When is a vaccine not a vaccine? (Part 1)
When the shot makes you more likely to get the disease!!!!
In my last thrilling post, I laid out the case that the vaccines are causing unnatural changes in the seasonality, case numbers, and distribution of COVID infection.
Now, let’s dive a little deeper into the possible reasons that this is happening.
There is a lot going on concerning those changes (and lots of theories), but we will concentrate here on the timing(s) of the abnormal increases in cases:
Vaccinated people are at much higher risk of infection at three different times during the vaccination sequence.
#1 - for the 2-3 weeks after their first shot
#2 - starting about 4-6 months after their second dose
#3 - for 2-3 weeks after their booster/3rd shot
For this post, I will concentrate on #1. If you are interested in the rapid failure of vaccine to protect from infection (and the problems caused by adding a booster shot) - see the data behind #2 & #3 in Part 2 of “When is a vaccine not a vaccine?”.
#1 - More cases in the 21 days following the first dose of an mRNA ‘vaccine’
The data on this phenomenon couldn’t be more clear. It is so obvious that the CDC only records people as being ‘vaccinated’ two weeks after their second shot. In fact, they record these one-shot-but-not-two people as ‘unvaccinated’.
In their usual honest, forthright, and scientific way (sarcasm, sorry), this allows the CDC to take advantage of the higher case numbers among the newly vaccinated to artificially inflate the true case rates of the truly unvaccinated.
This categorization makes it look like the effectiveness of the vaccine is much higher than it really is AND that the dangers of staying unvaccinated are much higher than they really are.
They literally (mis)use the side effects of the vaccine to try to convince people to take the vaccine!
There are many scientific papers and other data supporting this apparent immunosuppression.
If you know where to look and how to parse the dense language, it is actually in the data of the original Pfizer trial1, where they had a 40% increase in ‘suspected COVID’ cases in the trial arm versus the placebo arm.
One of the earliest and easiest to understand examples of data showing problems right after first shot is a report by Moustsen-Helms, et al2 looking at several thousand healthcare workers and LTC (long term care) residents in Denmark.
As you can see in their Table 2 below, the Vaccine Efficacy (VE) for the two weeks after the initial dose (highlighted) for the two groups is negative!
A ‘negative VE’ means those patients were more likely to get COVID during those 2-3 weeks than if they had never gotten the shot.
In this study, the just-jabbed were between 40-105% more likely to get the disease they had just been vaccinated for.
This increased susceptibility to the disease is seen in many, many other datasets. They almost all show a 50-150% increased chance of infection.
Reclassifying the recently inoculated as ‘unvaccinated’ sure makes the ‘vaccinated’ data look better, doesn’t it?
The mechanism for this unusually high number of cases among the recently vaxxed is unclear. They are not getting COVID from the shot - that is impossible: the mRNA codes for a small portion of the viral coat (the spike protein), not the virus itself. It may be priming the immune system. It may be weakening it temporarily. We don’t know. Whatever the exact physiological pathway, the shot causes more of these people to become infected.
So… if individuals are more likely to catch COVID during this early period, what does that mean for the community?
The population-wide effect of this first-shot problem is perfectly encapsulated by Mongolia, but similar trends can be seen in Ireland, the UK, Israel, Gibraltar, the Seychelles, and many other places.
Each location vaccinated a large proportion of their populations very quickly.
Each saw huge increases in cases a few weeks later.
Even more frightening is that this three week period after the first dose (what one blogger - who covers this in far more detail than presented here - calls the ‘worry window’3&4) is also correlated strongly with increased deaths.
Mongolia had essentially zero deaths for 14 months…. then the vaccine program started.
The makers of these vaccines quickly realized that (even after these early devastating consequences of the shot) efficacy was under 60%. Their solution? Add a second shot soon after the first (4-6 weeks).
This second dose of the vaccine has far more vaccine injury reports than the first, but it does seem to help efficacy: Soon after the second dose, VE maxes out at about 95% protection. Sounds great… but it doesn’t stay that way.
Efficacy fades over time.
Read more about that in Part 2.
Page 41 of the Pfizer EUA application https://www.fda.gov/media/144416/download
Vaccine effectiveness after 1st and 2nd dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in long-term care facility residents and healthcare workers – a Danish cohort study https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.08.21252200v1