Negative effectiveness in XBB.1.5 COVID jab
What’s the point of a COVID-19 vaccine that has negative efficacy or negative effectiveness? In other words, it makes COVID-19 infection (and perhaps even hospitalisation and death) more likely. Lovely trade off for (other) adverse effects, huh, even if they’re supposedly rare? Here’s yet more evidence, concerning monovalent COVID-19 XBB.1.5 omicron vaccines.
Publishing in the Annals of Internal Medicine, Ioannou et al. found negative effectiveness for infection, and pathetically low effectiveness for hospitalisation and death: “Over a mean follow-up of 176 days (range, 118 to 211 days), VE was −3.26% (95% CI, −6.78% to −0.22%) against documented SARS-CoV-2 infection, 16.64% (CI, 6.47% to 25.77%) against SARS-CoV-2–associated hospitalization, and 26.61% (CI, 5.53% to 42.32%) against SARS-CoV-2–associated death.” Just months after vaccination there was “substantial waning”. Kudos for the relatively honest conclusion: “COVID-19 vaccines targeting the XBB.1.5 variant of Omicron were not effective in preventing infection and had relatively low VE against hospitalization and death, which declined rapidly over time.” Source.
Better rush out and get your boosters, huh? Especially after factoring in the side effects. But wait, it gets better (worse). Carefully examine these snippets from the article: “Follow-up for outcomes began 10 d after the index date (date of XBB.1.5 COVID-19 vaccination or same date for the matched unvaccinated comparator) and continued up to 10 May 2024.”; “Outcomes were ascertained through 10 May 2024 and included any positive result on a SARS-CoV-2 test from day 10 after the matched index date, subsequent hospitalization within 1 day before or 10 days after the positive result, or death within 30 days after the positive result.” Imagine what the figures would look like if we got some long-term data, and if we counted all cases and adverse effects from day 1, so that we could actually find out how safe and effective these things really are.
Okay then.
The point is to send more taxpayer dollars to rich people. That's it.
To be more complex about it, the point is also to sustain a religious belief in the necessity of (to quote Robert Malone out of context) the continuous production of influenza type vaccines (despite the existence of multiple drugs that handle viruses better).
Follow the money. And the psyops.
Why wouldn't one want to keep those poor urchins making pharmaceuticals in business.