3 ms·

They define effective using a complicated statistical derivative that inverts the data. This is mostly visible in UK data and other occasional studies, because

They define effective using a complicated statistical derivative that inverts the data. This is mostly visible in UK data and other occasional studies, because most public health reports hide the true numbers. UK does now too but for the longest time published both pre and post adjustment data. The actual effectiveness, as defined by case rates by vaccine status, have been strongly negative for a long time. Around a year now. Vaccinated people catch COVID a lot more often than unvaccinated people do. The reason they claim effectiveness is they use an adjustment procedure to try and correct for "bias". The procedure dates from before COVID. It breaks if people can volunteer to get tested, by making the vaccines look more effective. They don't care because it turns bad news into good news. Also they classify people as vaccinated weeks after someone gets the shot. Negative consequences from the shot are then assigned to the unvaccinated cohort. Again they shouldn't use stats that way but they do. Real effectiveness is negative.

lostmsu 4y ago
> Real effectiveness is negative. Your whole comment reeks BS. I don't see any plausible explanation for _negative_ effectiveness. And you don't link any data to support your point.
- VagueMag 4y ago
  These comment threads are all posted on a link to a scientific paper showing that mRNA vaccines may cause class switching to a type of antibodies which cause tolerance (reduced immune response) to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Vaccine enhanced disease is not a new phenomenon and not outside the realm of possibility for the COVID vaccines.
- fidgewidge 4y ago
  I was once like you. When I first learned about negative effectiveness I thought that was crazy. That's not possible surely? Hah. I was such a child. It can happen, has happened in the past with other vaccines and has now happened in a big way with COVID vaccines. The biological mechanisms are well known by immunologists for many years, look for "OAS" and imprinting. Or heck read the fine article we're discussing on this thread, which is about the body making the wrong sort of antibodies due to over-exposure (which makes it easier to become infected). You don't have to believe me. Maybe you'll believe Dr Fauci: https://youtu.be/uagsb4wii3E?t=3401 https://youtu.be/uagsb4wii3E?t=3401 so when you have that many people in a trial 56:41 not only are you looking to see if it works but you're constantly keeping your eye 56:47 on safety to make sure that a vaccine actually doesn't enhance disease He says they have to watch to make sure vaccines don't enhance disease, because negative effectiveness is a problem that's occurred in the past especially with HIV vaccines. So now we established that my comment doesn't reek of BS, here's data on covid vaxx negative efficacy: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/theres-something-antigenic-in-denmark https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/theres-something-antigeni... https://dailysceptic.org/tag/negative-efficacy/ https://dailysceptic.org/tag/negative-efficacy/ Follow the white rabbit but don't use search engines. Searching the obvious queries on both google and duckduckgo gives back CDC propaganda and none of the results actually discuss negative efficacy. The extent of the coverup is pathetic.
Izkata 4y ago
> Also they classify people as vaccinated weeks after someone gets the shot. Negative consequences from the shot are then assigned to the unvaccinated cohort. Again they shouldn't use stats that way but they do. "Unknown" also tends to get grouped in with "unvaccinated", skewing it even more.

lostmsu 4y ago

> Real effectiveness is negative. Your whole comment reeks BS. I don't see any plausible explanation for _negative_ effectiveness. And you don't link any data to support your point.

VagueMag 4y ago
These comment threads are all posted on a link to a scientific paper showing that mRNA vaccines may cause class switching to a type of antibodies which cause tolerance (reduced immune response) to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Vaccine enhanced disease is not a new phenomenon and not outside the realm of possibility for the COVID vaccines.
fidgewidge 4y ago
I was once like you. When I first learned about negative effectiveness I thought that was crazy. That's not possible surely? Hah. I was such a child. It can happen, has happened in the past with other vaccines and has now happened in a big way with COVID vaccines. The biological mechanisms are well known by immunologists for many years, look for "OAS" and imprinting. Or heck read the fine article we're discussing on this thread, which is about the body making the wrong sort of antibodies due to over-exposure (which makes it easier to become infected). You don't have to believe me. Maybe you'll believe Dr Fauci: https://youtu.be/uagsb4wii3E?t=3401 https://youtu.be/uagsb4wii3E?t=3401 so when you have that many people in a trial 56:41 not only are you looking to see if it works but you're constantly keeping your eye 56:47 on safety to make sure that a vaccine actually doesn't enhance disease He says they have to watch to make sure vaccines don't enhance disease, because negative effectiveness is a problem that's occurred in the past especially with HIV vaccines. So now we established that my comment doesn't reek of BS, here's data on covid vaxx negative efficacy: https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/theres-something-antigenic-in-denmark https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/theres-something-antigeni... https://dailysceptic.org/tag/negative-efficacy/ https://dailysceptic.org/tag/negative-efficacy/ Follow the white rabbit but don't use search engines. Searching the obvious queries on both google and duckduckgo gives back CDC propaganda and none of the results actually discuss negative efficacy. The extent of the coverup is pathetic.

Izkata 4y ago

> Also they classify people as vaccinated weeks after someone gets the shot. Negative consequences from the shot are then assigned to the unvaccinated cohort. Again they shouldn't use stats that way but they do. "Unknown" also tends to get grouped in with "unvaccinated", skewing it even more.