CDC Data: Sub-par Efficacy Of The Bivalent COVID Shots

This article used data from the Centers for Disease Control, and Prevention Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report published on November 22, 2022.

After reading it, you will know that the COVID jabs, including the Omicron booster, are ineffective against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and may even lower immunity.

I will also show you how the CDC presents its reports to give the false impression that the COVID “vaccines” are effective for COVID-19.

Contents hide

1 How the CDC collected data

2 Monovalent and Bivalent

3 How the CDC presents its data to show the COVID shots are effective

4 Why you should have a different conclusion

5 Absolute Vaccine Efficacy

6 Relative Vaccine Efficacy

7 Effects of An Ineffective Immune System

How the CDC collected data

The CDC has a program called ICATT – Increasing Community Access to Testing, where it partnered with 9,995 retail pharmacies that test people for COVID-19.

The test is nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). One of which is the standard PCR test. Three hundred sixty thousand six hundred twenty-six were done from September 14–November 11, 2022.

During the test, the COVID vaccination history is recorded. The unvaccinated are also included.

They divided the patients into age groups and their number of monovalent and bivalent Pfizer and Moderna mRNA-1883 COVID shots.

Monovalent and Bivalent

The monovalent shot contains the mRNA of the first strain of the SARS-CoV-2. The bivalent includes segments from the Omicron variant. The Omicron is more infectious but less deadly than the Wuhan strain.

How the CDC presents its data to show the COVID shots are effective

Let us start with the Summary, which everybody reads when they go to the CDC MMWR report.

See how the paragraphs in the Summary are nicely spaced and easier to read.

What is already known about this topic?

Monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were less effective against symptomatic infection during the period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant predominance.

What is added by this report?

In this study of vaccine effectiveness of the U.S.-authorized bivalent mRNA booster formulations, bivalent boosters provided significant additional protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in persons who had previously received 2, 3, or 4 monovalent vaccine doses. Due to waning immunity of monovalent doses, the benefit of the bivalent booster increased with time since receipt of the most recent monovalent vaccine dose.

What are the implications for public health practice?

All persons should stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, including bivalent booster doses for eligible persons.

In contrast, when they presented the data, it is a wall of words.

Cdc Data: Sub-Par Efficacy Of The Bivalent Covid Shots — Source: Cdc Mmwr Nov. 22, 2022

Bit of a struggle to read, isn’t it? Your eyes tend to go down to the Discussion part, where the paragraphs are shorter with more white spaces, making them easier to read.

But that may not be enough for some healthcare professionals and medical writers who are pressed for time and too busy to read the whole thing, so they may just read the last paragraph.

In this study of immunocompetent persons tested at ICATT locations, bivalent booster doses provided significant additional protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during a period when Omicron variant BA.4/BA.5 lineages and their sublineages predominated.

All persons should stay up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccines, including bivalent booster doses, if it has been ≥2 months since their last monovalent vaccine dose.

From that, the mass media will report, and healthcare providers will advise “all persons” to get booster shots.

Not too fast. I read the data and looked at their tables; the numbers I saw contradicted the recommendations.

Why you should have a different conclusion

To be approved as a COVID-19 vaccine, the US Food and Drug Administration said COVID shots should be 50% effective. Below is a snippet from the FDA page about vaccine approval for SARS-CoV-2.

The guidance also discusses the importance of ensuring that the sizes of clinical trials are large enough to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a vaccine.

It conveys that the FDA would expect that a COVID-19 vaccine would prevent disease or decrease its severity in at least 50% of people who are vaccinated.

Source with link: FDA Takes Action to Help Facilitate Timely Development of Safe, Effective COVID-19 Vaccines

In the next part, I will show the CDC data and how they presented it. I will then explain why the conclusion is to the contrary.

Absolute Vaccine Efficacy

CDC:

Absolute Vaccine Efficacy (aVE) of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 monovalent doses (compared with being unvaccinated) was similar among persons aged 50–64 years (28%) and ≥65 years (22%) but varied somewhat by number of previous monovalent vaccine doses (Table 2).

TABLE 2. Shows the Absolute Vaccine Efficacy against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection for a single bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster dose received after 2, 3, or 4 doses of monovalent vaccine compared with no doses by age group and number of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses — November 2022

My Comment: The Absolute Vaccine Efficacy in all age groups does not reach the FDA standard of 50% in all doses and age groups except for the 50-64 at two doses (50), which barely passed the FDA standards.

Here is what the CDC said about Table 2 to make you think that a monovalent plus the bivalent booster shot is more effective in the 50-64 years group who received ≥2 doses.

Among adults aged 18–49 years, Absolute Vaccine Efficacy (aVE) after ≥2 monovalent doses (43%) was higher than that for older age groups and did not vary among those who received 2 or 3 previous monovalent vaccine doses.

After reading that, I won’t blame you if you think the absolute vaccine efficacy using booster shots is higher for the older and other age groups.

However, it should be written like the following after looking at the data in Table 2 showing the <50% vaccine effectiveness. My additions are in red.

Among adults aged 18–49 years, Absolute Vaccine Efficacy after ≥2 monovalent doses (43%) was higher than that for older age groups (28 and 22%) and did not vary in ineffectiveness among those who received 2 or 3 previous monovalent vaccine doses.

Relative Vaccine Efficacy

Here is the CDC statement about Relative Vaccine Efficacy. (Emphasis and bullet points added)

Among persons who received ≥2 monovalent vaccine doses, rVE (relative vaccine efficacy) increased with time since the most recent monovalent vaccine dose in all age groups (Table 3).

At 2–3 months and ≥8 months after receipt of the most recent monovalent dose, rVE of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose was

30% and 56% among persons aged 18–49 years

31% and 48% among persons aged 50–64 years

28% and 43% among persons aged ≥65 years.

Yes, the relative vaccine efficacy increased with time. But that’s because, in the three groups who got the bivalent shots 2-3 months after the monovalent, the relative vaccine efficacy was abysmal at 2-3 months (30%, 31%, and 28%).

At ≥8 months after receipt of the most recent monovalent vaccine, the rVE improved to 56%, 48%, and 43%. Only one went about 50.

Thus, the shots continued to be ineffective (48% and 43%) for those more than ≥50 years old, the highest risk group!

Please don’t take my word for it. Here is Table 3. (emphases added)

TABLE 3. Relative vaccine effectiveness of a single bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster dose against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection* received after 2, 3, or 4 monovalent vaccine doses, by age group, number of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses received, and interval since last monovalent dose — United States, September–November 2022.

It is also curious that the relative vaccine effectiveness of the bivalent vaccine was lower (30%, 31%, and 28% in the 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years, respectively, from 2-3 months after the monovalent dose suggesting that more people in those groups were infected with COVID-19.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but does that mean that in that same groups, 70%, 69%, and 72% of the 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years got infected with COVID-19?

That is not surprising, considering that the antibodies elicited by the mRNA shots are short-lived.

The data suggest a weakening of the immune system. This may be the reason for the increased number of people with influenza, RSV, and COVID-19 during this season. The so-called tridemic.

Effects of An Ineffective Immune System

A disrupted immune system can result in shingles and Bell’s palsy.

The immune system keeps precancerous cells in check. A study published in Nature and an article in Cancer and Careers show a rise in cancer for 2022. They did not mention the gene-editing mRNA shots as the cause, but who will put their careers on the line to say that?

In silico research by Singh and Singh showed that the S2 subunit of the spike protein interacts with the tumor suppressor gene and potentially leads to cancer. I discussed that study in The Carcinogenic Effects of the SARS-CoV-2.

When I bivalent Moderna shot was approved, I looked at the same study that was provided for the FDA and wrote – Seven things wrong with the Moderna mRNA-1283 SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Phase 1 Trial

Summary

The first CDC MMWR about the bivalent mRNA COVID shots does not show convincing real-world effectiveness. In contrast, it should raise concerns about negative efficacy and unpredictable future effects.

When reading the CDC MMWR report, it is essential to look at the Tables. To be sure.

Postscript

The CDC used the test-negative statistical design to calculate the absolute and relative vaccine efficacy. In that technique, it uses those who test negative as a control group for those who test positive.

When the Pfizer shot was first released, I wrote The Absolute Risk Reduction of the Pfizer Biontech Booster Shot.

Truth heals. Lies kill. Don’t Get Sick!

Knowledge about Covid-19 is rapidly evolving. Stay current by subscribing. Feel free to share and like.

If you find value in this article, you can buy me a coffee!

Reference:

Link-Gelles R, Ciesla AA, Fleming-Dutra KE, et al. Effectiveness of Bivalent mRNA Vaccines in Preventing Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection — Increasing Community Access to Testing Program, United States, September–November 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2022;71:1526–1530. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7148e1

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.