I’ve explained a few times now that the COVID vaccine efficacy stats are deceiving. You’re faced with two big problems. To start with they generally don’t adjust for confounders. Vaccinated elderly tend to be healthier than the small group who remain unvaccinated. When you don’t account for this difference, you’ll imagine we would have faced a black death type scenario if it hadn’t been for the vaccines, based off the high death rate among the unvaccinated.
But the other big issue you run into, is that the manufacturers of these vaccines got away with pulling off a big trick hidden in plain sight. Whenever you’re injected with these vaccines in your arm and the white blood cells capable of mopping up the Spike protein migrate to the location of the injection, the rest of your body is left at increased risk of infection.
So what happens is that during the first few weeks, you’re actually at increased risk of getting infected. Your soldiers are busy shooting at decoys, while the enemy marches in from the back. The vaccine efficacy stats however are presented as following: You’re vaccinated once you’re more than two weeks past your second dose. Those first two weeks after the second shot are either dumped in with “partially vaccinated”, or even dumped in with “unvaccinated”.
Practically every government in the Western world does this. From my own direct anecdotal experience I was already noticing this. Healthy young people would get the shot, be allowed to party, immediately go out and manage to get a nasty COVID infection. In the Netherlands this led to the “dansen met Jansen” debacle.
We’ll give our government officials the benefit of the doubt and just assume that they are ignorant incompetent people who make up for their ignorance and incompetence with high amounts of self-confidence, leading to disasters like this, but the evidence was clear that there was a sudden spike in infections in the middle of the summer, when healthy young people were allowed back into the clubs as soon as they got the shot.
So this inflates the efficacy of the vaccine. But the question of course is: How much? Well we only know when one government becomes accidentally overly transparent. And that just happened. It turns out that 47.6% of COVID hospital admissions and 55.6% of COVID deaths in Alberta occur from infections in the first fourteen days after the injection. Those deaths are thrown into the “unvaccinated” basket. It won’t shock you to hear that the Alberta government immediately removed the data again, but people had already downloaded it, so the cat was out of the bag.
Keep in mind what the effect of this is, when you deliver these vaccines to a population. You vaccinate people near the end of a wave, as we did at the start of 2021. If those people get sick or die during the first two weeks after the second shot, you’ll say it’s because the vaccine hadn’t kicked in yet and so they die as “unvaccinated”. In the meantime, they become a source of infection for the unvaccinated during this period.
“Conspiracy theorists” were already noticing a few months ago that the start of every vaccination campaign in just about every country was followed by a massive surge in infections. And now we have strong evidence to suggest a causal connection. When you begin vaccinating people, you take a large group of at-risk people, give them an injection that suppresses their immune system for a few weeks and then put those people together in the same room for a few minutes, to check if they suffer any adverse effects.
It’s this definition game that leads to the following outcome in Scotland, where you can see a sudden jump in hospital admissions for the double vaccinated, while no such jump is seen in the unvaccinated:
The triple vaccinated who get sick are now thrown into the double vaccinated category, meaning that those numbers very rapidly turn ugly. They hand over three weeks of first shot infections to the “unvaccinated” category, two weeks of second shot infections to the first shot category and another two weeks of third shot infections to the second shot category. This leads to the ugly numbers you see here, where the second shot now doubles your chance of being hospitalized compared to no shots, to clean up the third shot numbers.
For what it’s worth, these definitions don’t seem to be chosen incidentally. Here are graphs from Alberta that illustrate the problem:
With 21 days you capture the big spike after the first shot and can throw it into the “unvaccinated” category. For the second shot two weeks works better. Look at how massive that spike is, this really suggests massive inflation of the number of unvaccinated COVID cases (and by extension hospital admissions and deaths).
It means that as long as you keep vaccinating unvaccinated people, the numbers for the unvaccinated continue to look ugly, because the first 21 days of those who received the first shot will inflate the numbers of the unvaccinated demographic. When you start running out of a steady supply of unvaccinated people who can be made to receive these injections, that’s when your numbers become embarrassing again.
They use roughly the same definitions in every Western country. This is important to keep in mind, when you find yourself faced with the question: Why are they bullying us? Why are they so adamant on getting unvaccinated healthy young people to get that first shot? Why do they prohibit us from going to restaurants and gyms?
The incentive should be clear in this data. As long as you keep vaccinating the unvaccinated, they will get infected with COVID and you can throw the first 21 days worth of infections into the “unvaccinated” basket. If they don’t have a steady supply of people who can be made to receive the vaccines, the numbers suddenly stop showing a “pandemic of the unvaccinated”.
Also take a look at this graph, of case rates by vaccination status:
The first two weeks of three vaxx is thrown into two vaxx and so those numbers start to look ugly. The ugliness of novaxx is mainly dependent on a steady supply of unvaccinated people who can be bullied into taking these vaccines. If for whatever reason you run out of unvaccinated people who take the shots, case rates in the unvaccinated collapse and the numbers become really embarrassing.
I don’t know if they’re doing this on purpose. All I know is that if I injected millions of people with a vaccine that doesn’t work because of the negative efficacy valley that occurs immediately after the injection and didn’t want this to become apparent to the public, this is the way I would go about it. I would gradually implement all sorts of bullying measures, to offer me a steady gradual supply of people from various age groups who will receive the first vaccine.
Whenever your government’s statistics contradict your lived experience, you need to ask yourself what’s going on. Sometimes you might find yourself faced with an exceptional situation, but other times, it’s just a case of your government publishing deceptive statistics. The anecdote you’ve seen everywhere so far is of the only unvaccinated person in the workplace seemingly not getting the virus. Now you know why this is.