UNITED KINGDOM – It was just over a year ago, in December of 2020, when The New England Journal of Medicine published a report proclaiming that the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid jab (which would later be known as the Pfizer BioNTech jab) was “95% effective in preventing Covid-19.”
“A total of 43,548 participants underwent randomization, of whom 43,448 received injections: 21,720 with BNT162b2 and 21,728 with placebo. There were 8 cases of Covid-19 with onset at least seven days after the second dose among participants assigned to receive BNT162b2 and 162 cases among those assigned to placebo; BNT162b2 was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 (95% credible interval, 90.3 to 97.6).”
However, UK data published this past November suggests that such proclaimed efficacy in “preventing Covid-19” back in December of 2020 isn’t the case – and that positive cases abroad seem to be cropping up more frequently among those who’ve obtained their COVID shots.
Per the data presented in Table 2, titled “COVID-19 cases by vaccination status between week 40 and week 43 2021”, instances of positive cases among the jabbed in every age demographic – except for those under 18 – outpaced the unjabbed by significant margins.
For instance, the 18-29 age group had a total of 75,211 positive COVID cases, with only 24,097 of those cases being those who hadn’t been jabbed. With the 30-39 age group, there were 113,717 positive cases, with only 25,832 showing up as not having been jabbed.
And the disparities only grow from there with each and every age group from then on.
However, the released UK data attempted to explain this anomaly with an asterisk below the tabled data, proclaiming that “even with a highly effective vaccine, it is expected that a large proportion of cases, hospitalizations and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated, and no vaccine is 100% effective.”
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Red Voice Media. Red Voice Media would like to make a point of clarification on why we do not refer to any shot related to COVID-19 as a “vaccine.” According to the CDC, the definition of a vaccine necessitates that said vaccine have a lasting effect of at least one year in preventing the contraction of the virus or disease it’s intended to fight. Because all of the COVID-19 shots thus far available have barely offered six months of protection, and even then not absolute, Red Voice Media has made the decision hereafter to no longer refer to the Pfizer, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson substances as vaccinations.
About the author
We support free speech and will not quit telling the truth just because big tech tyrants don’t like what we say. From this, Red Voice Media was born. We hope you will plug in and take the ride with us as we fight false narratives against conservatives and law enforcement.
Opt-in to subscribe to new article notifications from this category.
Loading ...
