Just three years after federal COVID-19 vaccine mandates by the Biden administration forced millions of Americans to choose between their jobs and exercising informed consent rights to protect bodily autonomy, a new study funded by Pfizer found that only the company’s most recent Comirnaty mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid) COVID shot is effective in preventing symptoms of COVID and that people who received any previous version of Comirnaty had similar outcomes as unvaccinated people.
The paper, which has not been peer reviewed, was published on Dec. 28, 2023 and found no benefit for recipients of past Comirnaty shots.1 2
The updated Comirnaty booster targets the Omicron XBB 1.5 strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus already on the decline in the United States. While any potential immunity from all vaccines, including mRNA COVID shots wanes over time, Pfizer study researchers determined that previous Comirnaty doses do not protect against hospital admission, emergency room or urgent care visits, or outpatient visits in any meaningful way, but also that certain individuals who received the older Comirnaty doses had a higher risk of hospital admission.2 3
The findings of the study stated:
Older versions of COVID-19 vaccines offered little, if any, additional protection compared to the unvaccinated, including against COVID-19 hospital admission, regardless of the number or type of prior doses received.2
Infectious disease epidemiologist Sara Tartof, PhD, MPH and co-authors of the study wrote:
Compared to the unvaccinated, those who had received only older versions of COVID-19 vaccines did not show significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 outcomes, including hospital admission.2
Higher Risk of Hospital Admission for Those Who Received Two or More Doses of Older Comirnaty Shots
Marketing campaigns for the initial deployment of the experimental Comirnaty shot leaned heavily on the messaging that getting vaccinated would reduce one’s risk of hospitalization from COVID disease, but the latest study does not confirm the accuracy of that message. Dr. Tartof and colleagues found that people who received at least two doses of older Comirnaty shots actually had a “higher risk of outpatient visits and, for some age groups, were more likely to be hospitalized with acute respiratory illness.”2
Some doctors are speculating that Pfizer’s goal in funding the latest study with a negative finding for older Comrinaty shots is to encourage increased uptake of the newest Comirnaty shot, considering that only 14 percent of Americans have gotten a COVID booster shot. Leading Israeli immunologist Ehud Qimron, MD of Tel Aviv University believes conflicts of interest are present, saying the study “reveals a strong bias, potentially influencing the reported results.”2 4
The mRNA COVID shots were not the only public health measure that subsequently proved to be ineffective and even harmful to the public: The conclusions of the Pfizer-funded Comirnaty study revealing the vaccinated had similar outcomes to the unvaccinated come on the heels of former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci, MD testifying in Congress that the six-feet social distancing guidelines had no scientific basis. 5 6
WHO Urges Vaccine Uptake Amid “Incredibly Low” Vaccination Rates
Despite the study finding that previous Comirnaty shots did nothing to prevent COVID disease-associated hospital admissions or emergency room visits in any meaningful way, World Health Organization (WHO) officials continue to urge people to get COVID shots they say will lessen pressure on health care systems dealing with rising hospitalizations for respiratory infections.
“Too many people are in need of serious medical care for flu, for COVID, when we can prevent it,” said Maria Van Kerkhove, PhD, the WHO’s interim director of epidemic and pandemic preparedness, citing “incredibly low” flu and COVID vaccination rates in many countries this season.7
If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.
Click here to view References:1 Tarfof SY, Slezak JM et al. BNT162b2XBBI.5-adapted vaccine and COVID-19 Hospital Admissions and Ambulatory Visits in US Adults. medRxiv Dec. 28, 2023.
2 Stieber Z. People Who Received Older Pfizer COVID Vaccines Had Similar Outcomes as Unvaccinated: Study. The Epoch Times Jan. 5, 2024.
3 Constantino AK. FDA approves updated Covid vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna as hospitalizations rise. CNBC Sept. 11, 2023.
4 Baker A. Only 14 Percent of American Adults Have Received Updated COVID Booster Shots. The Vaccine Reaction Dec. 4. 2023.
5 Zimmerman D. Fauci Refused to Explain Rationale for Covid Social-Distancing Guidelines during Congressional Testimony, GOP Lawmaker Claims. National Review Jan. 10, 2024.
6 St. George D. American students’ test scores plunge to levels unseen for decades. The Washington Post Sept. 1, 2022.
7 Rigby J et al. WHO sees ‘incredibly low’ COVID, flu vaccination rates as cases surge. Reuters Jan. 12, 2024.
9 Responses
‘reveals a strong bias, potentially influencing the reported results’
You don’t say… We were talking about this many years ago, and they’re just catching up now? Dollar signs in their eyes.
This is not science. These people are not experts.
I’m not surprised. I have never read about or heard of any evidence that the immune system is capable of mounting an immune response to either DNA or RNA. How could it distinguish the DNA of one individual from that of another? How could it distinguish the DNA contribution from the mother from that of the father? How could it distinguish mitochondrial DNA and RNA from that of the nucleus??? And, since both DNA and RNA are ubiquitous in all cells in the body this would invite a devastating “autoimmune” reaction. But the immune mechanism has never been shown to cause any sort of “autoimmune” reaction. So, I expected that the entire mRNA vaccine notion was a hoax from the start.
My sentiments exactly. Why should we be given a “vaccine” of RNA or DNA to protect us from the very building blocks of life?
So Pfizer funded a “study” that found–surprise–that you need their latest product to be protected. And after they’ve made their money on the shot they’re pushing now, they’ll fund another study that will find that you need the next shot to be protected.
These “expose’” articles make me feel both glad that I never got the jab, and so sad that all my kids and grandkids did :(.
Follow Dr. Geert to find out what the boosters are doing. https://open.substack.com/pub/gvdb/p/what-happens-if-a-pandemic-involving?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=qckds
The boosters result in non-neutralizing antibodies that aggregate to temporarily prevent symptoms but have insufficient concentration to prevent immune refocusing and immune escape of more virulent variants. This is well known historically, see Mareks disease in chickens where vaccines caused a weak respiratory virus to eventually become 100%fatal.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/tthis-chicken-vaccine-makes-virus-dangerous
Is Comirnaty available in USA?
they know the COVID injections didn’t stop COVID in late July 2021. before approval, before mandate.
Yet they still required them.
we followed science.
did they?
if they followed science and recruited or encouraged COVID injections, they wanted us to get pain, injury, 🤕 and death ☠️.