I hate being right, and it's even nastier when a peer-reviewed medical journal publishes proof without realizing what they're doing, and thus doesn't make a recommendation based on the data they present.
Findings In this repeated cross-sectional study that included 1 443 519 blood donation specimens from a catchment area representing 74% of the US population, estimated SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence weighted for differences between the study sample and general population increased from 3.5% in July 2020 to 20.2% for infection-induced antibodies and 83.3% for combined infection- and vaccine-induced antibodies in May 2021.
Remember the basic rule of epidemics: Herd suppression begins to bend the curve of infection at about 1/2 of the actual suppression number and widespread epidemic spread is mathematically impossible when you reach that number.
That doesn't mean a light switch is thrown and nobody gets sick. It means the outbreaks are spotty and of no major consequence because they don't go beyond the concentrated places where immunity does not exist.
The basic formula for herd suppression is 1 - 1/R0.
Therefore at 83.3% total immunity as of May 2021 a virus with a given R0 can be computed.
.83 = 1 - (1/R0)
In other words a virus with an R0 of 5.88 or less is suppressed.
That's well beyond the necessary level to suppress Covid-19.
But it didn't, did it? Since May we've seen a serious outbreak and screaming from everyone.
We know natural immunity works because every study of persons previously infected, where said previous infection was documented by more than PCR test, that is, medical certainty and not a BS, flawed test has shown that an effective zero persons get re-infected and, there is no evidence said persons can spread the disease either.
Non-sterilizing vaccines do not suppress anything; if you can still get and spread the virus, and we now know that is true despite the claims of the lying media, the CDC, NIH, Fauci and everyone else originally back to December and January when those false claims were used to CON people into taking jabs then until and unless you actually acquire an infection and build natural protection spread does not stop because you are not part of the herd that suppresses spread.
The JAMA study now proves that:
- The jabs are worthless to inhibit the spread of Covid-19. The legal, ethical and moral arguments for "forced vaccination" are now dust. The anecdotal evidence from places like Cornell, which is taking a case rate five times that of last year despite near 100% vaccination rates, are now converted into hard, irrefutable science. The debate on "passports", "digital certificates" and demands by employers and others to get jabbed is over. JAMA has proved that the jabs do exactly nothing to prevent the spread of disease.
- If you are jabbed you are just as likely, if not more-likely, to give the virus to others. This is particularly important if the "others" are seriously medically-compromised (e.g. elderly and morbid, immune-suppressed, etc.) and take no precautions because they believe they're safe around you. The reason you may be more-likely to spread the virus to others is that if the jab suppresses your symptoms you will not know you're sick, and thus you will have no reason to limit contact with others. This makes the jabbed literal Typhoid Marys; an un-jabbed person who feels ill will (unless they're psychotic) self-isolate to the extent it is practical, even without a quarantine order.
- The insistence of jabs in medical settings is now, on the science, converted from "will protect patients" to will, with scientific certainty, screw unvaccinated patients, some of whom cannot be vaccinated and thus now constitutes gross negligence and depraved indifference to human life. Since we know that prior infection in fact confers sterilizing immunity the only rational act for health care providers dealing with high-risk patients who either cannot be vaccinated or show no sufficient immune response is to only allow convalescent, recovered health-care workers to care for them because they are the only sterile immune individuals. To do anything else, when there is a sizeable reservoir of said persons in the community (one in five, and almost-certainly much higher as medical personnel were exposed preferentially for the last 18 months) is voluntary manslaughter or even Murder 2.
In addition the JAMA data suggests (but does not prove) that VEI (vaccine-enhanced infection) is occurring. That is, the symptomatic and serious infections in vaccinated people may be cases where the vaccine made the infection more-serious. That, by the way, is exactly what every other coronavirus vaccine attempt has ended in over the decades. We, in our arrogance, believed that foregoing the several years required to make sure that ordinary mutational patterns would not lead to the same result didn't need to take place and a short, four month trial was sufficient. We're now finding out that it wasn't after putting that risk in the arms of roughly 200 million Americans. That was stupid.
The data is what it is. You cannot argue with mathematics folks, and while JAMA apparently does not realize what they published and proved, they nonetheless did exactly that. Not only did they do so the number of samples involved (nearly 1.5 million) gives excellent statistical power and a very narrow confidence band that spans less than 1% of those with said resistance.
Yet despite that fact and data, and after the cut-off date for this study's data in May the spike we took this summer did happen which, unfortunately for all the madhouse screamers at the CDC, State Departments of Health, the NIH and the Biden Administration proves, with scientific certainty, that the vaccines are worthless in interdicting both the acquisition and transmission of Covid-19, as otherwise given this prevalence as of May of 2021 the spike in infections this summer could not have occurred.
The debate is over folks.
The slaughter must end and end now; the data from JAMA is irrefutable.