Coronavirus

[Maeght]

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.11.13.24317190v1
The graph in this screenshot from the video shows negative efficacy at 6 months, not 3-4 as I said.

Thanks. As said by Enki this isn't new, we know that efficacy wanes, hence the boosters.

[Free Willy]

I think this is well recognised. That is why we have the boosters in Spring and Autumn. I, along with many others, had my Spring one a couple of weeks ago.

Spring booster? I wasn’t aware that was the case.

[Maeght]

Spring booster? I wasn’t aware that was the case.

If you are aged 75 years and over, residents in a care home for older adults or are aged 6 months and over and have a weakened immune system you can book a booster until 27th June.

[Free Willy]

If you are aged 75 years and over, residents in a care home for older adults or are aged 6 months and over and have a weakened immune system you can book a booster until 27th June.

Thanks for that Maeght.

[Spud]

I think this is well recognised. That is why we have the boosters in Spring and Autumn. I, along with many others, had my Spring one a couple of weeks ago.

I suspected so. I pick up medication for someone else from a chemist monthly and am surprised at how frequently they roll out the vaccines. But are the people themselves aware that they are only getting about 50% increased protection (against hospitalisation) rather than the initial 80% in 2022, and that this drops to 30% after 3 months? Balanced against the risks of vaccine injury is it worth it? And are they aware that the boosters may make them more susceptible to covid infection, due to the combined effects of suppression of the immune system from repeated exposure to the virus and vaccine,  and the rapid changes in variants?

[Sassy]

The Bible shows your god to a murderous psychopath who killed everyone but 8 people, murdered the first born in Egypt,and approved of beating slaves, and rape of women.

Elements still sadly kill people.
Was there laws to prevent this to protect people who really had no care for their own children who were taught an eye for an eye?
If your allowing people to leave would make everyone safe, then what would you do? Having experienced dreadful thing from a power which warned you to let his people go, would you still harm your people because of your pride.

We need reality and that comes from taking it all into prospective. What happened was because people too proud to allow God to teach them and to treat people properly it is a learning curve.
It all led to G

[Enki]

I suspected so. I pick up medication for someone else from a chemist monthly and am surprised at how frequently they roll out the vaccines. But are the people themselves aware that they are only getting about 50% increased protection (against hospitalisation) rather than the initial 80% in 2022, and that this drops to 30% after 3 months? Balanced against the risks of vaccine injury is it worth it? And are they aware that the boosters may make them more susceptible to covid infection, due to the combined effects of suppression of the immune system from repeated exposure to the virus and vaccine,  and the rapid changes in variants?

All you have given here is a list of half truths and prejudiced conclusions. This doesn't surprise me, as you have this tendency to cherry pick, exaggerate and distort . Perhaps you need some sort of vaccine to enable you to look at evidence objectively, instead of through your favoured hobby horse spectacles.

Try reading some of these, all of them from reputable sources.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504142/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01699-1

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/is-your-immune-system-weak-after-covid-vaccine#vaccine-benefits

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10821957/

https://www.science.org/content/article/should-i-get-covid-19-booster

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-cleveland-clinic-study-did-not-show-vaccines-increase-covid-19-risk/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2025/04/nhs-spring-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-kicks-off/

[Spud]

All you have given here is a list of half truths and prejudiced conclusions. This doesn't surprise me, as you have this tendency to cherry pick, exaggerate and distort . Perhaps you need some sort of vaccine to enable you to look at evidence objectively, instead of through your favoured hobby horse spectacles.

Try reading some of these, all of them from reputable sources.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504142/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01699-1

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/is-your-immune-system-weak-after-covid-vaccine#vaccine-benefits

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10821957/

https://www.science.org/content/article/should-i-get-covid-19-booster

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-cleveland-clinic-study-did-not-show-vaccines-increase-covid-19-risk/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2025/04/nhs-spring-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-kicks-off/

I've summarised what I learned from the link I gave. With your links, you've given no indication of what the links are about.
Here is the full interview with Dr Clancy, which by the way I can follow because I have had training in pathology in the past. He does get some words mixed up, but what he says makes sense as far as I can tell. Will try and look at a link or two of yours.

https://youtu.be/ecAenIH7yhY?si=k6ON0g9Vh5ymh7j7

[Outrider]

I suspected so. I pick up medication for someone else from a chemist monthly and am surprised at how frequently they roll out the vaccines. But are the people themselves aware that they are only getting about 50% increased protection (against hospitalisation) rather than the initial 80% in 2022, and that this drops to 30% after 3 months? Balanced against the risks of vaccine injury is it worth it? And are they aware that the boosters may make them more susceptible to covid infection, due to the combined effects of suppression of the immune system from repeated exposure to the virus and vaccine,  and the rapid changes in variants?

The rate of serious complications from vaccines lies somewhere between 12 and 55 per million administrations, and the various CoVID vaccines available in the UK do not stand out from that range - that's an adverse reaction of any kind. Everyone has to make their own decision on those balances of risk, but for me it's a no brainer, having the vaccines is orders of magnitude safer than risking exposure without protection.

O.

[Enki]

Spud,

Here are a few selected quotes from my sources:

This meta-analysis summarized the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine booster versus non-booster in reducing infection rates, and the findings supported the comparable effectiveness of the booster. In addition, the booster was less effective against the Omicron variant than the Delta variant. Further studies on the effectiveness of real-world vaccine booster shots are encouraged to explore other sources of heterogeneity that may influence the efficacy of meta-analysis results.

from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504142/

Against hospitalization or death, absolute effectiveness of a BNT162b2 booster ranged from around 97% to 99% in all age groups irrespective of the primary course, with no evidence of waning up to 10 weeks. This study provides real-world evidence of substantially increased protection from the booster vaccine dose against mild and severe disease irrespective of the primary course.

from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01699-1

It is a myth that the COVID-19 vaccine weakens the immune system. After someone receives a vaccine, their immune system is better equipped to protect against subsequent infections.

Although there are slight differences in the ways that the various COVID-19 vaccines work, they all follow the same principle. They help the body create immunity, or resistance, to SARS-CoV-2 — the virus that causes COVID-19 — by mimicking an infection. The immune system then remembers how to fight that infection in the future.

COVID-19 vaccines strengthen and prime the body’s immune response and help prevent serious COVID-19 disease and hospitalization.

Some European regulators have expressed concerns that giving COVID-19 booster shots too frequently could weaken the immune response to the vaccination. However, this is not the same as weakening a person’s immune system overall.

from https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/is-your-immune-system-weak-after-covid-vaccine

Over the last 24 months, there has been growing evidence of a correlation between mRNA COVID-19 vaccine boosters and increased prevalence of COVID-19 infection and other pathologies. Recent works have added possible causation to correlation. mRNA vaccine boosters may impair immune system response in immune compromised individuals.

from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10821957/

This is the only one which has any sort of agreement with the points you make, but, even then, it is only in already immune compromised individuals.

Everyone Science spoke with said yes, if you are elderly, immunocompromised, or have medical conditions that make you particularly susceptible to harm from the virus. “For people who are at high risk of severe disease, I think the answer is pretty simple and largely noncontroversial: A 4- to 6-month period of protection has a meaningful clinical benefit,”  Barouch says. “It’s clear that that population benefits from a boost and probably more than one boost for the year.”

from https://www.science.org/content/article/should-i-get-covid-19-booster

The researchers also noticed that people who got more vaccine doses prior to Sept. 12, 2022 — the day the bivalent booster became available at the Cleveland Clinic — had a higher rate of testing positive in the following months than people who had gotten fewer prior vaccine doses. But the researchers didn’t find that more doses caused a higher risk of infection. Rather, this finding was an association that could be due to multiple other factors. And studies have generally found that each additional vaccine dose reduces COVID-19 risk.

Incorrect claims about the paper have been circulating since before it was peer-reviewed and published. Recently, a widely viewed social media post jumped to the conclusion that the study shows that “a higher number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received increases the risk of infection with COVID-19.” Another widely viewed post sharing the study results incorrectly concluded that the vaccines were a “failed experiment.”

from https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-cleveland-clinic-study-did-not-show-vaccines-increase-covid-19-risk/

Dr Alex Allen, Consultant Epidemiologist at UKHSA: “Last year’s spring Covid programme reduced the risk of getting severely ill and being hospitalised by over 40% in those at greatest risk – for up to 9 weeks after vaccination.

“I would strongly advise all eligible to get vaccinated to top up your immunity and greatly reduce your chances of the virus ruining your spring and summer months.”

Date published: 1 April, 2025
Date last updated: 31 March, 2025

from https://www.england.nhs.uk/2025/04/nhs-spring-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-kicks-off/

Nowe let's see about your source:

John Lorimer Campbell is an English YouTuber and retired nurse educator who has made videos about the COVID-19 pandemic. Initially, the videos received praise, but they later diverged into COVID-19 misinformation.[2] He has been criticised for suggesting COVID-19 deaths have been over-counted,[3] repeating false claims about the use of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment, and providing misleading commentary about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.[4] As of March 2024, his YouTube channel had 3 million subscribers and over 750 million views.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Campbell_(YouTuber)

Incidentally he is neither a scientist or a medical doctor.

So much for your unprejudiced and authoratitive sources...as expected.

As regards the person interviewed(Dr Robert Llewellyn Clancy), this is what Wiki had to say about his views on Covid:

During the COVID-19 pandemic Clancy was involved in controversy when he was quoted by Australian MP Craig Kelly in support of unverified information about claimed benefits of the drugs hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. Newcastle University issued a statement in which it distanced itself from Clancy's views, mentioning also that the vice-chancellor had said the university did "not consider Robert Clancy a subject matter expert on COVID-19".[7]

[Spud]

All you have given here is a list of half truths and prejudiced conclusions. This doesn't surprise me, as you have this tendency to cherry pick, exaggerate and distort . Perhaps you need some sort of vaccine to enable you to look at evidence objectively, instead of through your favoured hobby horse spectacles.

Try reading some of these, all of them from reputable sources.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504142/

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01699-1

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/is-your-immune-system-weak-after-covid-vaccine#vaccine-benefits

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10821957/

https://www.science.org/content/article/should-i-get-covid-19-booster

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/scicheck-cleveland-clinic-study-did-not-show-vaccines-increase-covid-19-risk/

https://www.england.nhs.uk/2025/04/nhs-spring-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-kicks-off/

Hi enki,
I've scanned through these. The fourth one says basically what is explained in the video I posted. The last one tries to persuade to take the booster based on 40% reduction in hospitalisation over two months following the booster, without saying anything about the waning effect after that. The first two are dated 2022,when the higher effectiveness was due to the fact that the population hadn't been exposed to repeated boosters.

[Enki]

There are plenty of reputable sources on the internet which are up to date which say exactly the same thing about the value of getting a covid booster, especially for older people. As I've already agreed,  immunocompromised individuals are special cases, and they are encouraged to seek their doctor's advice before having either a booster, or an extra covid vaccination or not. The booster vaccinations factor in new variants as far as possible. No one has disagreed about the efficacy of the protection waning over a period of time. That's why there are boosters, so I don't see your point at all. Finally, if you want some up to date info, how about the government statistics which show covid related illnesses to be at base levels, and hospitalizations have been generally at a low and decreasing level from July 2024 to April 2025. This seems to fly in face of the idea that boosters lead to people being more susceptible to covid infection.

[Gordon]

I just had a Covid booster this afternoon because I'm considered to be vulnerable.

I'm happy to be offered it since I have enough health issues to concern me without Covid - and if the wonderful people at the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre thought that a booster would be a risk then I wouldn't have been offered it. They look after me so well, and have done for the last 5 years, so I'll trust them!

[Enki]

According to an extensive Danish study written on March 27th 2025, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization reached 70.2 percent for Pfizer and 84.9 percent for Moderna.
Even against the newer variants, vaccine effectiveness remained high, with no significant decline during the first four months.

Both vaccines offered high levels of sustained protection over four months against hospitalisation and death.

Source:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5227321

[Spud]

According to an extensive Danish study written on March 27th 2025, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization reached 70.2 percent for Pfizer and 84.9 percent for Moderna.
Even against the newer variants, vaccine effectiveness remained high, with no significant decline during the first four months.

Source:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5227321

Thanks for the link, Enki. I've posted it onto the John Campbell video comments to see if there is any response. One factor that came to mind was that iirc they did not compare it with unvaccinated people?

[Maeght]

Thanks for the link, Enki. I've posted it onto the John Campbell video comments to see if there is any response. One factor that came to mind was that iirc they did not compare it with unvaccinated people?

I'm sure you'll get a response on there!

[Spud]

I'm sure you'll get a response on there!

None so far, which isn't surprising because it's not possible to post a link in the YouTube comments. I just made a quick reference to it.

Looking at the study again, I see that they compared people who had had the latest booster, with those who had not. Assuming that most of the latter had already received the primary vaccinations, and earlier boosters, then what the study actually shows is the waning effect of those earlier vaccinations. We don't know the effectiveness compared with unvaccinated people.

Also, how do we know that if the vaccines were halted, then after an inevitable initial rise in hospitalizations and deaths the rate wouldn't subsequently decrease, due to exposure to the new strains of Covid, and the immune system's adaptive protective response?

[Maeght]

None so far, which isn't surprising because it's not possible to post a link in the YouTube comments. I just made a quick reference to it.

Looking at the study again, I see that they compared people who had had the latest booster, with those who had not. Assuming that most of the latter had already received the primary vaccinations, and earlier boosters, then what the study actually shows is the waning effect of those earlier vaccinations. We don't know the effectiveness compared with unvaccinated people.

Also, how do we know that if the vaccines were halted, then after an inevitable initial rise in hospitalizations and deaths the rate wouldn't subsequently decrease, due to exposure to the new strains of Covid, and the immune system's adaptive protective response?

Why would we do that? Let people be hospitalised and die when there is a vaccine available? What adaptive protective response are you referring to? The boosters are only being offered to those with compromised or weakened immune systems and those over 75 remember.

[Spud]

Why would we do that? Let people be hospitalised and die when there is a vaccine available? What adaptive protective response are you referring to? The boosters are only being offered to those with compromised or weakened immune systems and those over 75 remember.

Vaccines are supposed to prevent infection. The boosters do not do that, they reduce severity of symptoms, for a limited time after administration. If there are other treatments that can do this (eg antivirals), why give an uninfected person the jab (the long term effects of which we don't yet know) instead of treating only people who are infected?

[Maeght]

Vaccines are supposed to prevent infection. The boosters do not do that, they reduce severity of symptoms, for a short time. If there are other treatments that can do this (eg antivirals), why give an uninfected person the jab (the long term effects of which we don't yet know) instead of treating only people who are infected?

No, vaccines prepare the body's immune system to recognise and defend against infections but not all prevent infection. The Covid ones protect against serious illness but not infection and are currently only being offered to people who are particularly vulnerable. For those with compromised immune systems they may not be suitable. The NHS does offer antivirals for particularly vulnerable people. They only really work if used in the early stages of infection and are not without side effects.

[Spud]

For those with compromised immune systems they may not be suitable

You mean COVID jabs?

[Spud]

No, vaccines prepare the body's immune system to recognise and defend against infections

So we can't really call something a vaccine unless it defends against (prevents) infection?

[Maeght]

You mean COVID jabs?

Yes, not unsuitable as in dangerous but rather may not on their own be effective. Maybe not the correct word.

From Gov.uk 'However, there remains a smaller number of people whose weakened immune system means they may be at higher risk of serious illness from COVID-19, despite vaccination.

Enhanced protection measures, such as those offered by specific treatments or additional vaccinations alongside other protective behaviours, may benefit these individuals.'

[Maeght]

So we can't really call something a vaccine unless it defends against infection?

Defend against but not necessarily prevent.

From Wikipedia

'Vaccines can be prophylactic (to prevent or alleviate the effects of a future infection by a natural or "wild" pathogen), or therapeutic (to fight a disease that has already occurred, such as cancer). Some vaccines offer full sterilizing immunity, in which infection is prevented.'

[Dicky Underpants]

And now British cardiologist and antivaxxer Aseem Malhotra is going to the US to be an adviser to health secretary JFK Junior. I'm sure he'll get on with the self-promoting quack Andrew Wakefield, who seems very popular there (Trump still calls him "Doctor", though he was struck off here).
Nevermind; if epidemics break out again, Trump can just blame them on China.

https://www.channel4.com/news/us-health-advisors-vaccine-views-wrong-and-dangerous

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aseem_Malhotra

I should say that some of Malhotra's views on health look pretty innocuous, and both his and JFK jnr's reservations about "Big Pharma" are worth considering. But when just about every nation on earth and their main experts consider that vaccination is the way to deal with Covid 19 and measles, I'd like to know who is controlling the big 'conspiracy'.