UK Government continues to lie and publish misinformation about “Vaccine Effectiveness”
Whilst browsing the “Greenbook” advice from the UK Government, I was dismayed by the persistent lies.
COVID-19 greenbook chapter 14a (publishing.service.gov.uk)
On page 6 of 57, there is this for the Pfizer/BioNTech injection:
“A phase 3 study was conducted in around 44,000 individuals aged 12 years and above with a second dose delivered between 19 and 42 days. Initial analysis conducted as part of a phase 3 study demonstrated a two-dose vaccine efficacy of 95% in those aged 16 years and over and against symptomatic disease with the wild-type virus.”
Ok, so even leaving aside the failure to state that “efficacy of 95% “ refers to relative rather than the more informative and relevant absolute efficacy kf a 1-2% at most, notice the run on in the sentence “and symptomatic disease! The advice also fails to state that the injections WERE NEVER INTENDED TO REDUCE INFECTION, TRANSMISSION, HOSPITALIZATION OR DEATH. The cole clinical end point of the trial was to REDUCE SYMPTOMS – like cytokine storms – remember the horrific pictures from China about people keeling over, frothing at the mouth?
Anyway, the UK Government knows full well that the Pfizer Phase 3 clinical trials were terminated BEFORE the end of the six month period, intended to run from 31 July 2020 to 31 January 2021. They know because the UK Government was the first country in the world to begin C19 injections on 8 December 2020 – two months prior to the scheduled end of the Phase 3 clinical trial.
Bavk to the clinical trial results know the UK government. No matter how many times I have posted this, it remains ignored by the UK government – and by all media outlets!
From here:
The COVID-19 Inoculations - More Harm Than Good FINAL Video & Print (canadiancovidcarealliance.org)
There were 4 times the number of adverse events reported in the truncated trials, 75% more “severe” (life altering) events and 10% more more “serious” life threatening events.
This data has been in the public domain for more than 18 months.
So have these results from the post-authorization marketing reports for under 70 doses administered (ignore the 126 million doses “shipped” number.
reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf (phmpt.org)
1,223 deaths since the early December roll-out – a few months -– an unknown under-reporting factor and 9,400 unknown outcomes from the 42,000 reports submitted (almost 25%!)
No follow-ups by the UK Government, complete disinterest.
We also know that the UK Government failed to inspect and match ANY of the doses administered post authorization with the doses administered in the clinical trial. The UK Government did not have the edpetiise, let alone the will to do this basic check.
The safety and efficacy statement does not condescend to state that the injection was not intended to prevent infection or transmission, nor does it condescend to publish any analysis of the effectiveness of the injection against Omicron.
Lies and misinformation – all funded by taxpayers who have been defrauded by those lies and the lack of quality and transparency of the State propaganda machinery.
Instead of “physician heal thyself”, bureaucrats and politicians need to adopt the mantra “liars, tell the truth”!
Onwards
Please upgrade to paid, or donate a coffee (I drink a lot of coffee) - “God Bless You!” if you can’t or don’t want to contribute. Coffee donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan - Buying just one Ko-Fi a week for $3 is 50 bucks more than an annual $100 subscription!
I would suggest not being dismayed by the "persistent lies". I would actually be dismayed if they were to somehow stop or even slow down adding to the already mountainous pile of lies they have told. They will never stop lying, ever. They wouldn't know how not to. These are the most pathologically evil minds that have ever existed and they will never back down. They know they are dead if they do.
The contrast between flights of establishment propaganda and stonewalled reality:
UK ONS: Direct and indirect impact of the vaccination programme on COVID-19 infections and mortality .... modelling of "effectiveness."
"Since the first wave, the model has been constantly improved to capture the pandemic activity as it develops, in particular to account for the impacts, both direct and indirect, of the vaccination programme. The direct impact of vaccination is the number of deaths saved in those that get infected, whereas the indirect effect incorporates the additional prevention of infections. The history of real-time modelling outputs can be found at Nowcasting and Forecasting of the COVID-19 Pandemic (3), with the most recent results on which the figures here are based is currently available at COVID-19: nowcast and forecast (4)."
"Vaccination rates in the model are based on the actual number of doses administered, and the vaccine is assumed to reduce susceptibility to COVID-19 as well as mortality once infected. Estimates for vaccine efficacy are based on the best available published results (5). To infer the impact of vaccination, the model was fitted to both ONS prevalence and daily COVID-19 mortality data in England, resulting in posterior samples for a range of epidemiological parameters. The posterior samples were then used to simulate the number of infections and deaths that would have occurred without vaccination (Figure 1). Finally, the total impact was calculated by comparing the infection and mortality estimates with vaccination versus the simulated outcomes without vaccination (Figure 2; Table 1)."
From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8057721/
COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and effectiveness—the elephant (not) in the room
Piero Olliaro, Els Torreele, and Michel Vaillant. Lancet Microbe. 2021 Jul; 2(7): e279–e280.
The only reported indication of vaccine effectiveness is the Israeli mass vaccination campaign using the Pfizer–BioNTech product. Although the design and methodology are radically different from the randomised trial, Dagan and colleagues report an RRR of 94%, which is essentially the same as the RRR of the phase 3 trial (95%) but with an ARR of 0·46%, which translates into an NNV of 217 (when the ARR was 0·84% and the NNV was 119 in the phase 3 trial).