Please understand the significance of that occurrence because Rep. Lynch is not the only person to have tested positive for COVID-19 after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. There has been a slew of such reports. It seems to have become the norm. For example, it was reported by COVID Legal USA on March 12, 2021, that there was a COVID-19 infection outbreak at the Cottonwoods Care Centre retirement facility in Kelowna, British Columbia, even though 82% of the residents were fully vaccinated. Eight out of the twelve COVID-19 confirmed cases were fully vaccinated persons.
Two staff members and 10 residents tested positive for COVID-19 this week at the Cottonwoods Care Centre, according to CBC TV. The publicly-funded retirement facility has 221 total beds. The report says 82% of residents were fully vaccinated as of February 15. Two-thirds of staff were fully vaccinated. Thus, the proverbial “two-week waiting period” for alleged immunity had passed. Eight of the confirmed cases were fully-vaccinated.
The COVID-19 vaccine is supposed to prevent someone from getting COVID-19. The whole purpose of the COVID-19 vaccine is to prevent the COVID-19 infection. Indeed, that was the primary focus of the study that resulted in the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the FDA for the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccines.
CDC Says Vaccines Do NOT Stop COVID-19 Infection or Spread
The CDC lists the following official recommendations for fully vaccinated people:
For now, fully vaccinated people should continue to:
- Take precautions in public like wearing a well-fitted mask and physical distancing
- Wear masks, practice physical distancing, and adhere to other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people who are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease or who have an unvaccinated household member who is at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease
- Wear masks, maintain physical distance, and practice other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people from multiple households
- Avoid medium- and large-sized in-person gatherings
- Get tested if experiencing COVID-19 symptoms
- Follow guidance issued by individual employers
- Follow CDC and health department travel requirements and recommendations
There is no way that if a person obtains immunity from COVID-19, as the vaccines purport to do, that the CDC would recommend that a person who is fully vaccinated continue to:
Wear a mask;
Practice physical distancing;
Avoid medium and large-sized in-person gatherings;
Get tested if experiencing COVID-19 symptoms;
Follow other prevention measures to stop the spread of COVID-19.
The CDC claims that there is “a growing body of evidence suggests that fully vaccinated people are less likely to have asymptomatic infection and potentially less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.”
Notice that the CDC uses the terms “less likely” to be infected and “potentially less likely” to transmit COVID-19. What do those unscientific weasel terms mean? The CDC does not know what those words mean because the COVID-19 vaccines are still under investigation. “How long vaccine protection lasts and how much vaccines protect against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants are still under investigation.”
The CDC says that they use the terms “less likely” to be infected and “potentially less likely” to transmit COVID-19 because they don’ know if the vaccines work. But even that is a lie because they do know. The evidence is that the vaccine offers little protection and that is why the CDC continues to recommend that a vaccinated person still take precautions to prevent getting and spreading COVID-19. The CDC states:
Until more is known and vaccination coverage increases, some prevention measures will continue to be necessary for all people, regardless of vaccination status.
The CDC describes the “less likely” to be infected and “potentially less likely” to transmit COVID-19, “residual risk.” Don’t be fooled. Residual risk is a real risk. The CDC is admitting that the COVID-19 vaccines do not work.
The benefits of reducing social isolation and relaxing some measures such as quarantine requirements may outweigh the residual risk of fully vaccinated people becoming ill with COVID-19 or transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to others.
Monitor and Quarantine Vaccinated Persons Exposed to COVID-19
The CDC claims that the residual risk is low for infection of a fully vaccinated person. But the claim that the residual risk is low makes no sense in light of the CDC’s advice that a person be monitored following any exposure to someone with “suspected or confirmed COVID-19.”
Fully vaccinated people who do not quarantine should still monitor for symptoms of COVID-19 for 14 days following an exposure. If they experience symptoms, they should isolate themselves from others, be clinically evaluated for COVID-19, including SARS-CoV-2 testing, if indicated, and inform their health care provider of their vaccination status at the time of presentation to care.
That advice makes no sense unless the CDC has already established that vaccinated persons have in-fact been infected with COVID-19 after being vaccinated. Thus, the vaccine has been proven, to the satisfaction of the CDC, to be ineffective in preventing COVID-19. Furthermore, the advice makes no sense unless the vaccine has in-fact been proven ineffective in preventing the spread of COVID-19. Indeed, so ineffective is the vaccine that the CDC recommends quarantining for 14 days a fully vaccinated person working in a jail or group home who has been exposed to someone who is even suspected of having COVID-19.
Fully vaccinated residents of non-healthcare congregate settings (e.g., correctional and detention facilities, group homes) should continue to quarantine for 14 days and be tested for SARS-CoV-2 following an exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19. This is because residential congregate settings may face high turnover of residents, a higher risk of transmission, and challenges in maintaining recommended physical distancing.
That advice to quarantine a fully vaccinated person who has been exposed to someone suspected of being infected with COVID-19 absolutely confirms that the CDC knows that the COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be ineffective against contracting and spreading COVID-19.
You only quarantine a person who poses a real risk of transmission of the disease. The fact that the CDC is advising that a fully vaccinated person be quarantined upon being exposed to a person even suspected of having COVID-19 means that the CDC believes that a fully vaccinated person can be infected with COVID-19 and then spread that disease to others. That advice by the CDC testifies that the CDC believes that the COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective in preventing the infection and spread of COVID-19.
The CDC knows that the COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be ineffective. The CDC now admits that fact. The CDC explains that a “fully vaccinated” person can still become ill with COVID-19 and also transmit COVID-19. The CDC states that the only reason to relax some liberty restrictions for COVID-19 vaccine recipients is NOT because the vaccine is effective in preventing the infection and spread of COVID-19 but to “improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake” by the general public.
Additionally, taking steps towards relaxing certain measures for vaccinated persons may help improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and uptake.
The CDC admits that it should be understood that the loosening of restrictions for fully vaccinated persons does not mean that those who have been vaccinated cannot still be infected with COVID-19 or spread the disease to someone else. The CDC is quite clear that fully vaccinated persons can still get infected with COVID-19 and should remain on guard for the risk of transmitting the virus to others.
Therefore, there are several activities that fully vaccinated people can resume now, at low risk to themselves, while being mindful of the potential risk of transmitting the virus to others.
Bait and Switch
What is the point of getting the COVID-19 vaccine when it is now proven to be ineffective? There is no reason to get the vaccine if prevention of infections and spread is the objective. So, that standard for effectiveness must be changed to something else. The standard for effectiveness is now no longer prevention of COVID-19 infection or preventing the spread of COVID-19. The standard has shifted to lessening the symptoms of COVID-19.
When you read page 28 of the Pfizer-BioNtech publication titled FACT SHEET FOR HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS ADMINISTERING VACCINE, it reveals that the only criterion reported for establishing the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine is the subsequent infection rate in the study groups. The study compared the COVID-19 infection rate among the vaccine group and compared it with the infection rate in the placebo group to come up with an effectiveness of 95% for the COVID-19 vaccine. The study announced that the “Vaccine Efficacy” was based upon a finding of the “First COVID-19 Occurrence From 7 Days After Dose 2.”
The 95% effectiveness rate is misleading. I address that in another blog article regarding the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. Pfizer-BioNtech used precisely the same deception as did Moderna when announcing its misleading 95% of effectiveness.
But The Daily Mail article announces that the reason that Rep. Lynch was infected with COVID-19 after being vaccinated is that “Pfizer’s vaccine does not necessarily prevent COVID-19 infection, but is said to be 95 percent effective in stopping the serious symptoms that are caused by the coronavirus.”
That is a lie. Pfizer-BioNtech announced that their COVID-19 vaccine was 95% effective in “preventing” COVID-19. They did NOT announce that it was 95% effective in reducing symptoms of COVID-19.
The reason that the FDA allowed the EUA of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was that the COVID-19 vaccine study claimed a 95% effectiveness in “preventing” the recipient from getting COVID-19 after they had been vaccinated. Indeed, the FDA states the reason for the EUA of the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine was that it is theorized to be effective in “preventing” the COVID-19 infection.
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is authorized to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 16 years of age and older.
Remember, the Pfizer-BioNtech has not been approved by the FDA as being safe and effective. The FDA states:
The FDA only states that the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine “may” prevent COVID-19. By the way, the FDA has made the same statements about the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. The FDA only hopes that the COVID-19 vaccines will prevent COVID-19.
The COVID-19 vaccines are only “authorized” under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to be used because the alleged benefits outweigh any potential dangers. Neither the Moderna nor the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective in preventing COVID-19. The FDA has stated clearly that there is no proof that the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine will be effective they just “hope” that is the case. Read it for yourself:
Most vaccines that protect from viral illnesses also reduce transmission of the virus that causes the disease by those who are vaccinated. While it is hoped this will be the case, the scientific community does not yet know if the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine will reduce such transmission.
If a person who has been vaccinated can be infected, then that infected person can pass on that infection. At least that is the present germ theory. Discussion of the terrain theory is beyond the scope of our discussion here, but be aware there is a growing plurality of doctors who ascribe to it. The “hope” of the scientific community that the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine will stop transmission has been unrealized. The vaccine has now been shown to be ineffective by standards announced by Pfizer-BioNtech and the FDA.
The evidence now is that the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine is ineffective in preventing COVID-19. The FDA and Pfizer-BioNteck warned about this eventuality. The Pfizer-BioNtech fact sheet admits that their vaccine may not protect “everyone.”
What they meant to say, but would not say, is that their vaccine may not protect anyone.
And so now that their COVID-19 vaccine has been shown not to protect anyone from getting COVID-19, Pfizer-BioNtech wants to change the standard for effectiveness from preventing the disease to lessening the symptoms of the disease.
The problem with this new criterion for effectiveness is that it was never studied. If it has now been shown that the vaccine is truly ineffective in “preventing” a vaccine recipient from getting COVID-19 it should be announced as ineffective. The vaccine should be taken off the market. Apparently, that will not happen. Instead, there is now being announced a new criterion for effectiveness that was never studied. And that new criteria is lessening of symptoms.
That is a problem because the FDA has stated that the Pfizer-BioNtech COVID-19 vaccine has been authorized under the EUA in the hope that it will “prevent” COVID-19 and NOT in the hope it will reduce the severity of COVID-19.
To date, only a small number of severe cases have occurred during the study, which makes it difficult to evaluate whether the vaccine reduces the severity of COVID-19. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is authorized to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 16 years of age and older.
This bait and switch from preventing infection to lessening symptoms, it seems, was the plan all along. On October 28, 2020, before either the Modern or the Pfizer-BioNtch vaccines were granted EUA by the FDA, Anthony Fauci stated that the “The primary thing you want to do is that if people get infected, prevent them from getting sick.” Fauci explained that reducing symptoms of COVID-19 was the “primary endpoint” of the vaccines. Fauci said that getting rid of the virus through immunity was only a “secondary endpoint.” His argument was that “with reduced severe symptoms, the coronavirus would pose a lower threat as a pandemic. Then scientists could focus on developing a solution that would reach the full goal of preventing initial infection.”
“If the vaccine also allows you to prevent initial infection that would be great,” [Fauci] said. “But what I would settle for, and all my colleagues would settle for, is the primary endpoint, which is to prevent clinically recognizable disease. That’s what we hope happens.”
He and his colleagues viewed reducing symptoms of COVID-19 as the primary endpoint of the vaccines. They hoped the vaccines would also prevent COVID-19 but he (and his colleagues) did NOT view that as the primary endpoint. Of course, his colleagues included the scientists at the FDA and those employed by the vaccine makers.
That is the opposite of what the FDA and the drug companies said in their publications. The FDA said that the COVID-19 vaccines are being “authorized to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).” They are NOT being authorized to reduce symptoms of COVID-19 because it is “difficult to evaluate whether the vaccine reduces the severity of COVID-19.”
Anthony S. Fauci is the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). He is in charge of the federal response to the Covid-19 threat. He had the inside information about the proposed COVID-19 vaccines. He knew at the outset that the COVID-19 vaccines in development would NOT prevent the infection of COVID-19.
While the drug companies were seeking approval for their COVID-19 vaccines to “prevent” the COVID-19 infection and its spread. Fauci’s statements prior to the EUA reveals that the vaccine makers and the FDA knew that their vaccines would not accomplish the goal of preventing COVID-19.
The bait-and-switch was planned ahead of time. They presented evidence of efficacy that falsely showed that their COVID-19 vaccine was effective in “preventing” COVID-19, knowing all along that those results were invalid. The studies were rigged to obtain the EUA.
Indeed, prior to the EUA authorization by the FDA of the Pfizer-BioNtech vaccine the Daily Mail reported that on or before December 4, 2020, “Pfizer CEO [Albert Bourla] admits he is ‘not certain’ their COVID-19 shot will prevent vaccinated people from spreading the virus.”
Moderna Chief Medical Officer Tal Zaks is on record saying that the Moderna vaccine can prevent someone from getting sick from COVID-19 but that there is no evidence that it can prevent someone receiving the vaccine from carrying the vaccine and infecting others. Prior to the FDA issuance of the EUA for the Moderna vaccine, on or before November 23, 2020, Zaks stated: “our results show that this vaccine can prevent you from being sick, it can prevent you from being severely sick. They do not show that it prevents you from potentially carrying this virus transiently and infecting others.”
Now that the vaccines have been shown not to prevent COVID-19, the vaccine makers are embarking on their pre-planned new justification for vaccination against COVID-19: to reduce the symptoms of COVID-19. The problem is that was not the basis for the EUA. Thus, that should not be the basis for continuing under the EUA. The ineffective and dangerous vaccines should be withdrawn from the market immediately.
But the U.S. Government does not care. The FDA is in the back pocket of the pharmaceutical industry. The pharmaceutical companies do not have to make safe vaccines because with immunity from liability granted to them by the government they have no economic incentive to do so. Since they control the government customer who buys their ineffective vaccines and the government will buy them no matter whether they are effective, the pharmaceutical companies have no incentive to ensure their vaccines are effective. All of this skulduggery is happening while the pharmaceutical companies control the mainstream media, thus ensuring that the public knows none of this.
So, when the COVID-19 vaccine is shown to be ineffective, the pharmaceutical companies just change the rules for what it means to be effective. The lapdogs in the mainstream media go along with their masters and deceptively report that “Pfizer’s vaccine does not necessarily prevent COVID-19 infection, but is said to be 95 percent effective in stopping the serious symptoms that are caused by the coronavirus.”
That is what George Orwell described as “Newspeak” in his dystopian novel, “1984.”
The one silver lining in this dystopian cloud is that because the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent COVID-19 infection, and thus they also cannot stop the alleged spread of COVID-19, there is no scientific justification for tyrannical governments to force their people to be injected with a COVID-19 vaccine.
Below is a chart created by the CDC that illustrates the additional steps needed to prevent a fully vaccinated person from being infected by COVID-19 and to prevent that fully vaccinated person from spreading COVID-19. The chart testifies to the ineffectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines.
The chart comes with the following pertinent guidance from the CDC:
Visits or small gatherings likely represent minimal risk to fully vaccinated people. Medium or large-sized gatherings and those including unvaccinated people from multiple households increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Though the risk of disease may be minimal to the fully vaccinated person themselves, they should be mindful of their potential risk of transmitting the virus to others if they become infected, especially if they are visiting with unvaccinated people at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19 or who have unvaccinated people at increased risk for severe disease in their own households. Fully vaccinated people should not visit or attend a gathering if they have tested positive for COVID-19 in the prior 10 days or are experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, regardless of vaccination status of the other people at the gathering.
For the CDC to admit that a person who has been vaccinated can still be infected with COVID-19 (although they say the risk is minimal) is damning. Even more damning is the admission that a fully vaccinated person still poses a “potential risk of transmitting the virus to others if they become infected.”