COVID ‘vaccines’ are useless in stopping the virus

Vaccine manufacturer Merck has said its vaccines (which are now scrapped) were less effective than catching the China virus and naturally developing antibodies against the disease. In related news, German scientists have claimed that the UK Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is less than 8% effective in over 65s. This significant in Australia because the government has heavily invested in the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.

In addition to that, none of the vaccines under development (and none have yet been approved) were ever studied to see if they stop the transmission of the disease. Pfizer admitted that they did not test human subjects to see if those vaccinated could get and spread the infection. Thus the ‘vaccines’ cannot be used by governments around the world in their messaging as the pathway to ease the draconian lockdowns. So why even bother?

We also know that Pfizer and Moderna experimental injections are unapproved. They are not technically vaccines but some sort of gene therapy devices, and they have already caused many deaths and other adverse reactions.

It has now been discovered that the most likely scenario is that China released the Wuhan virus or it accidentally escaped the Wuhan lab. Either way the CCP took advantage of this to attack the West.

The following excerpt is reposted from InfoWars.com, article: “Merck Scraps COVID Vaccines; Says It’s More Effective To Get The Virus And Recover” by Steve Watson

Vaccine manufacturer Merck has abandoned development of two coronavirus vaccines, saying that after extensive research it was concluded that the shots offered less protection than just contracting the virus itself and developing antibodies.

The company announced that the shots V590 and V591 were ‘well tolerated’ by test patients, however they generated an ‘inferior’ immune system response in comparison with natural infection.

The company stated that instead it will focus on research into therapeutic drugs labeled as MK-7110 and MK-4482.

The drugs aim to protect patients from the damage of an overactive immune response to the virus.

“Interim results from a Phase 3 study showed a greater than 50 percent reduction in the risk of death or respiratory failure in patients hospitalized with moderate to severe COVID-19,” the company’s statement noted of the MK-7110 drug.

Merck is to receive around $356 million from the US government to fast-track production of the potential treatments under Operation Warp Speed.

Meanwhile, in related news, German scientists have claimed that the UK Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is less than 8% effective in over 65s, prompting the vaccine developers to hit back, rubbishing the claims.

The German media published the claims, alleging it had been ‘confirmed’ by ‘multiple’ unnamed senior German government sources.

The following are excerpted from associate editor of the BMJ Peter Doshi’s blog:

Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—we need more details and the raw data

January 4, 2021

Five weeks ago, when I raised questions about the results of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s covid-19 vaccine trials, all that was in the public domain were the study protocols and a few press releases. Today, two journal publications and around 400 pages of summary data are available in the form of multiple reports presented by and to the FDA prior to the agency’s emergency authorization of each company’s mRNA vaccine. While some of the additional details are reassuring, some are not. Here I outline new concerns about the trustworthiness and meaningfulness of the reported efficacy results.

“Suspected covid-19”

All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.” [emphases added]

With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29% (see footnote).

In August 2020 the CDC published estimates give survival rates by age group of the following:

0-19: 99.997%
20-49: 99.98%
50-69: 99.5%
70+: 94.6%

There has been a massive over reporting of COVID deaths. That is, the was a deliberate program claiming people were dying of the China virus when they in fact were largely dying with it, and not from it. But even these figures seem to be a lot better than the real efficacy of the so-called vaccines.

So in summary, the vaccines were never tested for stopping transmission of the disease and the two mRNA gene therapy experimental injections (Pfizer and Moderna) that are now widely being given have an efficacy closer to 19% or at best 29%, when all the actual test data are taken into account. You are better off getting the disease, where, for under 69 years old the survival rate is 99.5%. And you have no worries dealing with a severe adverse effect from the injection, which includes death.

Related Reading

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Related

By John Gideon Hartnett