The Covid-19 Vaccines Do Not Work, According to Three Studies Released by the CDC, the UK Government, and Oxford University

On September 9th, Nina Pierpont (MD, PhD) presented a report analyzing numerous research published in August 2021 that show the claimed Delta Covid-19 version evades the existing Covid-19 injections and hence does not prevent infection or spread of Covid-19.

Vaccines are designed to accomplish two goals, according to the doctor of medicine in her published research.

Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here:

Vaccination protects the vaccinated individual from sickness.
Prevent infected people from spreading the disease to others by vaccinating them.
However, the Doctor of Medicine believes that vaccination will not provide herd immunity because fresh research in a variety of situations demonstrates that the claimed Delta variation produces herd immunity.

Vaccine requirements, such as the one currently in effect in the United Kingdom for all Care Home personnel, are thus unjustified, according to Nina Pierpont (MD, PhD), because vaccinating individuals does not stop or even delay the spread of the supposed dominant Delta Covid-19 form.

Because all severities of Covid-19 disease create healthy levels of natural immunity, the Doctor of Medicine concludes that natural immunity is far more protective than vaccination.

Nine Pierpont (MD, PhD) cites three studies whose findings and data support her conclusions, including one published in the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) ‘Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report’ on August 6th, 2021, and another published in the CDC’s ‘Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report’ on August 6th, 2021.

Over the course of two weeks, the CDC studied 469 cases among Massachusetts individuals who attended indoor and outdoor public gatherings. The findings revealed that 346 cases were among vaccinated residents, with 74 percent presenting with reported Covid-19 symptoms and 1.2 percent being admitted to the hospital.

The remaining 123 instances were among the unvaccinated population, with only one person (0.8 percent) being hospitalized. There were no deaths in either group, and virus loads were determined to be quite similar among the vaccinated and unvaccinated, indicating that they were equally contagious.

Between March and April 2021, 900 hospital staff members in Vietnam were vaccinated with the Oxford / AstraZeneca viral vector injection, according to the Oxford University study. In mid-May 2021, the whole hospital staff tested negative for the Covid-19 virus; nevertheless, on June 11th, the first case among the vaccinated staff members was detected.

Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here:

The Covid-19 virus was subsequently retested on all 900 hospital employees, and 52 additional instances were discovered right after, causing the institution to go into lockdown. 16 more cases were discovered during the next two weeks.

According to the study, 76 percent of Covid-19 positive employees suffered respiratory symptoms, with three employees having pneumonia.

The UK Department of Health and Social Care study examines continuous population-wide SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in the UK and includes viral load measurements.

The study discovered that virus loads in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are nearly same, and that they are significantly greater than previous to the Covid-19 injectable roll-out. The majority of cases within the vaccinated population presented with symptoms after they tested positive, according to the study.

The study’s authors conclude that the Pfizer and Oxford / AstraZeneca injections have lost efficacy against the Delta Covid-19 form, but they maintain that they are still effective in preventing people from becoming infected with the Delta variation in the range of 67 to 80 percent.

Nine Pierpont (MD, PhD) asks a good question in her work about how they can come to this conclusion given 82 percent of the new positive PCR tests in the research were from fully vaccinated people.

– writes the doctor of medicine –

‘If a vaccine reduces the risk of becoming infected by two-thirds (67%), we would expect the proportion of vaccinated in the positive sample to be less than the proportion of vaccinated in the population.

Say we start with 1000 people in the country, of whom we will randomly sample 100. The country is 80% vaccinated. This means that in our sample of 100 we have 80 vaccinated and 20 unvaccinated people.

Let’s say that the virus has infected 10% of the people across the sampling period, or 10 total cases. If 8 of the infected are among the vaccinated, and 2 in the unvaccinated (80% and 20% of the positives, matching the ratio of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the population), the vaccine has made no difference in whether one can get infected (0% efficacy). If the vaccine is 67% effective, the cases in the vaccinated group would be reduced by 2/3 to 2.67 cases, and the total cases would be only 4.67 cases (2.67 vaccinated and 2 unvaccinated).

This means that only 2.67/4.67 or 57% of the cases would be in the vaccinated group, and 43% in the unvaccinated. (We can go back to 10% overall being positive just using ratios, yielding 5.7 cases among the vaccinated and 4.3 among the unvaccinated.)

This is why the proportion vaccinated in the infected sample, very close to the proportions vaccinated in the total population, are incompatible with the efficacy numbers generated by the authors.

It appears to me—as in the Massachusetts study—that the vaccine is not decreasing susceptibility to infection at all, and is in reality somewhere between slightly (insignificantly) decreasing susceptibility and slightly increasing susceptibility to the Delta variant.

The UK study is clear that viral load (and thus infectiousness to others) is much greater with Delta than with Alpha, and that, with Delta, viral load and infectiousness are equal in vaccinated and unvaccinated infected people.’

In her research, Nina Pierpont (MD, PhD) draws the conclusion that forcing someone to take a vaccine is potentially detrimental and damaging conduct.

She writes that because the primary purpose of a mandate is to protect others from infection, and these studies show beyond a shadow of a doubt that they do not, those who mandate the Covid-19 injections should seek legal advice regarding their culpability and liability for potential long-term harm to those who are forced into vaccination with the threat of losing their jobs.

Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here:


Margaret Taylor

Experienced communications professional with 10 years of experience in international journalism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Back to top button

This will close in 0 seconds

Adblock Detected

For continue reading on the site please disable the Ad-block