New CDC-Funded Study Finds Some Vaccinated Children More Likely To Get COVID

COVID-19 vaccines for children never made any sense. Which is why many sane countries in Europe never offered or recommended them to children at all. Some even specifically banned them from use for most under the age of 30.

Presumably since "The Science™" is an immutable state of inarguable consensus among every expert, medical doctor and public health professional on earth, that same standard would be applied in the United States as well. Right? 

Of course not.

The Science in the United States was different than The Science in Europe, because there is no such thing as "The Science," just a series of evaluations made by individuals with different backgrounds, priorities, political goals, and ideologies. As such, we not only encouraged and recommended COVID vaccines for children, in certain jurisdictions we wanted to force them on young kids. Or babies down to six-months-old. 

All based on an inaccurate assessment from one of the many branches of The Science that they would stop transmission from one person to another. Or prevent kids from being infected themselves. Now another study, funded by the CDC, keepers of The Holy Science itself, has shown how spectacularly wrong that was. No wonder trust in the experts is at an all-time low.

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 11: Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, answers questions at a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on Capitol Hill on January 11, 2022 in Washington, D.C. The committee will hear testimony about the federal response to COVID-19 and new, emerging variants. (Photo by Greg Nash-Pool/Getty Images)

CDC Funded Study Undermines CDC Message On COVID Vaccines

A new study was published on the Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society website that attempted to examine how effective COVID-19 vaccines were at reducing the risk of infection among children under the age of five. To do so, the researchers looked at several cohort studies to determine efficacy against any infection and against symptomatic COVID infection.

In short, as their topline result indicates, there was absolutely no efficacy whatsoever. 

"To understand how COVID-19 vaccines impact infection risk in children <5 years, we assessed risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection from Sept 2022–April 2023 in three cohort studies. There was no difference in risk by vaccination status," the study reads.

So every single mandate, every single advertisement, marketing campaign, political lecture, media promotion, public health expert…all of the facets of The Science itself were wrong. Completely, spectacularly, wrong.

But wait! It gets worse.

Essentially, the researchers used statistics to compare the rates of infection among babies aged six months old, up to four years old. The population that the CDC recommends get vaccinated. The vaccinated group includes those who had completed "just" the original two dose series of Moderna, or a whopping three doses of Pfizer. 

"Statistics were also compared between those who were unvaccinated to those who, at a minimum, had completed their primary series (at least 2 doses of Moderna or at least 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech, including both original [non-Omicron containing] and bivalent [Omicron-containing] vaccines)," they write. 

The majority of participants int he study were either partially vaccinated or fully vaccinated, with a significant portion having received a specific bivalent booster targeted to the currently circulating strains in late 2022-early 2023.

"By the end of the study period, 28.5% (n=175) of participants were unvaccinated, 15.3% (n=94) were partially vaccinated, and 56.2% (n=345) had completed, at a minimum, their primary vaccine series; of those 345, 129 received a booster dose (37%) and 139 (40%) received at least one bivalent dose."

During the exam period, just over 14% had lab-confirmed COVID, and 38% of those infections were symptomatic.

"Prior to enrollment in the study, 41.9% of participants had a SARS-CoV-2 infection, half of whom had also received at least their primary vaccine series (47.1%). During the study period, 87 (14.2%) of 614 participants had a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection; 33 (37.9%) of 87 had symptomatic infections."

Sure enough, what provided the most protection against further infection in this group wasn't vaccination, it was natural immunity. 

"Participants with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were less likely to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 and experience symptomatic COVID-19 compared with those who had no evidence of prior infection."

The same natural immunity that was downplayed, demonized and ignored by The Science for years, because it was inconvenient for the narrative they were trying to sell.

We're not done yet though.

These researchers, again, funded by the CDC, then admitted that there was no benefit whatsoever to vaccination with regards to risk of infection or symptomatic COVID case. No benefit whatsoever. And not only that, those children who hadn't already had COVID were more likely to get infected and be symptomatic after receiving a Pfizer vaccine.

"There was no difference in risk of infection or symptomatic COVID-19 by vaccination status alone, regardless of timing of vaccination or manufacturer type. However, naïve participants vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech were more likely to be infected and experience symptomatic COVID-19 compared to naïve and unvaccinated participants."

Quite literally, children who hadn't yet had their SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to have lab confirmed COVID, and importantly, symptomatic COVID, after getting Pfizer's vaccine than they were if they were unvaccinated at the time of infection. Simply, Pfizer's COVID shot actually had negative efficacy against infection and symptomatic COVID compared to being unvaccinated.

And experts and the media wonder why no one trusts them anymore.

The implications here are obviously massive. It's a thorough and complete repudiation of the entire messaging apparatus of the public health profession and "expert" class. They made unsupported assertions and demands and mandates based on inaccurate information, while steadfastly refusing to admit they were wrong. Still today, the CDC recommends babies and toddlers and young children get every single updated COVID booster dose. 

Yet a study funded by the CDC has found that natural immunity is significantly more protective.

"Although there was no difference in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19 among children aged 6 months - 4 years by vaccination status, prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was associated with lower incidence of both. These findings suggest that prior SARS-CoV-2 infection provides protection against both overall SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19."

When people talk about wanting these agencies to undergo a complete overhaul, this is why. The CDC and FDA should be ashamed of themselves, ignoring side effects to push a vaccine on young children based on nothing, only to see it have literal negative efficacy against symptomatic COVID compared to being unvaccinated. And then doubling and tripling down on it to protect themselves and their unlimited egos.

The Science failed. Again. Just don't expect them to admit it.