The Efficacy of COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters against Severe Illness and Deaths: Scientific Fact or Wishful Myth?
Yaakov Ophir, Ph.D. Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ph.D. Shay Zakov, Ph.D. Peter A. McCullough, M.D., M.P.H.
The medical narrative justifying the global vaccination campaign has changed throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis. While the primary narrative focused on the proclaimed excellent ability of the novel mRNA vaccines to prevent infections and (therefore) to attenuate the spread of the pandemic, policymakers today (March 2023) acknowledge the poor vaccine efficacy (VE) of contemporary booster doses against infections but insist that the boosters are still capable of providing long-term protection against severe illness and deaths (as if the two types of protection do not depend on each other). We examine the evidence behind this modified narrative through an in-depth evaluation of representative and high-profile data from: (1) the formal, phase 3 clinical trials by Pfizer and Moderna, which preceded the FDA’s emergency use authorization (EUA); (2) the observational studies from Israel (“the world’s lab,” as termed by Pfizer officials), which examined the efficacy of the fourth dose at about the time the FDA authorized this second booster; and (3) the publicly available, real-life dashboards of pandemic statistics.
This investigation encountered multiple methodological and representational constraints, including short, and sometimes arbitrary or uneven follow-up periods; uneven exclusion criteria and COVID-19 testing levels; selection biases; and selective report of results. But most importantly, the documented, conditional probability of death and severe illness (i.e., the percentage of severe illness and death cases among those infected with the virus) did not differ between the treatment and the control groups of the various clinical and observational efficacy studies. Altogether, the representative data examined in this article do not lend convincing support to the notion that the current booster doses offer protection against severe illness and deaths that extends significantly beyond their temporary and fragile protection against infections. Considering the already known poor efficacy against infections and transmission and the ever-growing concerns over serious, vaccine-associated adverse outcomes, the findings of this meticulous scientific investigation challenge the current (modified) narrative and serve as an urgent call for the medical community to reconsider the balance between the benefits and the risks of the newly developed COVID-19 vaccines. (See link for entire study)
Efficacy has been dealt with by experts many, many times over; however, the bought out media is simply not reporting on the way ‘the powers that be’ have manipulated, skewed, hidden, and outright lied about data. It’s also important to remember that similarly to Lyme/MSIDS, the entire house of cards is built on false premises including:
- they have never, to this day, created a successful”vaccine” for an upper respiratory disease
- a “vaccine” isn’t needed for an illness which has a 99.991% recovery rate by doing nothing
- the entire house of cards is based upon flawed testing making everything COVID when it could simply be the flu
- this article points out that these injections lack a viable mechanism of action against COVID in the airways and that antibodies cannot prevent injection due to the fact COVID invades through the respiratory tract and that none of the “vaccine” trials gave any evidence that they prevent transmission. Urging people to get these fast-tracked gene therapy injections to “protect others” has NO basis in fact
- Despite forcing countries to put up sovereign assets including their bank reserves, military bases, and embassy buildings as collateral, these “vaccine” manufacturers ADMIT efficacy and risks are UNKNOWN
- when absolute risk is taken into account, these injections are less than 1% effective
- COVID “vaccine” manufacturers have unblinded their trials giving control groups the actual “vaccine,” making long-term efficacy and safety impossible to assess
- Every clinical study and non-peer reviewed press release regarding efficacy needs to be revisited due to the sleight-of-statistical hand and the faulty PCR used in these studies. Please remember that the CDC did not consider people “vaccinated” until up to five weeks after the initial dose – demonstrating brazen statistical manipulation to bury perception of adverse events and deaths
- CDC data has shown that mass “vaccination” has had NO measurable impact on COVID mortality.
- Thanks to a federal court order, the FDA has confirmed graphene is in the COVID shots. Spanish researchers have found that graphene makes up more than 99% of the injection
- German researchers have found each and every vial to be contaminated with toxic ingredients
- The COVID gene therapy injections have caused more reports of adverse reactions and death than any other vaccine in the history of VAERS
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbTwoTMBB6Q&t=246s The efficacy devil hides in the little scientific details, so I urge you to read the entire article and judge the evidence for yourself. However, this video by one of the study authors discusses the findings in this video.