As predicted, the Omicron-driven case surge is coming down as fast as it went up. It is basically over and unless some other variant comes along, at this point the number of cases will recede to a very low level, if we stop the ludicrous testing policies. If we keep testing like we are currently, we will never run out of cases to scare people with. Several Scandanavian countries have eliminated any CV-19 restrictions and we should do the same, starting with masking children.
The heresy spreads and soon becomes gospel. Every where you see people questioning mask mandates, especially in schools, vaccine mandates, lockdowns–the whole panoply of futile, even counterproductive measures. Here is a paper in which several scientists, and I am sure others will calling for them to lose their jobs and be exiled to furthest Antarctica, dare to say what has been obvious from the beginning. Vaccine mandates and discriminatory treatment of the unvaxed has negative unintended consequences, although I question how unintended they are. (SSRN Article)
And this letter in Lancet summarizes a variety of research suggesting equal transmission among vaxed and unvaxed persons and drawing the obvious conclusion that vax mandates, including among health care workers, are therefore pointless. (Lancet Letter)
This CDC study is framed in a misleading manner, as CDC always does. It purports to look at cases and hospitalization rates among the boosted, two-dose vaxed and unvaxed. Note that the protection claimed for two-dose vaccinees is far lower than CDC had previously been allegeding existed. And the “unvaxed” group undoubtedly includes some partial vaxed persons, missed vax persons and those who can’t be vaxed for health reasons. No attempt to exclude incidental hosps, which some systems in Los Angeles, where the study was done, and some reports have placed those at 40% to 50%. And the morons at CDC can’t proofread, the study contains this sentence when explaining study limits around ascertaining vax status: “if vaccinated persons without accessible records were considered unvaccinated, the incidence in unvaccinated persons could be underestimated”. You will probably immediately see the logic error, I believe what they meant was that the incidence in vaxed persons would be underestimated. Somehow they think they can transfer the person to the right bucket, but not the case. All in all, another typical CDC effort. You will also note, and you have to dig into a table to find this since it wasn’t mentioned in the text. That the total number of cases in the vaxed is far higher than that in the unvaxed. (CDC Study)
This study from Michigan is similarly framed in an overly favorable light to vaccine effectiveness. You will note that the absolute number of infections is higher in the vaxed than the unvaxed and that the ultimate rates of protection against hospitalization are much lower than is typically claimed. Let me clear again, I think the vaccines provide good protection against hospitalization and death, but the benefits have been overstated. If you are at any significant risk, vaccination makes sense, but let’s be honest about the real world effectiveness. (Medrxiv Study)
Some researchers in Israel seem to never learn the lesson of time of follow-up in doing vaccine effectiveness studies. Israel started giving some people a fourth dose and this study claims, on an incredibly short follow-up period, that the fourth dose really does the trick. Isn’t that what we heard about two and three doses? (Medrxiv Study)