Friday, July 30, 2021

What? Really? Clinical Trial For Vaccine Shows It Has No Benefit?

None? Seems impossible to believe. The abstract notes the following: 
"This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice."

But, if the results of this test are not accurate, then why are they doing THIS?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Somebody is about to receive one hell of a kickback.

Pastorius said...

Maybe.

If this news is true, and if it gets out.

Anonymous said...

Many prior assumptions or hypotheses about COVID vaccines were challenged by the information in today’s CDC MMWR report.

This is a thread with some of the prior assumptions and hypotheses compared to the troubling information from Barnstable County, MA:
https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1421182711553798144

Prior assumption:
Most infections are occurring among the unvaccinated.

Report:
“vaccination coverage among eligible Massachusetts residents was 69%. Approximately three quarters (346; 74%) of cases occurred in fully vaccinated persons”

Prior assumption:
Vaccinated individuals who contract COVID will likely be asymptomatic.

Report:
“Overall, 274 (79%) vaccinated patients with breakthrough infection were symptomatic.”

Prior assumption:
COVID won’t spread quickly among vaccinated.

Report:
“On July 3, DPH had reported a 14-day average incidence of 0 cases per 100k persons / day in residents of the town in Barnstable Co; by July 17, the 14-day average incidence increased to 177 cases per 100k”

prior assumption:
the vaccine may wear off over time, but will provide robust protection in the first few months.

Report:
“Among fully vaccinated symptomatic persons, the median interval from completion of ≥14 days after the final vac- cine dose to symptom onset was 86 days”

prior assumption:
Hospitalizations primarily occur only in the unvaccinated.

Report:
“Among five COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized, four were fully vaccinated”

Prior assumption:
Viral load is lower in the vaccinated breakthrough cases

Report:
“(RT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values in specimens from 127 vaccinated persons with breakthrough cases were similar to those from 84 persons who were unvaccinated or not fully vaccinated…”

Hypothesis:
vaccine X is prone to breakthrough but not vaccine Y.

Report:
“Vaccine products received by persons experiencing breakthrough infections were Pfizer-BioNTech (159; 46%), Moderna (131; 38%), and Janssen (56; 16%)”

Here’s the CDC report:

https://cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7031e2-H.pdf
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1421182711553798144.html

Anonymous said...

Wow.

I thought this might be a deepfake.

Nope. It's just the OLD science from May, when Fauci and
@cdcgov
thought dropping mask rules would get people to be vaccinated, not to be confused with the NEW science from this week, when they've realized they were wrong.

Science!

https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1421167981338501124