Ute Grabowsky/Getty Images

New study questions value of giving mRNA shots to children for 'short-lived' 26% 'protection,' while FDA and CDC double down on booster push

A new study out of Qatar has raised doubts about the efficacy of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines amid a concerted campaign by both the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under President Joe Biden to push bivalent booster shots on children. It turns out the COVID-19 boosters may be far more effective at generating profits for Pfizer and Moderna than they are at actually keeping children safe.

The rundown

Booster shots didn't appear to protect Pfizer chairman and CEO Albert Bourla, who tested positive for COVID-19 in September after having caught the virus the previous month. They also didn't protect CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, who took ill from the virus in October, one month after receiving her booster, or FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, who tested positive this week.

Despite concerns about their efficacy and whether they may exhaust patients' immune responses, the FDA authorized new COVID booster shots for people 12 years and older on Aug. 31 before testing them on humans.

The boosters, which had only been tested on eight mice, were touted as "bivalent," meaning they would target the original COVID-19 strain as well as new Omicron subvariants.

Paul Offit, the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and a member of both the National Institutes of Health working group on vaccines and the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, said in September that "there's not clear evidence of benefit" of the vaccine in healthy young people.

Offit told CNN: "What I fear is that they're going to say everybody should get it when in fact, the healthy young person really is unlikely to benefit from the booster dose, and so I hope they targeted more specifically, to those really who are most likely to benefit from this additional dose."

Months earlier, Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo announced that healthy children shouldn't get the vaccines, as the benefits are dubious and the risks are potentially substantial.

The FDA clearly heeded neither Offit's nor Ladapo's warnings, because on Oct. 12, it authorized the bivalent boosters for children anyway. The CDC also authorized the bivalent booster shots for children the same day.

CDC Director Rochelle Walesnky said that an "updated vaccine can help bolster protection for our children this winter."

Fox News Digital reported that to be eligible for the new bivalent booster, children must first get two doses of the outdated vaccine, which, according to the New England Journal of Medicine, has "no effect against the omicron variant."

Extra to authorizing the shots, the FDA has mounted a pressure campaign to have parents get their children boosted.

FDA vaccines chief Peter Marks stressed in a video series on social media this month that giving kids over the age of 5 the booster will help them "avoid the worst outcomes of COVID-19."

Marks told the AP, "Right now is the time for people to consider going out and getting the updated" shot.

It turns out, however, that the mRNA shots may not just be woefully ineffective at protecting pharmaceutical executives and federal officials from COVID-19.

A new academic paper published Nov. 2 in the esteemed New England Journal of Medicine discussed the results of a Qatari study that tested the effectiveness of the primary Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine series in children with no previous record of infection.

Not only did the Pfizer vaccine's effectiveness drop precipitously in children after mere weeks, but it ultimately went negative for children ages 5 to 11.

The scientists' findings "suggest the need to reconsider the value and strategies of vaccinating healthy children in the omicron era."

The study

The paper, entitled "Covid-19 Vaccine Protection among Children and Adolescents in Qatar," indicated that the Pfizer vaccine series targeting children rapidly waned in effectiveness right after the second dose, going negative for some groups after just several weeks.

Its overall effectiveness was at best 25.7% averaged across ages 5-17: 46.3% among children ages 5 to 7; 16.6% among children ages 8 to 11; 35.6% among adolescents ages 12 to 14; and 20.9% among those 15 to 17 years of age.

Although those in the older cohorts had slightly longer "protection" because they had received larger doses, scientists nevertheless observed "rapidly waning protection."

Referencing the data in the second graph from this study seen below (shared by Dr. Tracy Beth Høeg, an epidemiologist who advises Florida's Department of Health), Just the News reported that the lower confidence interval boundary for children ages 5-11 after two months and median after four months were both around -10, meaning the vaccinated kids were more likely to get infected.

Another dose

The Miami Herald reported that as of Nov. 3, over 22 million people in the U.S. had received the newest bivalent COVID-19 booster.

According to a new preprint study published Nov. 1 to medRxiv, which has yet to be peer-reviewed, those who received a third dose may have less protection against infection with the Omicron variant.

Dr. Daniele Focosi, a hematologist at Pisa University Hospital in Italy, wrote, "If you got infected with Omicron at any time, a third vaccine dose actually doubles your risk of reinfection compared to 2 doses only."

Just the News reported that while Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla claimed the bivalent booster prompted "increased neutralizing antibodies" that afforded the boosted "better protection" against Omicron subvariants BA.4/5, a Pfizer official admitted to the FDA that "there is no established correlate" between antibody levels and protection from disease.

Vinayak Prasad, a hematologist and professor of epidemiology and biostatics at the University of California, wrote on Substack that the government's "entire vaccine policy seems to be interested in giving Pfizer and Moderna a perpetual market share for a yearly vaccine. But seems to have no interest in generating credible randomized control trial evidence to inform the public. As such, they fail the American people."

Bernard Chantal/Getty Images

Horowitz: The bio-weaponization of the flu shots

By now most Americans are clued in to the dangerous scam of the COVID shots and, despite the fierce government marketing behind them, are rejecting them. Thus far, less than 4% of the eligible population has gotten the new Omicron “booster” shot, and in Florida, where there is intrepid leadership at the top, the number is just 1 in 573 people. Whether it’s the ubiquitous sudden deaths or the clear lack of efficacy, after a painful 21 months of endless doses, the public finally got the message.

However, the bio-security state is not done by a long shot, and its leaders are planning a massive campaign to use another vaccine that the public is largely familiar with and accepting of in order to continue using their dangerous technologies. In other words, it’s time we give the flu shots – both past and future versions – the same scrutiny we’ve given to the COVID shots.

While Americans seem comfortable with the current flu shots despite their lack of proven efficacy, do we know what they are putting in the new versions and what they have planned for the future? On Monday, the AP published an article (perhaps at the behest of the industry?) warning seniors to ask for their “revved-up” flu shots this season. After all, because the flu essentially disappeared for two years, they can now scare people about flu season as if it’s something novel. So, what are these revved-up versions?

There are three choices. Fluzone High-Dose and Flublok each contain higher doses of the main anti-flu ingredient. The other option is Fluad Adjuvanted, which has a regular dosage but contains a special ingredient that helps boost people’s immune response.

Hmm … “higher doses” … “a special ingredient” … after everything we’ve been through over the past two years, don’t we want to find out more information about these ingredients and doses? What the COVID shots should have taught anyone is that vaccines have to be perfect. Not all types and levels of antibodies are good, and many can cause the immune system to either misfire or to attack the body with autoantibodies. And this is before we even discuss the mRNA lipid nanoparticle flu shots Pfizer and Moderna have planned for us next year. Before we blindly accept new versions of the flu shot, we should first understand that not everything we’ve been told about the existing flu shots is as pure as the wind-driven snow.

While it is certainly clear that the number of adverse events reported to VAERS from the flu shots is infinitesimal compared to the COVID shots, the lack of efficacy and waning immunity of these shots should give us pause. Now that we understand the concept of negative efficacy and original antigenic sin associated with waning vaccines, we must ask if the same holds true for the flu shot. Even according to the CDC, the flu shot was just 16% effective last season! However, now that we better understand waning immunity, we have to suspect an outcome of negative efficacy. In fact, past literature has suggested exactly that.

A study of infection rates in children in Hong Kong in a three-year randomized placebo-controlled vaccine study, 2009-2012, found no statistical difference or slight negative efficacy for several seasons.

Similarly, a Canadian study of vaccine efficacy during the 2018-2019 flu season found negative efficacy for some age groups because “vaccine mismatch [a form of original antigenic sin] may have negatively interacted with imprinted immunity.”

Despite all the fanfare around the flu shot, a 2005 study published in JAMA soberingly found that there was no correlation between “increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group.” The only mortality decline researchers discovered was against H3N2 in those born before the 1968 pandemic because of natural immunity, not the vaccines.

Here are some other studies published in prominent journals that failed to discover any benefit from flu shots.

This is certainly not the informed consent most people have gotten over the past few decades regarding the flu shots.

What’s worse than zero efficacy is for the vaccine to harm the development of natural immunity in children. Much as we are seeing with the COVID shots, studies have shown that some flu vaccines may “hamper” the development of virus-specific CD8+ T cell immunity in children. A shocking 2010 study from pathologists at the University of Massachusetts Medical School seemed to discover the same viral immune escape we are seeing with the COVID shots creating endless variants. “We show that heterologous immunity can disrupt T-cell memory pools, alter the complexity of the T-cell repertoire, change patterns of T-cell immunodominance, lead to the selection of viral epitope-escape variants, alter the pathogenesis of viral infections, and, by virtue of the private specificity of T-cell repertoires within individuals, contribute to dramatic variations in viral disease,” concluded the authors.

For more information on possible negative efficacy, antibody dependent disease enhancement, or immune imprinting potentially caused by flu shots, you can read more in the following papers:

Thus, even before the pharma companies tamper with the flu shots and “rev” them up with mRNA and LNP technology, there is already an open question of whether the vaccines have even worked and whether any degree of minor efficacy has come at the expense of long-term immune suppression or macro viral immune escape. Now, both Pfizer and Moderna are racing to complete their phase 3 clinical trials on mRNA flu shots. We already know that mRNA flu shots passed down in the DNA of four litters of offspring in mice.

It is perhaps this newfound knowledge about vaccines that has led to a massive decline in flu shot uptake among Israeli health care workers.

The time has come to stop blindly treating every vaccine as a categorical one-sided benefit to be given to every last person in perpetuity. Just as chemotherapy, antibiotics, surgery, and other medical interventions have their time and place, vaccines must be more targeted. The time has come for a massive commission on vaccines in every state to start from scratch and treat no shot like a sacred cow. There’s no better shot to begin with than the flu shot, and there’s no time like the present.