72 Comments

The most likely explanation for this observation is a catch-up effect: for several months after vaccination, vaccinated people had a lower infection rate than unvaccinated people. As a result, there were more infected and “recovered” people per 100,000 among the unvaccinated than among the vaccinated.

Once the narrow vaccine (spike) protection had declined (and Omicron showed up) infections among vaccinated people started catching up. The higher ratio of unvaccinated infected would have developed broad-epitope immunity, covering Omicron.

However, OAS and ADE should definitely not be dismissed going forward.

What is clear is that we need to maintain a statistically significant unvaccinated population to allow for important public health metrics. Their role in this is far better served that way than the endless (and disturbingly unscientific) attempts to eliminate them as a control group population. The forced mandates by proxy of removing civil liberties also needs to stop.

Expand full comment

I've seen people adopt the slogan "I'm in the control group". Now I realise there is actual merit to this and it shouldn't be taken in jest. Those of us who have declined covid vaccines are indeed serving a an important role.

Expand full comment

I had been so puzzled about the authorities pushing so hard for more than 100% vaccination rates when it was obvious that the vaccines were giving limited protection. Then, one day it hit me that they might not want the existence of a control group.

Expand full comment

Exactly!

Expand full comment

There is a global control group many of us have joined so there is an unvaccinated group to compare population wide events. https://www.vcgwiki.com/index.php/about

Expand full comment

the uk also will start to count re-infections. they were'nt counted before. this will provide even more insight on how bad the statistical negative efficacy really is

Expand full comment

You should have a look at the video by John Campbell and Norman Fenton he contested that the ONS date reinforcing efficacy is unreliable and this has been agreed as so by the regulator. He calls for a retraction of the data and a retraction by any organisation that has used the data to suggest efficacy.

Expand full comment

Except for the first week after vaccination the likelihood of getting COVID is greater than pre vaccine.

Expand full comment

Death rates increasing in same paste with injection rates in Finland fall 2021. Clear statstic evidence of vaccinated becoming ill. Non vaccinated healthier, but still targeted- against science. The coronavirus killed only 8 work aged persons in 2020. (THL) By august 2021 1300 deaths from vaccines directly, plus lowered immunity, ADE etc other non direct negative effects vaccines on health. The vaccines do NOT PROTECT enough, the vaccine protection is short, the vaccine may cause other negative health effects in long run. There is data world wide already in few months. Normal virus cycle is interrupted with vaccines. Need reset of health care i Covid. Natural immunity is robust strong and wider than given by vaccines, proven by 130 studies globally. Epidemology is clear, of vaccinated also spreading virus. Vaccinations are not effective, have negative impact on heath, they must be ceased.

Expand full comment

Thanks Karl, do you have any links to those statistics?

Expand full comment

This thread has been like watching a tennis match. My neck hurts. And I’m still unclear on what it all really means. But having said that my takeaway is and remains: What are we doing with a mass worldwide injection of an experimental drug with a questionable safety profile that may be causing immune escape (and god knows what else) if the vaccinated are getting any type of Covid? This was not intended as a therapeutic so spare me that headfake. Full stop.

Expand full comment

There is likely some sampling bias here, with people likely to get vaccinated also more likely to test when they are sick offset? by increased testing for unvaccinated people.

What IS clear is that the case for vaccines has eroded past any reasonable assertion that they should be compulsory.

Expand full comment

>Up until the latest release, the results were consistent with a vaccine that worked,

> albeit one who’s efficacy was waning quickly. Those who received one dose were

> less likely to test positive for COVID-19 than those not vaccinated.

If this is referring to the weekly PHE data (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports) this is incorrect. If not, then you should take a look there. That data has shown since before week 35 (week 50 data is the latest) that there has been negative vaccine efficacy for most age groups.

Expand full comment

I took the wording directly from the ONS and refers to their Characteristics of People Testing Positive for COVID-19 Infection Survey. This is different to the UKHSA reports you provided a link to, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

However, you are correct in that when looking at the rates/100,000 population in the UKHSA reports, more double vaccinated people (over 30) have been testing positive if double vaccinated, for a while now. This has now moved down to the 18-29 group in the latest report whilst the older age groups have gone out of negative efficacy territory (probably due to the boosters). This is only for testing positive, not for hospitalisation or death, which continues to show positive efficacy (however, this can be debated as well).

Expand full comment

Geert weeks ago posted bar graphs showing exactly what you posted above. He mentioned the elderly would see a short uptick in protection due to boosters. He also showed younger groups would move into negative territory as the weeks progressed into January.

Expand full comment

it is also BS that, at least in US, anyone with only 1 jab are counted as unvaxxed. Obviously designed to skew the data in favor of the "vaccines" attempting to show they work. Sorry, but I have huge doubts about the still secret studies that showed 95% efficacy. Right, after throwing out how many people from the study?

Expand full comment

Thank you for the write up. As I understand it, the higher likelihood of the vaccinated to get omicron is a conditional likelihood: Given the Condition of a positive test, how likely is the variant in the testee to be omicron. If a vaccine was to give perfect protection against all variants but omicron, then the vacinees would get only omicron and the likelihood would be sky high. No ADE is needed to explain this result, yet it still is a distinct possibility. I wrote this to get it straight for myself :)

Cheers

Expand full comment

Yes, good point. It's such a small dataset, you can't draw any conclusions but needs monitoring. However, the conditional likelihood is: given the condition of a positive test, how likely is the variant in the testee to be omicron compared with a vaccinated person.

The reason may be that, in general, vaccinated people have never been infected, Delta dominates where no previous immunity exists and therefore they are more likely to test positive for Delta. This wouldn't be great for unvaccinated individuals if Omicron turns out to be more mild.

Nevertheless, whatever the reason for the results shown above, it is clear the vaccines aren't doing what they claimed they were supposed to do originally and insanely intense booster campaigns should pause whilst the data is evaluated.

Expand full comment

I agree completely. The vaccines are a mess. I am in Germany and it seems that all signs of vaccine failure are taken as reasons to double down on the vaccination drive. In absence of data they openly extrapolate: "vaccines should still limit the severity of breakthrough infections". Even the formerly critical and supposed to be independent "Standing Committee on Vaccination" is now advising on boosting every 3 months.

Another sign of vaccine failure is the uptick of cases following vaccination ( https://mobile.twitter.com/gerdosi/status/1387413025926361093) . This is not even officially discussed and high casenumbers are only taken as a reason to do more vaccinations.

Expand full comment

I'm in Germany too and it seems they're making up the rules as they go along. Big criterion for making up those rules is that those who "have done the right thing" must not be alienated, so the unvaxxed remain the go-to scape goat. It's so sad.

Vaccine efficacy fades -> vaccinate more.

Omicron escapes the vaccine induced immune response -> vaccinate more.

People don't want to take obsolete vaccines -> create mandates to ensure we vaccinate more.

In what universe does this make any sense anymore?

Expand full comment

Here's what pfizer just admitted. For 7 days after you are vaccinated, your immune system crashes a bit and some kind of immune cell disappears. So lots are getting Covid right after their shots. In the US they are counted as Unvaccinated. Sorry, but whatever anyone says, if you look at the positive cases or hospitalizations after every vax push in EVERY country, the cases go UP. In incredible spikes. No matter the season no matter reason. UP UP UP. To try and fit the data to pre-conceieved notions is just ridiculous. It is like trying to say that a 4 sigma event in deaths of working age millenials is due to delayed hospital care. It is so overwhelming and the spikes are so sharp after the shots and mandates that if you are looking for a reason to quibble with the gross data, it is pointless. NOTHING, not delayed medical care for healthy age working people, not Fentanyl, not suicide, combined, would equal the numbers of deaths or the number of cases recorded in EVERY COUNTRY. And you can quibble with a straw, but for me, the evidence is CLEAR. Get the shots, get covid. Get the shots, healthy Millenians will experience a 4 sigma death event. The highest the world ever experienced outside of the Black Death is a 4 signma event. Temporal (time) evidence is enough for me.

Expand full comment

From what I understand there is not a single case of anyone contracting Covid a second time. Can you show me proof this has happened?

Expand full comment

Reinfection rates are low but they do happen and much higher with Omicron

Expand full comment

More likely 1 or the other infections are false positive.

Expand full comment

Joe Rogan asked Dr. Peter McCullough about people having covid-19 twice. Joe said he had a friend that's gotten covid twice. Dr. McCullough said that he felt one of the infections would not have been covid.

Dr. Peter A. McCullough | ⁣#1747 - The Joe Rogan Experience. Dec 13, 2021

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/dr-peter-a-mccullough-1747-the-joe-rogan-experience-dec-13-2021_JmemoZP5YULSUV4.html

Expand full comment

You are an author and many decide important things on your writings. I’m sure you hold yourself to a higher standard because of that and I think you should. My question was asking for proof and all I received was words which anyone can produce. In these times it is important to speak only truth. If we are speaking on what we think or how we feel that should be said upfront. Part of the reason we are in this position in my opinion is because people take what others say as truth without checking. Example; there are many still calling ivermectin a horse dewormer and don’t know anything about what it has done for people because they trust the liars on main stream media. What do you base your answer on?

Expand full comment

They are constantly reporting on reinfection rates in some of the ONS and UKHRA reports. This is an older one from June but dealt specifically with the reinfection point. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveytechnicalarticleanalysisofreinfectionsofcovid19/june2021

This report from Imperial looked at reinfection in Omicron vs Delta

http://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/

Expand full comment

Thank you for your reply. What do I say here, this whole thing is like a circle. This is going off two positive PCR tests. It has nothing to do with a person being sick. We need to ask more questions of these people. I’m my eyes this is not proof but propaganda. There is no a-simptamatic transmission and there is no re-infection proven. Look how influenza works, this is no different. The worst thing we can do is mass vaccinate children.

Expand full comment

Omicron doesn't appear to cause covid as it was originally defined -- it's more of a common cold. It diverges enough from all other strains that it seems capable of causing reinfections.

I now know two people who had covid in spring 2020 -- with some of the classic symptoms like loss of taste & smell, upset stomach and headache alongside fever, etc. -- and have now had reinfections (presumably omicron) consisting of mild and short-lived symptoms such as fatigue, sore throat and a cough.

I will note, however, that these two individuals are also double-vaccinated. I do not know anyone who is unvaccinated, recovered from covid, and who has been reinfected. Make of that what you will.

Expand full comment

You can't prove what data isn't kept. The CDC has been mixing the data so that you cannot tell. You cannot find information which has not been kept. Even so, look around and start asking. EVERYONE I know who has tested positive twice WITH symptoms each time has been Vaxxed. Enough for me.

Oh, but in addition the CDC just admitted they have NO cases of ANY unVAXXED person who had any strain of covid and survived, got the virus again. Zip, Zero. Nada. So despite the testing issues, they have NOT ONE PERSON in the US that did not get the shot, but who got ANY kind of symptomatic COVID twice.

Expand full comment

There is some Danish original research that finds negative vaccine effectivness:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v2

They buried the lede on the last page: negative vaccine effectivness for days 91-150 since full vaccine protection for the mrna-vaccines.

Of course this finding can have many underlying mechanisms. ADE is a distinct possibility. Other mechanisms include behavioral differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

With PCR test, how can they differentiate between covid, delta, omicron or any other variant?

Cos you mentioned in the article the following “of which 115 tested positive compatible with Omicron”

Expand full comment

This is how they differentiate:

The analysis is based only on individuals who test positive with a high viral load (Ct < 30) and have gene pattern OR + N, OR + N + S, OR + S or N + S.

Since the S gene is not detected in strong positive cases infected with the Omicron variant, those with gene pattern OR + N are defined as being compatible with the Omicron variant, and gene patterns OR + N + S, OR + S and N + S are defined as being compatible with Delta.

It is possible that some OR + N cases may not be Omicron as some genes may not be detected (for example, weaker Delta infections); however, limiting the analysis to cases with a high viral load should minimise this. Some OR + N + S, OR + S and N + S cases may not be Delta, as other variants may be circulating in small numbers, but sequencing suggests the majority (>99%) of such cases will be Delta.

Any cases with a low viral load or with different gene patterns are not included in the analysis.

Expand full comment

Not refuting you but I don't buy this. This is just casting a wider net and dredging up false positives and classifying them as the latest VOC by choice. CT >25 is useless in asymptomatic diagnosis.

Expand full comment

It's to bad we can't fight faith with reason.

Historically, we've seen it a century or so ago, when modernism promised Utopia in all fields.

And when modernism failed, as techno-fetischism always must, the peoples of Europe turned to authoritarian leaders who promised that salvation comes through enduring hardships and punishing The Others.

Look at the EU today.

Politicians and prophets of profit who for twenty years have promised the perfect world. No disease. No hunger. No homelessness. No war. All the horsemen given permanent leave.

Look at how these technocrats, corporativists and synarchists act as something they cannot control appears. Authoritarian, totalitarian, dictatorial, and flailing about like Polyphemus.

It is a blessing that this isn't a truly dangerous virus, like measles.

Expand full comment

What is troubling here is that the natural immunity according to the same table also increases the chances of getting omicron. Either the data is not right or we are slowly getting into a Marek's scenario ...

Expand full comment

Maybe but it doesn't differentiate between previous COVID-19 infection with vaccination and without vaccination.

Expand full comment

makes sense! we do not know how the recovered + vexed are counted.

Expand full comment

Greater illness and injury in the inoculated arm than in the placebo arm. From Canada Covid Care Alliance.

https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html

Expand full comment

I have an uncle who is a PT (and has himself suffered some long lasting adverse health issues after the 2nd shot) who said that he and his colleagues have seen a huge uptick in frozen shoulder cases on the arm where people received the shot.

Expand full comment

My druggist had this and knew of three other customers with the same complaint.

I asked if he had reported this, of course he had not. I volunteered to do the forms for him, but was declined.

All of these statistics remind me of the computer programmers' concept, "GIGO."

The Naked Emperor makes this point above, that the datasets are not compatible.

Here in Canada, and also in the JAMA comments one is not allowed to ask about PCR Ct's, so credibility of conclusions is challenging to assess.

Autopsies are also discouraged or banned, so you can't differentiate a Covid case from an injection death.

Expand full comment

Does anyone know if NE's data are cases/thousand or gross cases?

Berenson's data appears to be gross case counts.

Expand full comment

The dataset above is very small so just gross cases

Expand full comment

If there is a way to aggregate data from UK, Demark, and Canada, the evidence of ADE/OAS, if exists, will be clearer with the bigger dataset.

Expand full comment

not really, they are all sliced in different ways. At the very least it would be very manual but all the aggregations you need to make would lead to the final dataset being a complete mess. Not even considering the collection and testing biases (in DK you are incentivized to test yourself whenever you feel like, I suspect in the UK you need to pay out of pocket unless you go to the hospital). Damn!! data crap all around in this pandemic.

Expand full comment

No, in the UK you are encouraged to test as much as possible and for free.

Expand full comment

I believe the pcr tests are actually picking up the vaccine some how, this would explains how the more vaccinated you are th more likely you are to “catch” it ….. what if the flu like symptoms we are seeing are actually vaccine side effects.

Expand full comment

The pcr test can pick up anything you want it to. It was never meant to be used for diagnostic purposes for precisely that reason. Yet that is how it is being used, on a global scale. Anyone smell a rat?

Expand full comment

It would make sense that the PCR test is picking up the vaccine. At 40 cycles it will pick up your pajamas on the floor.

Expand full comment

Loved that. Can I keep? Hilarious.

Expand full comment

By all means!

Expand full comment

This is very misleading. The survey you are referring to is "early analysis of characteristics associated with the Omicron variant among Covid-19 infections". Note: among Covid-19 infection. So this is the statistics among those who were infected by some Covid-19, what are the chances that it's Omicron if you're vaccinated, unvaccinated etc.

It does not mean that vaccinated people are more likely to get the Omicron. It means that if you were infected by Covid-19, the more vaccinated you are - the higher the probability that it's Omicron. Which makes a lot of sense given that the vaccines are much less effective against Omicron than against Delta.

Expand full comment

This looked at all the Omicron cases in the UK so far and from that data it is clear that, compared to an unvaccinated person, the likelihood of getting Omicron is greater the more vaccinated you are.

But please come back and debate with me because if I have been misleading I will correct it.

Expand full comment

You may both be right.

The table that The Naked Emperor presented discusses "odds ratio" of being infected with Omicron, as opposed to being infected with Delta.

We can see that as vaccination level increases, the odds ratio for Omicron increases. This means that a highly vaccinated (boosted) person is much more likely to have Omicron, compared to that person's chance of getting Delta. This is because vaccines and boosters do give a short term protection from Delta, and much less protection against Omicron.

That said, many countries statistics (Denmark and the UK) show that the share of unvaccinated persons among Omicron cases, is less than the share of unvaccinated persons in the population. This means that the unvaxxed are, perversely, "protected" by their no-vax status, and the vaxxed are endangered by their vax status. The worst are double vaxxed more than 90 days past vaccination.

I discussed this in several of my own posts.

Expand full comment

Yes. You have done sterling work on this.

Expand full comment

No. It looked at all the Covid cases, and concluded that the more vaccinated who got Covid were more likely to get the Omicron variant than the less vaccinated people.

The data does not imply that more vaccinated are more likely to get Omicron. It just implies they are more likely to get Omicron compared to Delta. The key words that you are missing (in my opinion) are that the survey was "among Covid-19 infections". So it's only among those who were infected, and it could be that most of them were unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

No. There were 1806 cases. Of those 14/536 were unvaccinated, all the way up to 21/185 in triple dosed. Out of all the Omicron cases, the more vaccinated the group, the higher the probability of getting Omicron compared with a vaccinated person

Expand full comment

Your interpretation is again statistically biased. The fact that 21 vaccinated people got Omicron and 14 unvaccinated got Omicron, would imply that vaccinated are more vulnerable to Omicron if exactly half the population at each age group was vaccinated. If, at the more vulnerable age groups, there are more vaccinated people - you can expect more vaccinated infections and it doesn't imply a vaccinated individual is more likely to be infected.

Besides that, the high number of unvaccinated Delta infection might "mask off" Omicron infections from unvaccinated. There is some element of "competition" among the viruses. As an example, consider how flu infections dropped drastically with the rise of Covid-19. So the Delta infection drop among the vaccinated might expose them more to Omicron, from which the vaccine doesn't protect efficiently.

(BTW - I'm not a pro-vaccine person. I am unvaccinated, and I believe good nutrition and healthy lifestyle provides better and safer protection than the commercial vaccines.)

Expand full comment

It’s not the 21 & 14 cases that matter. It’s 21 omicron out of 185 and 14 out of 536 cases that matters. I said all the way through that the data set is small but that’s all we have to go on.

I agree Delta drop off may mask issues but even so the UKHSA data shows higher COVID rates in vaccinated people in most age groups.

Expand full comment

As I understand, PCR doesn’t distinguish influenza and SARS cov 2 viruses. US CDC said they will start using a different test that can differentiate the two. I don’t think a competition between the two viruses is the reason that we hardly saw flu cases for past two years.

Expand full comment