Novavax covid vaccine safe and effective?

Doctor chasing covid virus with vaccine needle

I’ve been getting frequent requests for at least the last six months to write about the Novavax covid vaccine. I’ve been resisting, mainly because it’s seemed uncertain whether it would ever actually be approved in the western world. Now that it’s been approved for use in the EU, however, that has changed, and I figure that I can put it off no longer.

I guess the reason so many people are excited about the Novavax vaccine is that it uses a traditional technology that’s been used many times previously, rather than the new-fangled technologies used in the mRNA and adenovector vaccines that have up to now been all that’s available in the US and EU. To many people, that apparently makes it feel inherently safer.

The Novavax vaccine consists of two parts: the Sars-Cov-2 spike protein and an adjuvant (a substance that causes the immune system to realize that a dangerous foreign entity is present, and which thus activates an immune response to the spike protein). So, rather than injecting genetic blueprints in to the body that get cells to make the viral spike protein themselves (as is the case with the four previously approved vaccines), the spike protein is injected directly.

The first country to approve the Novavax vaccine was Indonesia, which approved it for use in November. That means that there is no even slightly long term real world follow-up data available yet. All we have is the preliminary results from the randomized trials. That means we still have no idea about rare side-effects, and won’t for months. Several million people had already received the AstraZeneca vaccine before authorities realized it could cause serious blood clotting disorders, and millions had also received the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines before it became clear that they can cause myocarditis. With that cautionary point having been made, let’s take a look at what the preliminary results from the randomized trials show.

The first trial results concerning the Novavax vaccine appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine in May. 4,387 people in South Africa were randomized to receive either the vaccine or a saline placebo. The trial was conducted during the final months of 2020, when the beta variant was dominant in South Africa. Like the earlier covid vaccine trials, the objective of the study was to understand the ability of the vaccine to prevent symptomatic disease, which was defined as symptoms suggestive of covid-19 plus a positive covid test.

The average age of the participants was 32 years and chronic conditions were rare, so this was a group at low risk of severe disease. When this fact is combined with the relatively small total number of participants (for a vaccine trial), there was no possibility that the study was going to say anything useful about the ability of the vaccine to prevent severe disease. So this was really a trial looking at the ability of the Novavax vaccine to prevent the common cold in healthy young people.

Let’s look at the results.

As with the earlier published vaccine trials, data on efficacy was only provided two months out from receipt of the vaccine. At the two month mark, 15 people in the vaccine group had developed symptomatic covid-19, as compared with 29 people in the placebo group. This gives a relative risk reduction of 49% against the beta variant at two months post vaccination, which is disappointing. It’s below the 50% risk reduction that regulators have set as the minimum level required for them to approve a vaccine.

It’s even more disappointing when you consider that efficacy against symptomatic infection likely peaks at two months out from vaccination, and then drops rapidly – that is the pattern that’s been seen with all the other approved covid vaccines, and it’s very likely that the same is true for this vaccine.

Furthermore, the beta variant is long gone. The other approved vaccines appear to have little to no ability to prevent infection from the currently dominant omicron variant (although they do still seem to reduce the risk of severe disease to a large extent). Here in Sweden you are currently just as likely to get covid regardless of whether you’ve been vaccinated or not, but you’re still far less likely to end up in an ICU due to severe covid if you’ve been vaccinated. There’s no reason to assume that this vaccine is any different.

Let’s move on and look at safety. Safety data was only provided for a sub-set of patients, and for the first 35 days out from receipt of the first vaccine dose. What little there was though, was somewhat discouraging, with twice as many adverse events requiring medical attention in the group receiving the vaccine as in the group receiving the placebo (13 vs 6), and twice as many serious adverse events in the group receiving the vaccine (2 vs 1). To be fair though, the small absolute numbers make it impossible to draw any conclusions about safety based on this limited data. So we’ll wait to pass judgement.

Let’s move on to the second trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in September. This was a much larger trial than the first, with 15,187 people in the UK who were randomized to either the Novavax vaccine or a saline placebo. Like the earlier study, it was looking at the ability of the vaccine to prevent symptomatic disease. The study ran from late 2020 to early 2021, during a time when the alpha variant was dominant, so the results of the study apply primarily to that variant. 45% of the participants had at least one risk factor that would predispose them to severe disease, and the average age was 56 years.

Ok, so what were the results?

Among participants who received two doses of the vaccine, there were 96 covid infections in the placebo group, but only 10 in the vaccine group during the three month period after receipt of the second dose. This gives an efficacy during the first few months of 90%, similar to what was found in the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine trials. One person ended up being hospitalized for covid-19 in the placebo group, while no-one was hospitalized in the vaccine group – so unfortunately there again weren’t enough hospitalizations to be able to say anything about the ability of the vaccine to prevent severe disease (although it’s pretty clear from this study that even for a relatively high risk group, the overall risk of hospitalization due to covid is low – of 96 people in the placebo group who got covid, only one required hospitalization).

Let’s turn to safety. Safety data is only provided for the period from receipt of the first dose to 28 days out from receipt of the second dose, so we don’t learn anything about the longer term, but at least for that shorter period, there was no signal of serious harm. There were 44 serious adverse events in the vaccine group, and 44 serious adverse events in the placebo group. One person in the vaccine group developed myocarditis three days after receipt of the second dose, which suggests that the Novavax vaccine might cause myocarditis, just like the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines do.

Let’s turn to the final trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in December. It was carried out in the United States and Mexico during the first half of 2021. Just as with the previous trial, the results apply primarily to the alpha variant. 29,949 participants were randomized to either the Novavax vaccine or a saline placebo. Like the other two trials, the purpose was to see if the vaccine prevented symptomatic disease, again defined as symptoms suggestive of covid-19 plus a positive PCR test. The median age of the participants was 47 years, and 52% had an underlying condition that would predispose them to more severe disease if infected with covid-19.

So, what were the results?

At 70 days out from receipt of the second dose, 0.8% of participants in the placebo group had developed covid-19, compared with only 0.1% in the vaccine group. This gives a relative risk reduction of 90%, a result that is identical to that seen in the previous trial. Unfortunately, no information is provided on hospitalizations, which I assume means that not one of the 29,949 people included in the study was hospitalized for covid-19, so, just as with the earlier trials, it’s impossible to tell if the vaccine results in any meaningful reduction in hospitalizations.

At 28 days post receipt of the seond dose, 0.9% of participants in the vaccine group had suffered a serious adverse event, compared with 1.0% of participants in the placebo group. That is encouraging.

Ok, let’s wrap up. what can we conclude about the Novavax vaccine after looking at the results of these three trials?

First, we can conclude that it effectively protected people from symptomatic covid due to the alpha variant at two-three months post vaccination (which of course tells us nothing about how effective the vaccine is after six months or a year). That information is now mostly of historical interest, since alpha is long gone and we’re living in the era of omicron. If the Novavax vaccine is similar to the four previously approved vaccines, then it’s likely useless at preventing infection due to omicron.

Second, it’s impossible to conclude from these trials whether the Novavax vaccine results in any reduction in risk of hospitalization due to covid, for the simple reason that not enough people ended up being hospitalized. Having said that, my guess would be that it probably does protect against hospitalization and need for ICU treatment, just as the other approved vaccines do. At its heart, it’s doing the same thing as they are – generating an immune response to the spike protein found on the original Wuhan covid variant, and the overall trial results are very similar to the trial results for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

The overall safety data suggests that the vaccine is pretty safe, with serious adverse events being balanced between the vaccine group and the placebo group. Rare side-effects are however not detectable in randomized trials with a few tens of thousands of participants. For that longer term follow-up with much larger numbers of people is necessary. So it’s currently impossible to know whether the Novavax vaccine can cause myocarditis, like the mRNA vaccines, or blood clotting disorders, like the adenovector virus vaccines, or some other type of rare adverse event entirely. It’s therefore impossible to say at the present point in time whether it will turn out to be more safe, or less safe, or equivalent to the already approved vaccines.

Please provide your e-mail address below and you will get all future articles delivered straight to your inbox the moment they are released.

Join 23,624 other subscribers

Please support my work by becoming a patron. Your support is what allows me to dedicate time to producing new content. Regardless of whether you can contribute a lot or a little, it all makes a difference – the more patrons I have, the more of my time I am able to dedicate to this work. As a bonus, patrons get: 

  • Access to all the interesting discussions happening in my private forum. 
  • A private podcast feed with full-length versions of all the interviews I do. 
  • The ability to send me direct messages (I always respond to patrons). 

You can sign up to be a patron here. 

147 thoughts on “Novavax covid vaccine safe and effective?”

    1. In Canada, at McMaster University, a group was working on a vaccine that would do this – it would be inhaled. I have no idea what the progress or outlook it. I imagine if it was easy, it would have been used before for influenza and cold viruses. Can also use (as Dr McCullough suggests) iodine spray in nose + gargle in throat to kill the virus – apparently found to be more effective than the vaccine. I’d have to pull up the paper again for exact results, but that was my memory of the conclusion.

      1. Gargling and nasal rinsing may be under-rated, and well worth considering. There have been positive Iodine studies but sadly iodine is no longer available over the counter in the UK (“No demand” according to my local pharmacist). I’m considering using HOCl (Hypochlorous Acid) which is an approved virucide and apparently very safe for humans. My dentist sprays his consulting room with it between patients, cruise ships use it, opticians use it. Two doctors I know believe it would be safe to use as a gargle and nasal rinse to knock out the virus immediately after possible exposure, but I know of no supporting studies. Lots of info and good quality studies on the internet for other uses. I use BrioTech, imported from USA.
        <>

    2. Exactly. Bhakdi and Bridle both have said flu vaccines don’t really work because the virus enters the airways and is dealt with by the mucosal system. This explains why vaxxed/unvaxxed have same transmission/infection rates. The vax antibodies are in the vascular system, and only if the virus beats your first defences and goes deep in the lung via alveoli (and you are very ill) does the vax do anything. In other words a Yellow Fever vax works because the virus enters the blood via mosquito, it’s the first line of defence.

  1. All these so-called vaccines use only the toxic spike protein of the SARS CoV 2 virus rather than an attenuated or ‘dead’ virus. Why is that?

    1. That would be the Valneva vaccine from the french. Standard attenuated virus. Would be nice to see an article on that one.

      1. I agree. I’m watching Valneva anxiously. England has (controversially) cancelled our order, but Scotland remains a possibility. Trials I believe are concluded but no real-world data yet AFAIK.

    2. Cause we are beagals and huge numbers of office fauna (bureaucrats, academics and journalists) secretly delight in tortue and suffering.

  2. It seems to me that the “booster” might have several purposes:

    *It is the “cure” for the flaws in the AstraZeneca “vaccine”.

    *It really is a supplemental intervention.

    *It is a dose of Omicron, so that herd immunity is reached, as well as by natural infection.

  3. When you don’t get enough hospitalisations from a study of almost 30,000 participants to draw a significant conclusion, maybe it’s time to realise that the whole thing isn’t a severe threat in the first place, when compared to all the other ailments that have been neglected for the last two years, such as Alzheimer’s, heart problems, and cancers?

    1. Exactly my thoughts! Along the same lines as “a virus so dangerous you have to be tested to know if you have it”. So much harm caused by this circus, so unnecessary. And yes, so many horrible, neglected diseases getting no attention. A tragedy.

  4. I believe both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines do contain a modified SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, with Lysine at position 986 replaced by Proline and Valine at position 987 also replaced by Proline. This is if I’ve understood this
    “ The sequence of Pfizer/BioNTech’s BNT-162b2 is publicly available [3], and the sequence of Moderna’s mRNA-1273 has recently been sequenced [4]. Both mRNA encodes the same S-2P protein [5,6] which differ from the spike protein in the reference SARS-CoV-2 genome (NC_045512) by two amino acids, i.e., amino acids KV at sites 986 and 987 were replaced by PP to stabilize the resulting spike protein in the prefusion state to train the host immune system to recognize the virus before its entry into the host cell [7,8].” taken from Xia(2021), “Detailed dissection and critical evaluation of the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines” https://ruor.uottawa.ca/bitstream/10393/43075/1/2021vaccines.pdf

  5. In a previous posting, you said RRR is of lesser value than ARR in evaluating the effectiveness of a new agent. Why not here?

    1. Both have their place. I’ve provided the absolute numbers here, so ARR is easy to figure out for anyone so inclined. But in this setting ARR isn’t very useful because it’s entirely dependent on how many people happen to get infected, which varies massively depending on where and at what time point a trial is carried out, since the data provided only covers a two-three month period.

  6. We locked our 6 yo old in his bedroom, then glued him to his booster seat and stuffed him under his bed until the car accident pandemic is over.

  7. Sebastian, you mention in your Novavax post: “What is less encouraging is that nine participants died in the vaccine group, compared with only five in the placebo group.”
    But check out the EMA assessment report about the deaths (page 116 and 117)
    “Three (<0.1%) participants died during study 2019nCoV-302, 2 in the NVX-CoV2373 group and 1 in the placebo group. In 2019nCoV-301, a total of 14 participants died during the study, with 9 (0.05%) in the NVX-CoV2373 group and 5 (0.05%) in the placebo group. Four deaths occurred in 2019nCoV501, with 2 deaths (unknown cause and COVID-19) in the NVX-CoV2373 group and 2 deaths (both COVID-19) in the placebo group. There were no deaths reported in 2019nCoV-101 (interim report).
    All deaths were assessed as not related to trial vaccine. An overview of deaths occurring within clinical
    trials is provided in Table 31"
    CHMP assessment report
    https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/nuvaxovid-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf

  8. Anyone have any links to data regarding if one has Had Omicron infection already, And is being mandated to take the booster, how long after the natural infection should one wait until the third injection is given?

    1. I watched the video, I do not see anything there – when you talk about kill shots, it’s hard to take it seriously. Certainly the vaccines have well known side effects, but to say this was an attempt to wipe out a population is ridiculous.
      If they want to wipe out populations why concentrate their efforts on the western world where birth rates are so low?

      1. Oh, I think that the motive and power to reduce the world’s population by 90% is there. The question is whether the clotshots are just testing the water or the first step in a strategy. Perhaps the plan is to create a great deal of autoimmunity first, then keep mandating boosters.

        Dr. Arne Burkhardt showed that covid vaccine deaths are mainly caused by autoimmunity. T-lymphocytes had invaded the myocardium and caused arrhythmias leading to cardiac arrest. The more damage to the heart with each shot, the greater the chance of a fatal arrhythmia.

        You’ll also generally see increased damage to the vascular system, with more DVT and subsequent PEs. The damage from the clotshots is similar to the damage from covid, which should be no surprise, since the spike protein figures in damage in both.

        With the numbers showing no benefit for all-cause mortality, there must have been some reason for the approval of the clotshots.

      2. Because consumption and environmental impact are exponentially higher? Because a “one child” policy would not be acceptable?

  9. “What is less encouraging is that nine participants died in the vaccine group, compared with only five in the placebo group. The absolute numbers are small enough that the difference could easily be due to chance, but it is a potential signal of harm.”

    Perhaps relevant to note that the vaccine group had twice as many participants as the placebo group.

      1. Not really. The point of the vaccine is to prevent serious disease, hospitalization and death. It hasn’t done that.

  10. Sebastian, you cite evidence that the mRNA vaccines still protect from serious Covid requiring hospitalization. Can you comment on possible biases in the Swedish health data? Do we know how many of the unvaccinated in the ICU were not vaccinated because they are too I’ll to tolerate the shot? And also is there a healthy user bias (in vaccine uptake) in Swedes?

    1. I would love that data as well. I have a family friend undergoing chemo who cannot yet get any vaccine, but obviously is at massive risk of ending up in ICU with covid (vaccinated or unvaccianted). Where I live in Canada, they are demonizing the unvaccinated and some provinces are going to fine them – all the blame is placed on about 150 people in the ICU who are unvaccinated. Out of this incredibly small cohort, how many cannot be vaccinated? But we will never have access to that data, for I believe it would crush the narrative instantly.

      1. Which is worse of two evils? Being taxed for being vaccine-hesitant or being rounded up and put in quarantine camps/facilities as Down Under.

      1. One possibility is that they don’t, it just looks that way. Dr. Chetty speculates that the vaccines’ apparent initial protective effect is because the Vax inures you to an allergic reaction – they create a tolerance – and do not boost immunity to the S1 spike. Up until the 8th day all looks fine for the vaxxed, but if they’re the susceptible type, then from Day 8 on they desaturate fast and become worse than the unvaxxed, if I understood him correctly.

        Start at minute 20:

        https://rumble.com/vlohfe-dr.-richard-urso-comments-on-the-delta-variant-and-the-need-to-constantly-a.html

      2. Only because hospitals are playing tricks with category definitions. The unvaccinated category includes people who have been singly jabbed and all the jabbed who are still in the 2 week timeout period. The propaganda is everywhere.

        There were more vaccinated deaths than unvaccinated deaths in New South Wales today. 16 vaccinated versus 4 unvaccinated

        https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4029819/posts , where the source was the official New South Wales twitter account.

        Aside: If the throughput of vaccinated into ICUs is high and vaccinated are dying more quickly than unvaccinated, then it’s possible for ICUs to have more unvaccinated than vaccinated and vaccinated mortality to be higher.

      3. ”The difference is too massive to be due to confounders. Vaccinated are 12x less likely to be in ICU.”

        Is this number calculated on Covid-19 positive people in ICU or all people in ICU?

      4. ”The difference is too massive to be due to confounders. Vaccinated are 12x less likely to be in ICU.”

        Too massive to be due to confounders? As an example where a tiny percentage can have a great statistical weight, 0.46% of Americans live in nursing homes, but they are about 50% of covid deaths.

        Your major reasoning error is that you accept the binary categories and the lack of transparency in the statistics due to a false dichotomy–with two vaccinations and the two-week timeout period, there are SIX immunological categories, including unvaccinated-naive and unvaccinated-recovered–not two. If data is being obscured, the game isn’t science. In this case, it’s possibly propaganda, with the object being to deceive people into thinking that most of the covid ICU cases are the FULLY unvaccinated.

        When data is being obscured, should we be suspicious of the ones obscuring the data? Is obscuring data part of the science game or part of the propaganda game?

        Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

  11. Thank you very much for this analysis. Of course I would love to hear that it will be a safer option. But long term data is obviously impossible at this point. I am not sure if I take heart in opinions I have heard elsewhere that the Novavax trials seem to have less monkey-business going on than the Pfizer. Given a smaller company with more to risk re: reputation and fewer elites to cover up for, perhaps there may be some truth to this. As a younger, healthy individual with natural immunity, despite all the restrictions placed around me as an unclean unvaccinated person, I cannot bring myself to get vaccinated at 100% risk and 0% benefit. I may soon face fines in the country where I live, and restrictions may get worse, and there may come a day when I can resist no longer – I hope longer term data for Novavax is positive come that time!

  12. “vaccines do not reduce all-cause mortality, but rather produce genuine spikes in all-cause mortality shortly after vaccination”: p 25 of the paper by Neil, Fenton et al

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357778435_Official_mortality_data_for_England_suggest_systematic_miscategorisation_of_vaccine_status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination

    Any views? My own view is that it’s a good demonstration of the weakness of taking observational data at face value. I’ll entertain their conclusion unless some other workers manage to demonstrate that different conclusions can be drawn from the data with equal plausibility.

    P.S. on p8 they show evidence of what I interpret as error and dishonesty in some of the data, as drawn to their attention by a Dr Kremer.

    1. Yes, and the FDA report showing all-cause mortality for the Pfizer covid vaccine showed no benefit for the vaccine and the data tended towards harm, although underpowered to produce significance.

      All-cause mortality is the key metric.

  13. Just wondering who the participants were in the trials; are they individuals with comorbidities? If you test a substances safety on healthy individuals, when you know the pathogen itself is far more dangerous to unhealthy, older individuals, you are really not on a level playing field and unlikely to get a truly enlightening outcome/result.

    1. Check out page 155 of the EMA Assessment report:
      “Persons with stable comorbidities were included in the pivotal trials. In 2019nCoV-302, almost half of participants (45%) had a comorbidity or BMI greater than 30. In 2019nCoV-301, the majority of
      participants were overweight or obese (70.2%), 14% had a chronic lung disease, 8% had Diabetes
      mellitus type 2, 1% had cardiovascular disease and 0.6% had chronic kidney disease. There were
      lower frequencies and intensities of solicited local and systemic AEs after each vaccination among
      Nuvaxovid recipients with co-morbidities of obesity, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease,
      and diabetes mellitus type 2 than the overall population. Frailty has not been evaluated yet. Therefore,
      use in frail patients with co-morbidities (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD, diabetes,
      chronic neurological disease, cardiovascular disorders) has been identified as missing information in
      the safety specifications of the RMP.”
      https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/nuvaxovid-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf

  14. Sounds like the Author did not do their research…Novavax is the ONLY VACCINE shown to have virtually the same protection versus Omicron as with the Original strain…. https://ir.novavax.com/2021-12-22-Novavax-Announces-Initial-Omicron-Cross-Reactivity-Data-from-COVID-19-Vaccine-Booster-and-Adolescent-Studies
    “Third dose produced increased immune responses comparable to or exceeding levels associated with protection in Phase 3 clinical trials, with a 9.3-fold IgG rise and a 19.9-fold ACE2 inhibition increase after booster dose”

    Go ahead and read ALL the research done on the mRNA vaccines and any others….NONE can make that claim! None!

    1. That result is based on looking at surrogate markers. It’s basically meaningless, just like all the bazillion other studies looking at antibody titers. It tells us nothing about how effective the vaccine is in the real world. Also, you’re linking to a press release. Press releases are not valid sources of scientific information.

      1. It seems politicians get all their scientific information from press releases, because they
        know that’s what the majority of their voters align with. Media derived confirmation bias is killing us.

  15. The question that perplexes me is WHY all our governments seem to be so set on injecting everyone, even 2 yr-old babies at no risk of spread and barely any of suffering ill effects, after having initially pronounced the desired goal was herd immunity, estimated to be reached at 70% vaccination of the population? And why, when the advent of Omicron has indicated the virus might be on its way out, are some countries clamping down harder and more hysterically than ever with their punishments for daring to not comply with their orders? Where did this tyrannical mode of governing suddenly come from?

    1. That’s the 60,000 question.

      Many people have been forced to conclude that Evil is real, a consciously living force with purpose and intent. What were once crazy thoughts are less crazy now: outer space alien takeover, Deep State manipulation, mental parasites, global genocide, world governmental takeover by globalists, Chinese infiltration, US government attacking citizens, military collusion between countries, the New World Order, an upwelling of the collective subconscious, the alignment of wealthy and powerful interests, an alignment of stars, a tipping point due to unprecedented income and power inequality, Artificial Intelligence coming of age, Alien Ai working it’s plan – maybe all of these at the same time.

      We need to think exponentially to get ahead of what is happening. Nothing can be rejected as being too outré, to impossible. Our everyday evaluation of probabilities from the last millennium must be thrown aside. Something unthinkable and unimaginable is happening that makes no sense. There’s a high probability it has something to do with advanced technology we average people do not understand.

      The US military has population neuroweapons that seem alien in origin. Specifically, ultra-low dose/high specificity agents to target diplomats and local culture “hearts and minds.” Neuro-microbials with high neuro-psychiatric symptom clusters for public panic/public health dis-integrative effects. Gene-edited microbiologicals with novel morbidity/mortality profiles. High CNS aggregation lead/carbon-silicate nanofibers (network disrupters), neurovascular hemorrhagic agents for in-close and population use as “stroke epidemic” induction agents. 54% of taxes goes to the military – and they’ve been spending on much more than $600 hammers.

      Not making this up and not speculating. It comes from a DoD Neuroweapons presentation from 2017 – before the so-called virus. “Gain of Function” is an extreme understatement – it is no joke.

      What’s happening in top secret labs around the world is truly black magic and we’ve not yet experienced what’s been really cooked up for us. Covid and the Vaccines are test platforms, calibration experiments, for follow-on versions of a final solution. There appears to be a Deep State controlling all governments and they’re not targeting a specific country as in the old days but every person in the world – as crazy as that is.

      We may look back on the Virus and Vaccines with fondness.

    2. One simple explanation is regulatory capture of world governments by the handful of corporations that own the pharmaceutical (and media) industries. This includes owning political parties and the revolving door in bureaucrat/scientist hiring at reguluatory agencies. Look at the hundreds of billions of dollars to be extracted and the simultaneous building of surveillance and control mechanisms on populations.

  16. Hello Sebastian

    You write: “Having said that, my guess would be that it probably does protect against hospitalization and need for ICU treatment, just as the other approved vaccines do.”

    Could you give some references to research that shows that the other vaccines protect against “severee illness and death”, which is the expression I most often have seen in other literature where you write “hospitalization and need for ICU treatment”. Is there a significant difference between the expressions?
    Aapo

    1. Anything that doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. The vaccines cull the weak out of the herd.

      Doctors aren’t often reporting covid-vaccine-caused deaths for a variety of reasons:

      1) don’t want to be perceived as anti-vax
      2) believe in the vax
      3) have to feed their family and fear license revocation or retaliation by their employer
      4) fear social exclusion by colleagues
      5) don’t know what to look for
      6) haven’t seen guidance on how to recognize cvc deaths
      7) had their fingers crossed when they took the Hippocratic oath
      8) are being paid by pharma to promote the vaxxes
      9) don’t know the evidence because their sources of evidence are too limited

      1. I’d not necessarily say the vaccines cull out the weak in a population, because they are artificial mechanisms – they might be culling out the wrong people. The virus, on the other hand, would do so.

        10) It is difficult to use the VAERS system to report vaccine deaths. For example, if you don’t complete your report within 30 minutes it kicks you out and you have to start over.

  17. “Having said that, my guess would be that it probably does protect against hospitalization and need for ICU treatment, just as the other approved vaccines do. ”
    given all the confounders, the best data we will ever have IS the RCT data and as you admit, it does not show any meaningful decrease. I agree the data we have been shown globally does show at least a temporary decrease in risk of hospitalization but that data is full of confounders that will never be adequately addressed. Moreover, recent data shows efficacy for severe disease to be rapidly waning.

  18. I would like to see the rates of sickness and adverse outcomes in treatment and placebo groups compared to historic outcomes for the annual cold or flu. I’m wondering whether there’s a rebranding of the common cold going on here with these new variants.

    1. Well, it was interesting that the CDC recently decided to stop authorising the use of the PCR test because allegedly it was found not to be able to differentiate between covid and the flu. What does that suggest wrt the huge numbers of Covid infections/fatalities? That’s in addition to the PCR test being accused of unreliability if run at cycles above 30 — its inventor, Kary Mullis, repeatedly warned “it must not be used as a medical diagnostic, because the observer can find whatever they wish to find.”

      So many avenues unquestioned in this saga.

  19. ” Here in Sweden you are currently just as likely to get covid regardless of whether you’ve been vaccinated or not, but you’re still far less likely to end up in an ICU due to severe covid if you’ve been vaccinated.”

    What I am finding is that “unvaccinated” includes singly jabbed in 2 week timeout, singly jabbed, doubly jabbed in timeout, recovered unvaccinated, and immunologically naive unvaccinated.

    Are you really going to present the official propaganda–that includes vaccinated people in the unvaccinated group–uncritically? Let’s compare all these groups. How do the recovered unvaccinated group and immunologically-naive group compare with the fully vaccinated? That’s the key comparison.

    Recall that those who have recently been vaccinated are at risk for more severe disease. So let’s also compare them with the fully vaccinated and with the two unvaccinated groups. These are _all_ different immunological categories and it is important to compare them all.

    Are those statistics available? If not, why don’t you explain the situation better?

    1. Totally agree – to state unequivocally the the science is in, you are 12 times more likely to end up in the ICU if unvaccinated just does not make sense. Without knowing how they classify “unvaccinated” and whether they were unvaccinated because the had cancer or something like that makes it totally misleading.

      In NSW Australia you can find statistics which blow this idea out of the water. And we still don’t know what they mean by unvaccinated as I wrote before.

      COVID-19 patients in hospital, as at 9 Jan,2022 2,030
      Percentage who were unvaccinated 28.8%
      Percentage who were double vaccinated 68.9%

      COVID-19 patients in intensive care units (ICUs), as at 9 Jan,2022 159
      Percentage who were unvaccinated 49.1%
      Percentage who were double vaccinated 50.3%

      If you don’t believe me check out the official web page
      https://aci.health.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/698804/20220113-COVID-19-Monitor.pdf

      Dr Rushworth, you seem like a great guy but are you willing to take back this ridiculous assertion?
      “The difference is too massive to be due to confounders. Vaccinated are 12x less likely to be in ICU.”

      1. The 12x is based on the Swedish data. For the most recent week that number is 11x, not 12x, so sorry about that. You need to account for the fact that many more people are vaccinated than unvaccinated. Additionally, risk groups, such as people with cancer, are more likely to be vaccinated, not less likely, so that should make the vaccines seem less effective at preventing severe disease, not more effective. Here in Sweden the unvaccinated in ICU are on average ten years younger than the vaccinated.

      2. Dr. Rushworth,

        If the majority of the “unvaccinated” have recently been jabbed, they will be more susceptible to severe covid than if they had not been jabbed. It will be exactly like a relapse where the immune system is weak.

        Are you querying the people in ICU to see if they have been jabbed? If the choice in the electronic medical chart is binary (you would know the answer to this question–is the choice binary?)–unvaccinated or vaccinated–which bag will get those in the vaccinated 2 week timeout period? I would imagine that it is not safe for you to ask for more info about vaccination categories. The hospital with which I am familiar only has a binary choice for vaccination status and my vascular surgeon buddy calls the hospital’s ICU vaccination statistics “a pack of lies” because of the deception that is present due to limiting category choices to binary. It would not surprise me that the vast majority of covid patients in the ICU were in a vaccinated 2 week timeout period. And being younger wouldn’t be surprising, either.

        What percent of those in ICU are previously recovered, unvaccinated? Are most of those in the ICU transfers from other hospitals? Maybe transferred from less exposed rural areas, whereas those in the ICU who are vaccinated are from Stockholm? We saw that in my town–the unvaccinated were from less exposed rural areas, while the vaccinated are from in town. And now the fully vaccinated percent in the hospital is trending higher, even considering only binary categories. Vaccination is less common, so there will be fewer people in the post-vaccination two-week timeout period. So the percent of “unvaccinated” in the hospital will be declining.

        If you don’t get the definitions right, the statistics will be worthless.

      3. HI Sebastian,

        Is there data anywhere (Sweden or otherwise) that shows what the risk of death and hospitalization are in unvaccinated vs vaccinated in the 18-30 year old age group excluding people with pre-existing conditions?

        Thank you.

    2. There you have it! I fully agree with you! It is a pity that the author of this article (and blog) did not address your sensible and valuable comments…

    3. The definition of vaccinated in the Swedish statistics is someone who has gotten at least two vaccine doses, and who got the second dose more than two weeks ago. There is essentially no-one in Sweden at the moment who got the second dose less than two weeks ago, so they are not a meaningful part of the statistics. The singly jabbed group is bigger but still small, only 3.5% of the adult population, and is therefore also too small to meaningfully affect the statistics, although if anything the fact that they are included in the unvaccinated group should make the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated appear smaller, not bigger, since a single dose likely provides at least some protection.

      1. thank you for your responses to my comments. You contend that people with Cancer are more likely, not less likely to want to be vaccinated- where is the evidence of that? I personally know of 2 people who said they were scared to get jabbed because of their illnesses.

        I think that until you can get data on each patient in hospital and their comorbidites you can’t say definitively unvaccinated are more likely to suffer less serious disease and death.
        The unvaccinated being ten years younger on average is an interesting statistic but again if we don’t know the comorbidities it could be just a coincidence.

        What is so sad to me, is we were promised this vaccine would protect the ten years older folks who are in the ICU – when officials are confronted the mantra is “there will always be breakthrough cases” or “they had comorbidities”

        You can say more are vaccinated therefore the proportion means unvaccinated are more at risk – I see some logic, but again we don’t have all the information at our fingertips and what the NSW Australia numbers show seems quite staggering when you think about how effective these vaccines were supposed to be. And we haven’t even spoken about all the damage they have caused, deaths, heart issues, blood clots. The CDC spokesman joked that VAERS reports on people who got vaccinated then died two days later in a car accident. She lied about VAERS being mandatory reporting.

      2. These two weeks can seriously skew the data on comparing vac with no-vac (or Novak), particularly because we now know that people’s immune systems are weakened after vaccination, and they are more likely to get covid and end up in hospital during that period. And then they move the goalposts to 28 days in the UK, ( https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1038404/Technical_Briefing_30.pdf ) presumably to include more no-vac people in the worse looking effectivity statistics.

        In an Israeli safety study ( https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2110475 ) of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, it was estimated that with the Omikron variant, the benefits of vaccine only outweigh the disadvantages of the vaccine after 42 days. Vaccine protection decreases in strength after a few months, so in the UK and Israel they suggest booster shots every three months. When you give a new booster every three months, there is only a relatively short period in which the vaccines are effective.

        And Sebastian, what about the announcements recently by the EMA and WHO, advising against endless booster shots, apparently because they will affect people’s immune systems negatively? This raises so many questions. Is this only with booster shots, and not the first two? Why do they come out with this now? On what data is this based? Is this the first hint of long-term adverse side-effects of the vaccines?

        And what can one say in this context of the campaigns by various governments threatening to degrade people’s status to no-vac if they don’t take boosters, and therewith exclude them from much of public life, or force them to pay fines, and so on? Has the world really gone mad?

      3. “There is essentially no-one in Sweden at the moment who got the second dose less than two weeks ago.”

        It’s amazing how a tiny fraction of the population can have a huge impact on a certain category of national statistics.

        Let’s assume that 1% of the population are in the vaccine timeout period at any given time, with people boosting themselves ad hoc, vaccinating for travel, employment, etc. In Sweden, that would be 0.01 x 10 million, or 100,000 people. Let’s assume that 30% of them contract covid while in the timeout period–that would be 30,000 people. Then a third of them are hospitalized because their immune systems were compromised by the vaccine, so that’s 9,000 people.

        Some people will be immunologically-naive who contract covid (1% ?) and will be hospitalized (2.5%). 0.1 x 10 million x 0.025 = 2500 people

        Now let’s consider the fully vaccinated case. How many fully-vaccinated people are hospitalized for covid? Maybe 1,000? And the previously recovered, unvaccinated will be maybe half that?

        The “unvaccinated” group will contain 9,000 + 2500 + 500 = 12,000

        The (fully) vaccinated group will contain 1,000

        It’s all just fantasy numbers, but it shows the plausibility of the argument. The statistics are meaningless if you don’t keep track of different immunological groups. Worse than meaningless, because it’s all just propaganda to drive vaccine mandates.

      4. “There is essentially no-one in Sweden at the moment who got the second dose less than two weeks ago.”

        About 6% of Swedes are in the post-vax 2 week waiting period at any given time. That’s 600,000 people. The variance is about 100k.

        Check out the daily covid vaccine graph after selecting Sweden and disabling the other countries at https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

      5. Google translate has a 1,000 character maximum. Translating an entire page is tedious.

        Public health authorities and hospitals are doing funny business with statistics.

        A local hospital reported that a majority of covid patients were “unvaccinated”–that 30/70 covid patients were (fully) vaccinated. (There was no report for ICU patients, so likely the numbers there didn’t favor the vaccination agenda. Certainly, if the ICU numbers had been 12:1, it would have been reported.)

        4:3 “unvaccinated”/(fully) vaccinated USA hospitalized covid patients is nowhere near Sweden’s 12:1 ICU covid patients ratio. That’s a multiple sigma difference, maybe because of hospital/ICU or Sweden/USA. Maybe if we compare hospitalization numbers, we could resolve the difference, at least a little.

        What is the hospitalization percent for “unvaccinated” in Sweden?

  20. Where is the proof that one is less likely to suffer seriously if vaccinated – it makes no sense – if the vaccine does not prevent infection or passing it on, how is it that your symptoms are magically less deadly. For a disease with more than 99% survival rate? Did not a recent study from Australia totally debunk this notion?

  21. Even with the disappointing data, I am still more open to get a Novavax shot than one of the mRNA ones. At least this is a vaccination (i.e. injecting the irritant directly) rather than an instruction to my own cells to produce this poxy spike protein.
    The think that the vaccinations really protect against is discrimination, so I suppose sooner or later I will have to get one.

    1. Try and stay strong – the discrimination is a product of corrupt politicians, big tech and media caving in to big pharma which a a major source of their funding. The Leftists like to talk about a “manufactured crisis” because that is how they think. And people like Bill Gates that profit from vaccinations.
      The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) has bankrolled hundreds of media organisations to the tune of almost $319 million in several countries, according to more than 30,000 grants examined by American news website MintPress News. The recipients include CNN, NBC, NPR, PBS, The Atlantic, BBC, The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Daily Telegraph, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, El País and Al Jazeera.
      So no wonder journalists are not interested in the truth about MRNA vaccines. We have to resist and vote them out of power.

  22. Thank you again Dr Rushworth. Always very informative!

    I am not sure why someone who refuses the adeno-vector and mrna vaccines would consider novavax But,I guess, some of them will take but most will not. So not exactly a game changer…

    Anyway, I got a bit curious about Indonesia. I remember they had a rough Delta wave alongside with India during their winter/wet period .
    But so far no Omicron wave yet? Seasonal effect I suppose?

    1. “I am not sure why someone who refuses the adeno-vector and mrna vaccines would consider novavax But,I guess, some of them will take but most will not. So not exactly a game changer…”

      Because it is a traditional vaccine rather experimental technology? The mRNA and viral vector shots are instructions to your own cells to produce this spike protein. Which cells, where are they, how much do they produce and what happens to them subsequently? With Novavax, you know exactly how much spike protein you are injected with and where it is. This whole mRNA/vector technology looks pretty messy to me. And I know plenty of people who think like me.

      1. Yeah, I know that argument… But I just think the most of those obecting the mrna/adeno vaccines are now “entrenched” in the belief that a covid vaccine is not necessary in the first place and wont change their minds…
        Happy to be wrong about this.

      2. Kalle,

        At this point, why does anyone think that covid is a major problem for most of the population? Certainly there is no rush to take any covid vaccines. Sure, we see a covid threat to a small fraction of our population. There are always a tiny percent who will be susceptible to respiratory disease because of dementia/vitamin D deficiency/malnutrition.

        “Malnutrition in care home residents with dementia”

        https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-014-0006-6

        ” Vitamin D deficiency in elderly people in Swedish nursing homes is associated with increased mortality ”

        https://eje.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/eje/170/5/667.xml

        Vitamin D deficiency is exceedingly common in nursing homes (mean of 40 nM/liter). People with dementia won’t supplement with vitamin D in winter.

        What is the ICU census for covid in all of the hospitals in Sweden? 500? For a nation of ten million, that is a mole hill. I’d expect congestive heart failure to be a much bigger problem.

        Let long term studies on vaccines proceed and then I will make up my mind whether or not to take a vaccine based on the data and my risk/benefit.

      3. I agree… It shouldn’t be a very interesting topic to discuss but here we are anyway 🙂

        Latest number from Swedish ICU, 19 Jan, with Covid-19 is 106.
        I recall total number of ICU beds are 550 (excl various contingency plans such as military and makeshift solutions). About 100 beds are currently free.

      4. The reason for my interest in the vaccines is because of vaccine mandates, which are still in play in the US. Covid is no longer very interesting and looks to be endemic and seasonal now. Vitamin D’s role in immunity is still of interest.

        The immunological category definitions are also interesting to me, in a perverse way. It looks like the health authorities are playing a shell game with the definitions. It was _very important_ to not count those in the waiting period as vaccinated, but it’s trivial to count them as unvaccinated, somehow. I smell a fish–a very rotten fish.

        If vaccination puts people at increased risk during a waiting period, relative to the risk when they were unvaccinated, and something happens to them, it seems to me that the harm should be put in the vaccinated column.

        Cheating in statistics most often happens with categories and definitions.

  23. The trouble with these (and all flu vaccines) is that antibodies (IgG) produced by vax lie dormant in the blood. The virus enters the airways and is dealt with by the mucosal system IgA a/bodies as well as t cells. So first port of call is natural immunity not the vax. This why vax/unvax transmit infect the same. Only the people who get really ill, where the virus enters the bloodstream via alveoli will the vax do anything. And even then having lots of IgG a/bodies isn’t necessarily a good thing because (unlike IgA) these a/bodies are inflammatory.

  24. About people in the ICU with covid. I have heard and read that in sweden they count 3 or less in ICU with covid as unvaccinated/ hospital. If that’s true it would really twist statistics around. How is the case in other countries?

    1. Didnt FoHM or SoS confirm in the thursday press conference that they still consider 2 shots as fully vaccinated?

    2. Of the Covid-19 patients in intensive care, the majority are no doubt vaccinated
      Those who have only been vaccinated once are counted as unvaccinated. Even those who have recently received their second dose and those who have recently received their third dose are considered unvaccinated.
      In addition, the health service has made an outstanding somersault by creating the rule that all COVID-19 patients are counted as unvaccinated if there are fewer than three COVID-19 cases in an intensive care unit.
      At present (January 18, 2022), approximately 110 Covid cases are cared for in intensive care units in Sweden. There are 83 intensive care units in Sweden. In some, of course, there are more and in others fewer. But that means each unit currently cares for an average of 1.2 COVID-19 cases.
      The uncertainty is great, but with the above calculation method, one can just as easily assume that most people who are cared for in the intensive care units are vaccinated. The majority of the population is vaccinated in Sweden, and we know that they become as easily infected as the unvaccinated.
      Therefore, one cannot completely trust recurring headlines like this one from TT. “Majority of unvaccinated covid patients in intensive care.”
      https://www.nyteknik.se/samhalle/majoritet-ovaccinerade-covid-patienter-som-intensivvardas-7026365
      https://omni.se/ovaccinerade-patienter-ar-i-majoritet-pa-iva/a/BjvxzE
      https://afp.omni.se/biden-warns-of-winter-of-death-for-unvaccinated-as-omicron-spreads/a/rEGrze

      From email correspondence with Swedish Public Health agency (FHM) (svarstjanst@folkhalsomyndigheten.se)

      “Question 1 – What is your definition of vaccinated?
      Answer 1 – “At present, people who have been vaccinated with two and three doses of vaccine against covid- 19 are considered vaccinated. It must have been at least two weeks since the last dose was given. ”

      Question 2 – Is it true that if there are 3 or fewer in an IVA ward, everyone is counted as unvaccinated due to patient confidentiality so as not to reveal anyone’s identity?
      Answer 2 – “It is in some diagrams where in some cases we cannot show all the data because there is a risk of revealing the identity of individuals when the data is shown per week. That is, a reader could possibly understand that some individual was not vaccinated if only a few people were cared for at IVA that week. ”

      So, to sum up

      1 vaccine = unvaccinated
      2 vaccines but 14 days have not passed = Unvaccinated
      3 vaccines but 14 days have not passed = Unvaccinated
      3 or fewer who are cared for at an ICU ward = Unvaccinated”

      Note: There are 93 ICUs in Sweden. About 1000 patients are presently at ICUs with the diagnosis COVID-19 in the whole country. In most of the ICUs the number of COVID-patients must therefore be less than three and all these “three or less” are registered as “unvaccinated”.

      1. I interprer their response as when they present data or diagrams for the whole country, the number of vaçcinated vs unvaccinate is accurate. But, in cases where the diagrams show very few cases, such as from a single ICU(?) then they mask them all as unvaccinated for privacy reasons.

  25. Yes, since there are 83 ICU:s in Sweden most of them would have less than three COVID-19 patients at present. So most patients would therefore be counted as unvaccinated whether vaccinated or not. To me this seems really peculiar. Sebastian, could you get accurate information on this? And as I asked before – references to research that show that vaccinated are protected from serious illness and death…..

    1. It sounds very strange. So the claim is that if there are less than three people in an ICU with covid they would automatically be counted as unvaccinated? I highly doubt that’s true. Anecdotally, what I’ve been hearing from ICU doctors I’ve spoken to at the hospital I work, most in the ICU are unvaccinated, which is in line with what the official statistics are saying.

      1. The official explanation for calling all the cases “unvaccinated” when there are less than three vaccinated is for health privacy reasons.

        Yes, it distorts the statistics. Makes them less certain. Adds confusion. Part of the plan.

  26. My concern is also about the assertion: “…you’re still far less likely to end up in an ICU due to severe covid if you’ve been vaccinated. ” This is one of the most contentious issues regarding COVID-19 vaccination. A link was provided to a public health survey in Sweden showing 57% unvaccinated in ICU’s during “week 1”. By itself, that is not evidence of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness for preventing ICU admission – no adjustments etc.

  27. What is the adjuvant in Novavax (and in the other vacines)?
    Exley at Keene University has documented the dangers of commonly used Aluminum-containing adjuvants, and the devious clinical trials in which the control “placebo” injection also contained the adjuvant, masking the toxicity of the latter

  28. Finns det studier på i vilken omfattning de som genomgått infektionen kan insjukna på nytt i covid-19? Jag vill tro att naturlig immunitet ger ett brett och gott skydd men folk jag talar med hävdar att man för säkerhets skull ändå bör ta vaccinet. Att man så att säga boostar immunförsvaret. Vilket låter märkligt för mig! (Förutom att det ger mig fullt tillträde till samhället)

  29. Thanks for the update. Did you look into the supplementary material of https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.05.21264567v1

    They report quite a couple of cerebrovascular accidents (7 in V group, 1 in (half smaller) placebo group). This makes me somewhat concerned, since it is 1 in 3000 participants, and higher than what I would expect from the baseline rate.

    It would be great to hear an expert opinion on this issue, since other than that it looks like a great vaccine.

  30. Under duress, I would prefer a traditional vaccine like Covax-19 developed in South Australia by Dr Petrovsky and his team; however, the Aus. govt. won’t approve or allow use due to restrictive contracts signed with the big 4.

  31. Is this right? If you are unvaccinated your chance of not dying is say 98%. But if you are vaccinated it goes up to 99% roughly. So the difference is 1% say.
    But if you have a 4 or more health issues you are say 73% more likely to die. So if the you have less than 4 health issues, taking the vaccination only decreases the chance of dying by say .27% or are I missing something?

  32. PLEASE consider how if in 39K subjects, NO ONE falls ill enough to be hospitalized, then why do we need to have ANY vaccine at all? Omicron morbidity is so low compared to earlier strains, and I understand there may be a future mutation which may be have higher morbidity and mortality, but seriously, shouldn’t we just work on 100% NONHARMFUL measures such as sun, exercise, weight loss, VIT D to lessen the chance of contracting or developing severe disease. If they DO develop it, then add Zinc, ASA if not on DOAC already, Melatonin until better and sinus flushes/throat gargles (for 2-3d)? So much overreaction to woeful medical mismanagement to this point. We now KNOW what to do and not to do for this pathogen. We need to stop this insanity and get on with our lives. My family, nearly all our friends have already had this illness with MILD symptoms only, and are now immune. There is minimal masking where we live, I haven’t worn a mask in 18 months outside of work (policy and respect for my patients). I work primary care in Geriatrics, I have roughly 900 on my panel, the vast majority have multiple comorbidities and are > 65 y/o, I encourage vax for them, but many had Covid prior to availability or elect to decline. MANY have had COVID, and I have only had 1 fatality so far. I stress the above interventions to all. You need to FOLLOW these patients closely (daily RN phone call ALONE reduces hospitalization by 25% in the Mexico City study, care and reassurance go a long way), and then offer early tx if getting more ill by day 3-5. I am unable to use IVM or HCQ, but EARLY steroids, Antibx, inhalers or nebs work well enough for most. A few end up hospitalized despite, but they survive. Early care/treatment is the ticket. My heart breaks for those who do not dare see their families yet, no one should spend the last years of their lives in self-imposed solitary confinement due to irrational fear planted by the messaging of our governments and media, just shameful.

    1. I agree, I just saw a report from a Nurse in a hospital in Israel, she said there is not one single case of Omicron on a ventilator, or in ICU yet the news is still reporting that way because they also have Omicron. One was in a car accident, the other has a brain tumor not related to Omicron. She says they have been dealing with it for long enough to know it is not deadly. Yet my daughter in Israel has to have her 4 year old stay at home for a week in isolation because one of the teachers had Omicron. This is destroying society! Particularly tragic for elderly isolated from thier loved ones in the few years they have left.

    2. I agree with your approach. What would you use for “sinus flushes/throat gargles (for 2-3d)”? Salt solution (which I do already)? Iodine (not available over the counter in UK, sadly)? HOCl?

      1. I made the next nasal spray mix:
        • Common salt (for isotonic solution) – 0.1 g ;
        • Glycerin (for viscosity and virus capture) – 50 drops;
        • Aloe juice (to block virus docking) – 20 drops;
        • Shampoo Johnson’s baby™ (surfactant to dissolve the lipid protection of the virus) – 2 drops ;
        • Lugol’s solution (to inactivate the virus) – 2 drops; alternatives – eucalyptus oil – 1 drop , propolis – 10 drops;
        • Distilled water – 6 ml;
        • Colloidal silver (as a preservative) – 5 drops.

  33. “Waiting these two weeks is crucial. For all the vaccines, our immune systems aren’t as prepared to stop an infection or avoid severe disease (the type that sends people to the hospital or kills) until those two weeks elapse.”

    “or avoid severe disease…” Looks like this info is provided by “Dr. Vince Silenzio, an M.D. and professor in the Rutgers School of Public Health.” Looks like his specialty is family medicine and he has a master’s degree in public health.

    https://mashable.com/article/vaccines-covid-how-long-fully-vaccinated

    I would like to hear from a vaccinologist or immunologist about this question and about how likely it is that vaccinated people in the two-week time period are to 1) become infected, 2) become hospitalized, and 3) be transferred to the ICU. I think we need to know both absolute and relative risk for these events.

    It seems suspicious to me that vaccinated people in the two week timeout period are lumped into the “unvaccinated” category instead of being tracked separately by public health. Am I the only one who is suspicious?

    If vaccines put you at risk for severe disease during a waiting period, shouldn’t that be part of the risk analysis for vaccination?

    Why is the two-week waiting period after vaccination even mentioned by public health officials if the two-week waiting period is trivial? If the statistics for severe disease for the two-week waiting period are trivial, why not include those numbers in the “vaccinated” category?

    What is the weekly number of covid vaccinations in Sweden? What is the weekly number of “unvaccinated” people transferred into the ICU with covid infections in Sweden? Is there a matching trend? (Note that number of people in ICUs doesn’t match the number of people transferred in to ICUs and isn’t a useful surrogate.)

      1. An interesting theory… I think it will be difficult to find what you are looking for from broad national statistics. But do let us know if you find something…

        For discussion:
        The bulk of the swedish population were vaccinated during the late spring into middle of the autumn and during this time there was basically no spread of the virus and “few” reported deaths.
        About 1500 from April to November 2021. During the same period in 2020 something like 5000 covid deaths were reported.

        One reason for that is that Sweden had only a minimal delta wave unlike many of the neighbouring countries.

        Also, all-cause mortality in Sweden 2021 is believed to be the lowest in a long time (ever?). No official statistics is available yet so take this statement with a truckload of salt…

      2. Get this please, unvaccinated people in Swe been has been pretty stable for awhile. Those getting second shot are 12-16 years. Rest getting vaccinated is 3rd shot.

      3. Jonas,

        “Get this please, unvaccinated people in Swe been [sic] has been pretty stable for awhile. Those getting second shot are 12-16 years….”

        Those getting the second vaccination who are still in the two week waiting period count in the “unvaccinated” statistics.

        Why would people who were fully unvaccinated and are against the vaccines take them now? For work or travel.

        I’m sure that some people are getting vaccinated so that they can travel or work who were fully unvaccinated. Also some people are getting their second vaccination now so that they can travel or work. The percent fully vaccinated will tend to creep up because of desire to work or travel.

  34. Thanks Sebastien, interesting analysis and useful information for me. I’ve been hoping that the Novavax would be available in Australia and if I am coerced into getting a ‘booster’ then I could request Novavax, or even better the similar Covax-19 that Nikolai Petrovsky has developed (if I am going to be an experimental animal, then I want to be one for the home team).

    I had hoped that Novavax might be much better than the mRNA jabs, but I knew it was wishful thinking. At least it may not be worse. Plan B is to French kiss the first friend who stops by with Omicron, but at the rate people are getting the omicron sniffles, I may not need to be so rude.

    1. Yes, the main function of the vaccines is to protect against discrimination. That is why I am waiting to get Novavaxed.

  35. Hi Dr. S,
    I just wondered if you were aware of the recent figures published by the UK ONS on “Deaths from COVID-19 with no other underlying causes”?
    While the government and the media are reporting over 150,000 deaths in the UK (“within 28 days of a positive test”) the ONS have admitted in a Freedom of Information request, that the number with no underlying causes is just 17,000.
    Here’s a link –
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/deathsfromcovid19withnootherunderlyingcauses
    Regards,
    Mark
    (Apologies, I think I initially replied to someone else’s post by mistake)

  36. Third month in a row, the vaccinated covid deaths outnumber the “unvaccinated.”

    “#3 read story of `21: Covid kills more vaxxed Vermonters than unvaxxed for third straight month (November 30)”

    https://vermontdailychronicle.com/2021/12/31/3-read-story-of-21-covid-kills-more-vaxxed-vermonters-than-unvaxxed-for-third-straight-month-november-30/

    But the death rate among the “unvaccinated” was higher. But that category isn’t limited to the fully unvaccinated. The “unvaccinated” category includes those with one dose and the vaccinated who are in the two week waiting period.

    Shouldn’t covid deaths among the partially vaccinated be counted against the vaccines? Especially if the vaccines made them highly vulnerable during the two week waiting period?

    Think about those working in ICUs and see “unvaccinated” on a patient’s chart. Those people are going to think that the patient is fully unvaccinated, not partly vaccinated. The fact that the patient may have been in the two week waiting period post vaccination where the patient was highly vulnerable probably won’t even cross the minds of the ICU staff. Thus are people fooled by propaganda created by the clever manipulation of categories.

    1. There is no 2 week vulnerable period. At least none that science back up. The only 2 week period you have is after the second and/or third shot to get max effect from the vaccine, measured in antibodies.

      Unless you have the 2nd shot you are not done. Many other vaccines require multiple shots and boosters. Nothing new.

      Since approx 80% are fully vaccinated the remaining 20 % still counts for way to many deaths and ICU spots considering they are so few.
      Also the group that are vaccinated most likely are much older and sicker as well, because these people tend to get vaccinated in a higher degree.

      Also unvaccinated people in ICU tend to be a lot younger then vaccinated.

      Dr Rushworth explained this further up in this thread.

      1. Do vitamin D levels drop when the immune system begins to respond to an infection? Yes

        Why do they drop? The immune system uses vitamin D to signal its receptors.

        Why are relapses so nasty? Vitamin D levels are diminished and the immune system has lost some competence.

        Same is true for zinc and infection.

        Would you expect vitamin D levels to drop when the immune system begins to respond to a vaccination?

      2. Remember the story about German residents in a nursing home dying of covid shortly after having been vaccinated?

        https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/six-residents-in-a-german-nursing-home-died-from-covid-19-not-from-vaccines/

        Vaccine-induced immune incompetence was likely a contributing factor in their deaths and their deaths should be attributed to the vaccines, seems to me.

        Children’s Health Defense was closer to the truth than the fact checker.

      3. Wrong. The immune system is depressed after vaccination leaving people more vulnerable to any infection not just covid. People should be warned about this so as to take extra care with social distancing etc. The stats show massive rises in many countries in covid cases as vaccine roll outs start. Immune system depression after vaccination has been known about for years . That is why flu vaccines are given before flu season starts. Vaccinating in the middle of a pandemic will always have this effect but basic immunology seems to have been thrown out the window with covid.

      4. 80% of Vermont fully vaccinated – 91% have had at least one dose. When we see these numbers is it excluding children? You can play with numbers but you can’t deny the so called Vaccine is not working in Vermont.
        As someone else reported from Alberta Canada people with adverse reactions to the vaccine in hospital are counted as Covid patients. That could account for those in Intensive Care on average being 10 years younger when “unvaccinated”
        Whatever the case, unless we are given full transparent details on all the data, comorbities, within 14 days and so on we are all just speculation. I know of one person with Cancer who was advised by doctor not to get vaccinated and he got her Ivermectin. Yet Dr Rushworth reasons that Cancer patients are MORE likely to want the vaccine. It may be true, again we don’t have transparency to that data.
        The CD directory just came out with the statement that 75% of Covid deaths were those with at least 4 comorbidites. Asked about VAERS she joked that it counted people who had a car accident shortly after the vaccine. She also lied that it was a compulsory reporting system. When the head of the CDC flat out lies to us you can’t help but be skeptical about the whole thing. It’s actually the other way around, people whose death was recorded at Covid may have entered hospital with serious other conditions and then they discovered also infected. Hospitals that get bonuses for Covid patients coerced Doctors to report deaths as Covid. They all have families and mortgages so they can’t risk losing their jobs

      1. What they forgot to pinpoint is the absolute massive protection against hospitalization and death the vaccines provide after 3rd shot compared to people in other groups. Read the full report, including foltnotes and get enlightened!

      2. Jonas,

        “What they forgot to pinpoint is the absolute massive protection against hospitalization and death the vaccines provide after 3rd shot compared to people in other groups. Read the full report, including foltnotes and get enlightened!”

        Enlighten yourself. Some of us pay attention to trends, like the waning immunity of vaccines. And we also are concerned about a lack of transparency by pharma, which refuses to release the trial raw data, which we suspect will show a high incidence of adverse events as well as a lack of protection from covid. We already _know_ that the Pfizer covid vaccine does not provide a benefit as regards all-cause mortality. (That’s _know_, not “suspect”.)

        And we note that there is no official guidance anywhere about how to investigate covid vaccine deaths, which means that either technical or moral incompetence is at work. Are you going to argue that no guidance is necessary in order to conduct autopsies on suspected deaths from a novel _experimental_ vaccine, for which pathologists are untrained and there are no continuing education courses?

        Seriously, dude…

  37. Throughout the pandemic your commentary has been refreshing; informed by frontline experience and science. I wonder if you are willing and able to comment on Sweden’s current experience with Covid – in particular whether you believe Sweden has herd immunity and what the impacts of Omicron are on that?

  38. The Alberta government has accidentally released data about those in the two-week waiting period post vaccination:

    “According to its latest Covid-19 update, the Alberta Government admitted to following the fraudulent standard that was in use by vaccine manufacturers during clinical trials – which is to ignore the adverse outcomes, including Covid infection, hospitalizations, and deaths, for fourteen days after vaccine administration – no matter how many doses they have had.”

    Most of the covid deaths in the vaccinated group occurred within two weeks of vaccination and were getting added to the “unvaccinated” group.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/alberta-canada-inadvertently-published-quickly-deleted-health-data-exposing-half-vaccinated-deaths-counted-unvaccinated/

    The accidental release was archived.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20220107094256/https://www.alberta.ca/stats/covid-19-alberta-statistics.htm#vaccine-outcomes

    And note that this doesn’t even begin to consider those directly harmed by covid vaccines independent of covid.

    Fool me once….

  39. Sebastian, what about making a video interview with Dr Peter Gøtzsche? I have not heard much about him during the pandemic but today I noticed that he joined a group called “Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency” (PHMPT), in their
    Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in August 2021. Search for the group and you will notice that he signed. Perhaps you could talk about freedom of medical information, the Pfizer trials, the Hippocratic oath, corporate greed?

  40. Interesting interview here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPnyzvO7J4
    At around 104 minutes in, Prof. Clancey describes exactly the reason why I have been holding out on the mRNA shots, and why the protein based vaccinations like Novavax seem preferable. So that was not just my ignorance-based intuition, this guy has qualifications up the wazoo and feels the same way.

  41. Thanks for the clarification on 40 mins.
    The video is one hour and 4 mins – I make that 64 mins long 🙂
    Interesting video, thanks for sharing

  42. Here we have a prospective study of acute phase pharmacokinetics of vitamin D to provide the theoretical foundation for a proposed similar impact by vaccines.

    “Vitamin D kinetics in the acute phase of critical illness: A prospective observational study”

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28968524/

    ” Purpose: The objective of this study was to assess the vitamin D kinetics in critically ill patients by performing periodic serum vitamin D measurements in short time intervals in the initial phase of a critical illness.

    Materials and methods: We performed vitamin D serum measurements: at admission and then in 12-hour time intervals. The minimum number of vitamin D measurements was 4, and the maximum was 8 per patient.

    Results: A total of 363 patients were evaluated for participation, and 20 met the inclusion criteria. All patients had an initial serum vitamin D level between 10.6 and 39ng/mL. Nineteen patients had vitamin D levels between 10 and 30ng/mL, which means that they had vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency, and only one patient had a normal vitamin D serum plasma level. We observed that the median of the vitamin D level decreases until the fourth measurement then stabilizes around the 4th and 5th measurement and then appears to increase unevenly. The highest drop is at the very beginning. ”

    Would we expect a different course for vitamin D pharmacokinetics after vaccination than after infection? If so, why?

    And why has no one yet studied this???

    1. ”And why has no one yet studied this???”

      Maybe beacause there is a huge difference in critical illness and vaccination?

  43. Of course there is. My point was the difference between critical illness and getting vaccinated is so huge so no one has even thoughtof it.

    Also the study was done to see if you from D vitamin levels could tell the severness of the illness. Not to see if levels dropped if you are ill.

    1. “My point was the difference between critical illness and getting vaccinated is so huge so no one has even thoughtof it.”

      Maybe doctors who think “outside the box” have thought of it and are recommending supplementing with vitamin D in winter as a consequence. And recommending supplementing with 25OHD if getting vaccinated.

      Pharma researchers likely haven’t thought of it.

  44. I have Omicron right (well, HAD I suppose since the test was a week ago). So, since my body has dealt with Omicron, can I consider myself vaccinated? I would think so, as the whole point of vaccination is to get the immune system to react to a virus or part of it. Which clearly my immune system has done now. So do I even need to bother thinking about these vaccines (other than as protection against discrimination?) Or is Omicron not good enough?

  45. 95% UNvaccinated in Illinois ICUs per the governor

    40% vaccinated covid deaths in Illinois over the last 4 weeks

    Found it here:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/nearly-40-all-illinois-covid-deaths-last-month-are-breakthroughs-what-gives

    Raw breakthrough data here:

    https://dph.illinois.gov/covid19/vaccine/vaccine-breakthrough.html

    (Sorry, you have to add the daily data manually.)

    Total covid mortality data here:

    https://dph.illinois.gov/covid19/data/statewide-metrics.html

    I think that the breakthrough death numbers are cumulative. That means 363 breakthrough deaths for the last week and 863 total covid deaths for a current value of 42% breakthrough deaths.

    How does this happen?

    A. Is the governor relying on old data?

    B. Are the unvaccinated being kept on indefinite life support in ICUs and the vaccinated allowed to die quickly or are hospitals lying about the ICU statistics?

    I vote for A.

    Looks like breakthrough deaths are trending upwards in representation in covid deaths…

    Delta from previous week

    37, 110, 128, 116, 153, 210, 281, 363

    That’s about a 1000% increase in two months.

    Daily covid deaths are showing a 600% increase over the same time period. Looks like breakthroughs are trending higher in representation in covid deaths.

  46. We all know Illinois is the most corrupt state you can’t trust anything they say it’s all about squeezing more money out of the federal government

      1. they inflate Covid deaths etc to get more money for the bankrupt state, not to pay for vaccines everyone knows are not doing anything

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *