the experts are approving medical interventions without collecting and analysing all the relevant data? Will the ‘conspiracy theorists’ now be convinced that the bivalent boosters are a great idea, when they don’t appear to be any more effective, and may even be, like the original jabs, negatively effective?