there's something antigenic in denmark: boosters show negative vaccine efficacy for cases
a preliminary look at the denmark data
el gato malo
Dec 19 258 187 HERE and HERE.
for % vaccinated by date, i relied on our world in data HERE
the key danish data is this:
from it, many have made claims like: OMI is 78.7% in the fully vaxxed and yet they are 77.5% of the population, thus, there is no efficacy. similarly, claims of boosters are 10.3% of cases yet the boosted are 25% of the population, thus boosters ARE working vs omi are being made.
unfortunately, neither and especially the latter can be supported by this data. the problem lies here in the fact that the data is aggregated since nov 22.
boosters were only about 10% then. this huge change in prevalence (especially given the rate of change in boosters) makes normalization across the period impossible, especially as overall disease prevalence varies as well. thus, comparing 10.3% to 25% is meaningless
we can get around this issue by slicing the data more finely. to this end, i took the data from the prior day’s report which was through dec 13
we can then subtract this data from the next day’s data and, voila, we have the data for a single day.
this, of course, tells us nothing about vaccine efficacy without knowing the vaccine prevalence, but having narrowed this down to one day, we can now extract a value from OWID. i used 12/14 which will maximize the likelihood of showing a vaccine efficacy signal by using the highest possible base population. (this is almost sure to overstate efficacy as the actual contagion was likely a week or so before the report but as this is impossible to calculate with precision and just adds new error and assumption, i’d rather give all benefit of doubt to vaccines)
from this, we can then calculate VE by normalizing each case count to the size of the relevant sub-population. for convenience sake, i then normalized them to “per 100k population.”
and we get this:
from which we can calculate vaccine efficacy (VE)
this are, clearly, NOT good numbers. fully vaxxed more than doubles your relative chance of contracting omicron.
booster appears to mitigate this, but a lot of that benefit may be illusory because of the benefit we gave it by choosing to use the 25% boosted figure from 12/14. if we use the figure from a week earlier when contagion likely occurred it drops to 18% boosted which, in turn, drops VE to -75% and we get this:
so that looks to be the reasonable range to consider: based on this data, those vaccinated and boosted have between a 26% and a 75% greater chance than the unvaccinated of contracting omicron. (though, at least it’s a little better than the whopping 154% increase in risk for the double vaxxed though how durable that proves to be is anyone’s guess…)
this data, while not dispositive, is strongly consistent with and supportive of omicron as “the variant that leaky vaccines with overly narrow immuno-training begat.” this is OAS. this is exactly the the outcome you’d expect from pinned and non-adaptive immune system training and not what you’d see from simple full vaccine escape.
bad cattitude
is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?
the good news is that omicron looks mild. the bad news is that it increasingly looks like the variant that original antigenic sin (OAS) begot and this means that the vaccinated may be wide open for it in a way they would not have been had these programs not been rolled out. worse, they may NEVER be able to generate sound immunity because that’s what OAS…
Read more
7 days ago · 308 likes · 266 comments · el gato malo
simple vaccine escape would result in ~0% vaccine efficacy. but this looks like vaccines are making the virus MORE infective (as we saw in so much UK data). that’s going to be either OAS or ADE, and i’m nor really seeing the signs of ADE (like higher severity) while many of the markers of OAS (like failure to generate N-protein antibodies).
this is, if not a smoking gun, at least quite a warm one. (alas, unlike what john lennon promised us, it brings no happiness. this is very much the outcome that no one wanted.)
jeez, don’t you have any good news?
well, actually, yes.
some perspective:
of course, this is not as horrific as it looks when you look at absolute risk increase. double vaxxed is 0.047%, up from 0.0186%. this is not exactly “holy moly, grab my bio-bunnysuit!” territory.
and, of course, that’s cases, not anything inherently severe.
of interest, deaths in denmark look to be dropping as omi spreads, reinforcing once more that omi is a much milder variant. all data i have seen imply this is true among vaccinated and unvaccinated alike. this implies it’s a property of the pathogen, not the inoculant, and this is born out by the sudden drop in deaths as it propagates. presuming this holds, this is what you want, it’s nature making a vaccine and a variant going fully endemic, mild, and becoming another common cold.
to be sure, this data has significant limitations.
it is society scale and non-randomized. we have no idea what selectors are being applied to the risk groups and how they, on balance, generate risk bias. perhaps the vaxxed and boosted skew old and so do cases, but based on this, it does not seem to be the case for omicron.
perhaps the unvaxxed are generally sicker and higher risk for covid. perhaps they are more likely to have already had covid and thus be at lower risk. this one has been very hard to balance out anywhere and i doubt if anyone knows the answer to any degree of precision.
it’s also new data to me from a new source and we sliced it very thin as this is a young series. i’ll look to update it and track this further and see if we can tease out any further confounds over timeframe and possible simpson’s paradoxes by age, risk etc.
as ever, we do the best we can with the data we have, and the data is a bit of a mess, but at least the danes look to making an effort at real and honest reporting, which is more than one can say for the US data.
stay tuned for more:
Subscribe to bad cattitude
By el gato malo · Launched 9 months ago
come for the cat. stay for the toxoplasmosis.
187
50 min ago
I don't quite understand how this is signalling OAS. OAS means that those with prior immune response can't mount as good of a response for future variants. This makes sense for those who got vaccinated, but why would that make unvaccinated better? Unvaccinated would either have no prior immune response, and thus would be susceptible to new infections, or they might have natural immunity from a previous strain, which would also be susceptible to OAS. So I don't understand how OAS explains why vaccinated would be worse than unvaccinated for Omicron.
Writes Just an Observer ·Dec 19·edited 20 hr ago
The Unvaccinated Are Looking Smarter Every Week
First, let’s address the intelligence of the unvaccinated. Vaccine hesitancy is multi-factorial and has little to do with level of education or intelligence. Carnegie Mellon University did a study assessing vaccine hesitancy across educational levels. According to the study, what’s the educational level with the most vaccine hesitancy? Ph.D. level! Those can’t all have been awarded to liberal arts majors. Clearly, scientists who can read the data and assess risk are among the least likely to take the mRNA vaccines.
ADDED NOTE......has everyone seen this.
Italian Archbishop Vigano shared with The Gateway Pundit his transcript and audio message to the American people this week.
Italian Archbishop Vigano sent a message to the American people. He continues to speak out against the globalist threat this Christmas season.
He shared his message below:
DEAR AMERICAN PEOPLE, DEAR FRIENDS, for two years now, a global coup has been carried out all over the world, planned for some time by an elite group of conspirators enslaved to the interests of international high finance. This coup was made possible by an emergency pandemic that is based on the premise of a virus that has a mortality rate almost analogous to that of any other seasonal flu virus, on the delegitimization and prohibition of effective treatments, and on the distribution of an experimental gene serum which is obviously ineffective, and which also clearly carries with it the danger of serious and even lethal side effects. We all know how much the mainstream media has contributed to supporting the insane pandemic narrative, the interests that are at stake, and the goals of these groups of power: reducing the world population, making those who survive chronically ill, and imposing forms of control that violate the fundamental rights and natural liberties of citizens. And yet, two years after this grotesque farce started, which has claimed more victims than a war and destroyed the social fabric, national economies, and the very foundations of the rule of law, nothing has changed in the policies of Nations and their response to the so-called pandemic.
Expand full comment
66 replies
185 more comments…
Aboutthe vaccinated superspread hypothesisassessing the riddle of more recovered, more vaccinated, and more dying despite a lower CFR variant
el gato malo
Sep 16 335 317 peter daszak: supervillain origin storytaking a look at one of the more important and lesser studied players in the covid drama and his outright terrifying areas of research interest
el gato malo
Oct 6 402 326 leaky vaccines, super-spreads, and variant accelerationimperfect vaccines can make a virus more prevalent and more deadly. some questions on covid vaccines and their policy implications.
el gato malo
Aug 17 240 133 See all
Ready for more?
© 2021 el gato malo. See privacy, terms and information collection notice
Publish on Substack
bad cattitude is on Substack – the place for independent writing
Our use of cookies
We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We also set performance and functionality cookies that help us make improvements by measuring traffic on our site. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, please see our privacy policy.✖
a preliminary look at the denmark data
el gato malo
Dec 19 258 187 HERE and HERE.
for % vaccinated by date, i relied on our world in data HERE
the key danish data is this:
from it, many have made claims like: OMI is 78.7% in the fully vaxxed and yet they are 77.5% of the population, thus, there is no efficacy. similarly, claims of boosters are 10.3% of cases yet the boosted are 25% of the population, thus boosters ARE working vs omi are being made.
unfortunately, neither and especially the latter can be supported by this data. the problem lies here in the fact that the data is aggregated since nov 22.
boosters were only about 10% then. this huge change in prevalence (especially given the rate of change in boosters) makes normalization across the period impossible, especially as overall disease prevalence varies as well. thus, comparing 10.3% to 25% is meaningless
we can get around this issue by slicing the data more finely. to this end, i took the data from the prior day’s report which was through dec 13
we can then subtract this data from the next day’s data and, voila, we have the data for a single day.
this, of course, tells us nothing about vaccine efficacy without knowing the vaccine prevalence, but having narrowed this down to one day, we can now extract a value from OWID. i used 12/14 which will maximize the likelihood of showing a vaccine efficacy signal by using the highest possible base population. (this is almost sure to overstate efficacy as the actual contagion was likely a week or so before the report but as this is impossible to calculate with precision and just adds new error and assumption, i’d rather give all benefit of doubt to vaccines)
from this, we can then calculate VE by normalizing each case count to the size of the relevant sub-population. for convenience sake, i then normalized them to “per 100k population.”
and we get this:
from which we can calculate vaccine efficacy (VE)
this are, clearly, NOT good numbers. fully vaxxed more than doubles your relative chance of contracting omicron.
booster appears to mitigate this, but a lot of that benefit may be illusory because of the benefit we gave it by choosing to use the 25% boosted figure from 12/14. if we use the figure from a week earlier when contagion likely occurred it drops to 18% boosted which, in turn, drops VE to -75% and we get this:
so that looks to be the reasonable range to consider: based on this data, those vaccinated and boosted have between a 26% and a 75% greater chance than the unvaccinated of contracting omicron. (though, at least it’s a little better than the whopping 154% increase in risk for the double vaxxed though how durable that proves to be is anyone’s guess…)
this data, while not dispositive, is strongly consistent with and supportive of omicron as “the variant that leaky vaccines with overly narrow immuno-training begat.” this is OAS. this is exactly the the outcome you’d expect from pinned and non-adaptive immune system training and not what you’d see from simple full vaccine escape.
bad cattitude
is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?
the good news is that omicron looks mild. the bad news is that it increasingly looks like the variant that original antigenic sin (OAS) begot and this means that the vaccinated may be wide open for it in a way they would not have been had these programs not been rolled out. worse, they may NEVER be able to generate sound immunity because that’s what OAS…
Read more
7 days ago · 308 likes · 266 comments · el gato malo
simple vaccine escape would result in ~0% vaccine efficacy. but this looks like vaccines are making the virus MORE infective (as we saw in so much UK data). that’s going to be either OAS or ADE, and i’m nor really seeing the signs of ADE (like higher severity) while many of the markers of OAS (like failure to generate N-protein antibodies).
this is, if not a smoking gun, at least quite a warm one. (alas, unlike what john lennon promised us, it brings no happiness. this is very much the outcome that no one wanted.)
jeez, don’t you have any good news?
well, actually, yes.
some perspective:
of course, this is not as horrific as it looks when you look at absolute risk increase. double vaxxed is 0.047%, up from 0.0186%. this is not exactly “holy moly, grab my bio-bunnysuit!” territory.
and, of course, that’s cases, not anything inherently severe.
of interest, deaths in denmark look to be dropping as omi spreads, reinforcing once more that omi is a much milder variant. all data i have seen imply this is true among vaccinated and unvaccinated alike. this implies it’s a property of the pathogen, not the inoculant, and this is born out by the sudden drop in deaths as it propagates. presuming this holds, this is what you want, it’s nature making a vaccine and a variant going fully endemic, mild, and becoming another common cold.
to be sure, this data has significant limitations.
it is society scale and non-randomized. we have no idea what selectors are being applied to the risk groups and how they, on balance, generate risk bias. perhaps the vaxxed and boosted skew old and so do cases, but based on this, it does not seem to be the case for omicron.
perhaps the unvaxxed are generally sicker and higher risk for covid. perhaps they are more likely to have already had covid and thus be at lower risk. this one has been very hard to balance out anywhere and i doubt if anyone knows the answer to any degree of precision.
it’s also new data to me from a new source and we sliced it very thin as this is a young series. i’ll look to update it and track this further and see if we can tease out any further confounds over timeframe and possible simpson’s paradoxes by age, risk etc.
as ever, we do the best we can with the data we have, and the data is a bit of a mess, but at least the danes look to making an effort at real and honest reporting, which is more than one can say for the US data.
stay tuned for more:
Subscribe to bad cattitude
By el gato malo · Launched 9 months ago
come for the cat. stay for the toxoplasmosis.
187
50 min ago
I don't quite understand how this is signalling OAS. OAS means that those with prior immune response can't mount as good of a response for future variants. This makes sense for those who got vaccinated, but why would that make unvaccinated better? Unvaccinated would either have no prior immune response, and thus would be susceptible to new infections, or they might have natural immunity from a previous strain, which would also be susceptible to OAS. So I don't understand how OAS explains why vaccinated would be worse than unvaccinated for Omicron.
Writes Just an Observer ·Dec 19·edited 20 hr ago
The Unvaccinated Are Looking Smarter Every Week
First, let’s address the intelligence of the unvaccinated. Vaccine hesitancy is multi-factorial and has little to do with level of education or intelligence. Carnegie Mellon University did a study assessing vaccine hesitancy across educational levels. According to the study, what’s the educational level with the most vaccine hesitancy? Ph.D. level! Those can’t all have been awarded to liberal arts majors. Clearly, scientists who can read the data and assess risk are among the least likely to take the mRNA vaccines.
ADDED NOTE......has everyone seen this.
Italian Archbishop Vigano shared with The Gateway Pundit his transcript and audio message to the American people this week.
Italian Archbishop Vigano sent a message to the American people. He continues to speak out against the globalist threat this Christmas season.
He shared his message below:
DEAR AMERICAN PEOPLE, DEAR FRIENDS, for two years now, a global coup has been carried out all over the world, planned for some time by an elite group of conspirators enslaved to the interests of international high finance. This coup was made possible by an emergency pandemic that is based on the premise of a virus that has a mortality rate almost analogous to that of any other seasonal flu virus, on the delegitimization and prohibition of effective treatments, and on the distribution of an experimental gene serum which is obviously ineffective, and which also clearly carries with it the danger of serious and even lethal side effects. We all know how much the mainstream media has contributed to supporting the insane pandemic narrative, the interests that are at stake, and the goals of these groups of power: reducing the world population, making those who survive chronically ill, and imposing forms of control that violate the fundamental rights and natural liberties of citizens. And yet, two years after this grotesque farce started, which has claimed more victims than a war and destroyed the social fabric, national economies, and the very foundations of the rule of law, nothing has changed in the policies of Nations and their response to the so-called pandemic.
Expand full comment
66 replies
185 more comments…
Aboutthe vaccinated superspread hypothesisassessing the riddle of more recovered, more vaccinated, and more dying despite a lower CFR variant
el gato malo
Sep 16 335 317 peter daszak: supervillain origin storytaking a look at one of the more important and lesser studied players in the covid drama and his outright terrifying areas of research interest
el gato malo
Oct 6 402 326 leaky vaccines, super-spreads, and variant accelerationimperfect vaccines can make a virus more prevalent and more deadly. some questions on covid vaccines and their policy implications.
el gato malo
Aug 17 240 133 See all
Ready for more?
© 2021 el gato malo. See privacy, terms and information collection notice
Publish on Substack
bad cattitude is on Substack – the place for independent writing
Our use of cookies
We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We also set performance and functionality cookies that help us make improvements by measuring traffic on our site. For more detailed information about the cookies we use, please see our privacy policy.✖
