New Danish study - NEGATIVE effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against Omicron 90 days after 2 injections
(media.greatawakening.win)
😷 PLANDEMIC 💉
Comments (67)
sorted by:
Short version:
That's exactly the way I see it. So now they are screwed either way. Take no more and have zero immunity for anything ever again, or keep getting boosters and die that way. Man, there better be a reversal for this or it's going to get really, really ugly, and soon. The first thing they will do is blame the unjabbed, and millions of jabbed will believe it because they will not want to admit they screwed up so terribly.
They already blame the unjabbed and ban us from entry in a lot of countries/cities.
That’s just to protect us from the jabbed. Spike proteins are still a thing. Patriots are in control.
50% effective after two weeks...
Detrimental after 3 months....
Who did see this coming, really? It's so obvious. You put something in your body to make your body a high tension environment and it gets sick more easily. Who could have guessed that?
to my view, anyone with a functioning brain??
thx fren
So that's what "negative effectiveness" effectively means then.
It looks like they looked at it in terms of infection (so not whether it affects death rates) and 90 days post vaccination a vaccinated person was significantly more likely to catch covid than an unvaccinated person who hasn't previously had a positive covid test. This is quite bad..... Edited to add that their number of cases for omicron moderna isn't high enough to draw conclusions from, but the Pfizer one definitely has enough cases to prove there's a problem.
I guess I made a pro-vax'r mad, they already downvoted the post. :)
How does a post get downvoted?
Disable community styling to see downvote arrows on posts.
People have time to figure it out when they are stuck dilating.
pukes knowing wtf you're talking about
Goddamn I hate that all of the deplorables in the fighting game community educated me on their mentally ill members.
Dilating like a pregnant woman dilates? Damn, I'm usually good about knowing the colloquialisms here.
No, trannys have to dilate frequently to keep their fake vagina from fusing shut. No idea how often. Don’t want to know.
You have to turn off "Community Styling" in your settings. Then you can see the downvote option for posts.
Haha. Wrong.
My post is anti-vax because it gives you information to make a wise decision.
Fuck their clown world conclusions. Make up your own mind.
SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOURCE.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v2.full.pdf
Wild, the closing argument tries to use this data to push mandates and booster programs, as opposed to stepping back and realizing that the temporary immunity provided from vaccination isn’t greater than the long term immunity provided by natural immune systems.
Can't release anything like that without a proper HONK you know :)
Clowns!
Cooooonnnntexxxtttt
I like how the context button even glows and tons of us still miss it. Maybe they just assume it's an fbi agent.
I'M RETARDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED.
Oh the irony. True story, just happened.
As I'm reading the research paper describing how at best the vaccine provides marginal effectiveness, and then over time makes you more vulnerable, my home phone rings. I let the answering machine take the call.
It is the NYS Health department with a message about how we need to vaccinated and get a booster before the holiday because it protects you against the Omicron variant.
One caution, this paper has not be peer-reviewed yet. I don't doubt that is well done and result completely valid, but if you use this in an argument with a liberal and they find out it is not peer-reviewed they will consider it a victory and your argument has been deboooonked.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v2
Fair warning. At this point, leftists can go sit on a peer-reviewed pike
ADE kicking in ?
The size of those error bars lol... So moderna and Pfizer are fully useless. That means it's working!
What does negative effectiveness mean? They get sicker? More likely to catch?
I haven't read the paper, but I assume that zero effective means people are getting infected at the same rate as an unvaccinated person. A negative effectiveness would mean you are more vulnerable to the infection than an unvaxxed person.
Which is backed up by all of the strictest places in the world causing their own mass suffering.
“Excuse me sir. You cannot board our cruise ship without proving you suck big pharma… err, I mean proving you are vaccinated!”
Yes, more likely to catch covid than an unvaccinated person who has never had a positive covid test.
Surely with this data they can use it to justify the use of boosters on a regular basis.... from the data above they could argue for boosters every 3 months....!
WWG1WGA
That’s literally exactly what the authors try to suggest. Wild.
An anon posted elsewhere on the board that germany is now considering citizens unvaccinated after 3 months of their vaxx
That's why they are saying this flu season will be deadly.
So many people took their "booster" in November and December.
They will be VERY susceptible to Omicron in February and March.
In addition, they had their two "vax" shots last Spring or Summer... so they have negative immunity for other types of Covid too.
Those companies who insisted on everyone being vaccinated will be in BIG trouble.
They have blanket immunity.
The only kind of immunity those “vaccines” have given so far.
🤡
Last sentence of the article in context
What a shit-show.
Link to paper?
Oh cool. I didn't know about that feature. Thanks!
A British study found same thing - it causes VAIDS
I assume that 0% vaccine effectiveness is done by measuring number of cases in an unvaccinated control group?
Kek, -76% “effective”. Unfortunately the normies will just interpret this as them needing a booster every 30 days now.
If they can't isolate the virus, and they can't test for it... how can we seriously converse about "variants", especially when said variant is supposedly 3 weeks old?
From everything I've read on the subject, and how it is indeed true that the virus hasn't been isolated, I suspect that the reasoning for this is something different that would be revealed about the virus if it were to be isolated.
Perhaps something about the sequencing showing that it was generated with simple computer code or something along those lines.
But to claim covid doesn't exist and it's all a psy op.... well that just seems like disinformation that's harmful to our own cause actually.
Can't be. These really great vaxxines have saved millions worldwide.
Textbook gaslighting
Science is not a subject that forces its way back into your need to read it. As a professional and proper science. That's why I didn't bother taking way back after high school. Here I am now, helping yoinget your graphs right.
Omicron has been around for 3 months??? Wtf
The next Danish study should be prune vs. cheese.
It is not. This is a repository of "pre-print", non-peer reviewed papers. I feel like things against the narrative rarely make it outside of "pre-print". If they do it's by accident.
This is a good candidate for an accident. It is showing how "badly, boosters are needed". Hopefully, the peers overlook the negative effectiveness and focus on the ineffectiveness generally of the vaccine on the timeline. Then it might make it into the peer reviewed category for people to see.
Generally though, negative effectiveness is a real thing. Searching the internets, I found this: https://alethonews.com/2021/11/15/negative-vaccine-effectiveness-isnt-a-new-phenomenon-it-turned-up-in-the-swine-flu-vaccine/
It is interesting with its own citations with links if you want to go down the rabbit hole.
how do the measure 'vaccine effectiveness'? Is it related to absolute or relative efficacy?