My justification was similar, the vaccine seems to not be the hill to die on at this point. A true resistance movement needs active and passive support from the population and that just isn't happening right now. Sure, there seems to be a hard core of people who do not want to ever get vaccinated and wouldn't even do it if they get sentenced to prison for it, and I have a lot of respect for them if they're truly this firm in their belief. But the media control is so tight that in the big picture their resistance seems to be meaningless, at least right now.
This will not get better until ADDITIONALLY to the vaccine mandates you would have hyperinflation, food shortages or some other extreme cause of discontent in the general population - to the point where not even the media can convince them that what they see with their own eyes is a lie. As long as normies are allowed to live their lives semi-comfortably they will happily comply and ostracize people who disobey. Forced vaccinations are bullshit but ultimately a very expected development. I realized a long time ago that practically all western governments consist of evil sociopaths who want to see me and my kind suffer. But it'll take a lot of time for normies to realize this, particularly the politically apathetic.
People need to remember that they got forced to take a vaccine they never asked for and that they got systematically lied to for years concerning the effectiveness and safeness of this vaccine. But it will merely plant the seed of doubt in their mind so to speak, and dissidence as the fruit of doubt will come even later. Call me a coward all you want but as of right now the system hasn't produced nearly enough "nothing to lose" types of people that may be dangerous to it in the long run. But maybe it will.
In a few weeks hundreds of thousands of double and triple jabbed people will be throwing positive PCR's for Omicron. Of course they'll have their excuses lined up but it'll be obvious to a blind chimp that the vaccines have utterly failed.
It's puzzling to me why booster would increase protection against Omegon. Vaccinal antibodies fail to neutralize it, boosting won't increase their neutralizing ability. If anything, through affinity maturation they'll further adjust themselves to Wuhan variant spike. T-cell count will increase, but will return to baseline in a couple of weeks, and they will still carry receptors for outdated epitopes.
Only alternative explanation that I heard is that high concentrations of IgG (which will be recalled after booster) suppress inflammatory response to an antigen. It will look like "protection from the severe disease" (because runaway inflammation is what kills people who have COVID), but it has nothing to do with booster actually working.
Edit: I wrote about severe disease, but same goes for mild one: the symptoms of mild COVID are caused by initial inflammatory response meant to kick-start systemic immune response.
The 'evidence' that the boosters offer protection against Omicron is based on one study performed by Pfizer where they took plasma blood samples one month after booster dose administration and exposed them to a pseudovirus that they claim mimics Omicron Covid. The study supposedly showed the antibodies neutralizing the fake virus. TLDR Pfizer didn't use actual Omicron Covid in their experiment because they knew the result wouldn't support the narrative. Following on from this governments around the world and their media lackeys have been trumpeting that the boosters work to stop Omicron transmission, not hospitalisation, transmission. Which is quite the claim as we know that the vaccines don't stop Delta transmission.
Week 49 UK Covid-19 vaccine surveillance report
The same trends that have been apparent for months, double vaxxed either at similar or increased risk of infection.
So that leaves protection against severe disease as the ONLY protection from the vaccines. But how real is that? Let's take a deeper delve into the numbers
These are the population wide case rates for Covid in the 4 week reporting period. I 'll discuss the second column the 'unlinked' cases. I'll focus on the >80 age group as that's where most of the deaths occur.
Unlinked cases are people who've tested positive for Covid-19 but who they can't confirm vaccination status as they don't have their NHS numbers, the equivalent of social security numbers in the US and Medicare numbers in Australia.
Now notice something odd about the table, there are a LOT of unlinked cases, particularly in the 60+ age group, In fact there are more unlinked cases in this group than unvaccinated cases!
OK, maybe the UK just has really shitty record keeping or these are really old illegal immigrants. So let's take a look at the hospitalisation and death rates for the really old undocumented Covid cases in the UK.
For 80+ unvaccinated people the hospitalisation rate is 36%, vaccinated (mostly triple jabbed) 16.5%, so the vaccines reduce the hospitalisation rate by 50%. OK not exactly the 90% reduction the media are claiming but still not bad.
But take a look at the unlinked cases, a hospitalisation rate of 0.5%. No you're not seeing things, not disclosing your NHS number when you test positive for Covid 19 means you're 32 times less likely to end up in hospital than if you've been triple jabbed.
That's um remarkable.
Here are the mortality numbers. The unvaxxed 80+ in the UK have a 34% chance of dying if they catch Covid, the triple jabbed 80+ run a 19% chance of dying, again around a 50% reduction. But the unlinked have a 2% chance of dying!
So what's going on here? Clearly not disclosing your NHS number isn't giving British geezers some magical protection against the coof. So are they using the 'unlinked' to shift mild unvaxxed cases into another column to make the vaccines look better? I think that's the only plausible explanation.
So just for shits and giggles lets take the unlinked numbers and add them on to the unvaxxed numbers and compare them to the vaccinated.
1178 unvaxxed compared to 6571 vaxxed cases. Plausible? Sure we know that the vaccines provide a very short term (a couple of months) reduction in transmissability. The booster doses are having their effect.
211 hospitalisations versus 1073 for the vaxxed. A hospitalisation rate of 18% versus 16.5%. Remember a huge proportion of the over 80 demographic are in nursing homes and have treatment limitations preventing hospital admissions.
Finally a mortality rate of 19.5% versus 19% for the vaxxed, all but identical. Coincidence?
Being immune is like being pregnant you either are or you're not. The vaccines aren't actually vaccines, they're short acting antibody therapies that provide a brief window of protection from infection and viral replication while circulating neutralising antibodies are above the seroconversion titre. But once they drop below the virus does it's thing and the disease profile is identical.
Just to hammer the point home here are the latest numbers from my neck of the woods.
Mass vaccinations were mandated in late October
We've been averaging about 1000 cases per day with 5-10 deaths.
2 months ago we were averaging 1200 cases a day and 5-10 deaths.
Everything the government and media tells us about the vaccines is a lie.
