Jan 12, 2022
3 mins read
A cluster of recently released studies collectively show to the same conclusion. That being, vaccine effectiveness against Omicron is very poor. Considering the lack of data to support current vaccine mandates aimed to protect the public against Omicron, and recently surfaced studies showing just how poor the shots are against the new variant, a conversation needs to be had about public mandates, and policies.
First, the evidence. Here is a study fresh off the press from Kaiser Southern California. First, please see the 2 images directly below. After receiving dose 1 and 2, vaccine effectiveness against Omicron drops to 0% at 181 days, and remains low overall.
Throw into the mix a booster from the next image, effectiveness goes back up. But there’s a problem with that. If you notice, there’s a wide confidence interval (the vertical lines on the graph at the end) for the booster against Omicron compared to delta which means it’s uncertain if the booster effect is stable, or will last.
Let’s consider what the Ontario province study has to offer. Vaccine effectiveness after dose 2 and 3 of Pfizer (BNT162b1), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) against omicron dropped considerably. What’s worse, the confidence internal’s in this graph are no better than the last graph.
All and all, it seems the effects of 2 and 3 doses of vaccine overtime reveal diminishing returns. Not surprising considering said products were engineered to target the original variant. However, now that something heavily mutated has come along, the treatment has proven substantially less effective. So, even if you’ve had your booster, you still have a date with Omicron.
Conversely, natural infection in a newer study confers nearly 60% protection against symptomatic reinfection from Omicron. Thats good for people previously infected because a solid 60% is clearly better than the 0% from 2 doses, or the questionable 55-60% from a booster with low confidence interval. It’s not shocking more science is emerging since the Israeli data initially surfaced showing natural immunity to be 13.5X more protective than vaccine induce immunity.
Next, Dr. Montagnier, and Jed Rubenfeld from WSJ write that because there is no evidence that vaccines are reducing infections, Omicron is making Biden’s vaccine mandate obsolete. I agree with this. One couldn’t justify a mandate on an intervention that doesn’t yield a net benefit to society. Furthermore, as there is no effective way to reduce infection from this variant, and disease is mild (that evidenced by lower hospitalization, severe disease, and death), maybe the best policy is to let the virus run its course and bestow immunity.
Another point. In light of all the data presented in this publication, firing healthcare workers like nurses, doctors, PAs, and NPs, for choosing not to boost is unjust. Now would probably be a good time to call them back to work considering the staffing shortages and increasing numbers in hospitals. After all, this time of year is busiest in critical care settings.
Also, many colleges/schools have draconian vaccine mandates for attendees who are typically in the lowest risk category for suffering severe disease, hospitalization, and death from COVID-19. To partake in academics, they need to either be boosted, if not, leave. Now that vaccines have proven poorly effective against Omicron, there’s not much of a benefit to boosting, yet here we are. Also, don’t forget the risk of vaccine induced myocarditis is much higher in college aged males after dose 2 and 3 of Moderna and to a lesser degree, dose 2 and 3 of Pfizer. Meaning, the risks are out weighing the benefits.
I wanted to leave you with some interesting tweets from individuals who work in healthcare. You can see how things are beginning to change. See below.