Vaxxers and anti-vaxxers

 Vaxxers and anti-vaxxers

by George J. Dance

As a Covid libertarian, I have often been called an "anti-vaxxer" on social media. By "Covid libertarian" I mean that I am a libertarian when it comes to Covid. Being a libertarian just means holding the basic libertarian belief (that it is prime facie wrong to force or coerce other people), and since a person can believe that on one issue but not on another, a person (whether they identify as a libertarian or not) can be a libertarian or not on a particular issue. A Covid libertarian is one who applies that belief to Covid as a political issue, i.e. to government policy during and regarding the Covid pandemic. 

Covid libertarians, then, oppose government mandates, whether the government is mandating lockdowns, business and church closings, mask wearing, or vaccination. They can have various beliefs about the value of staying home, avoiding contact, wearing masks, or being vaccinated during a pandemic. For the record, and for what it's worth, I believe all four of the latter have value. What defines a Covid libertarian is a lack of belief that those things' value is a reason to ignore libertarian principles and human rights, and go with force and coercion instead. 

But what is an "anti-vaxxer"? And whom or what are they "anti"? It turns out the term has two definitions. Historically, it has referred to the view of a small minority that opposes vaccination, whatever the reason, and refuses to be vaccinated, a meaning best summed up in the Oxford English Dictionary definition: "a person who is opposed to vaccination, especially a parent who does not wish to vaccinate their child because they believe it could be harmful.".(1) The word has had that meaning since 1812, when Edward Jenner coined it to describe opponents of his cowpox vaccine.(2) I am certainly not one of those. Vaccination can help protect one from injury, death, and even disease, depending on the disease and the vaccine, which strikes me as a good reason to be vaccinated. 

But there is another definition of "anti-vaxxer," which has been around since at least 2008, and its use has increased exponentially during the Covid pandemic. In 2018 that definition was added to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "a person who opposes the use of vaccines OR regulations mandating vaccination."[stress added](3) By that definition I am an anti-vaxxer, because I oppose vaccine mandates. 

The Merriam-Webster (MW) definition looks like an example of what Ayn Rand called "package dealing", or "the fallacy of ... treating together, as parts of a single conceptual whole or 'package,' elements which differ essentially in nature, truth-status, importance or value."(4) As with Rand's original example of the fallacy – the early 1960s media crusade against "extremism" – that fallacy is often used to demonize a group through guilt by association with an already demonized group. That is exactly how the word has come to be used during the pandemic; but, as was noted on Quora as early as 2018, the term was already a pejorative before that:  

There are dictionary definitions of anti-vaxxers, but there is no agreement. The reason is simple. Most of the use of the word anti-vaxxer is by people who are against vaccine choices, who see and label their opposition “anti-vaxxer”.... Dictionary com gives a simple, and more accurate definition “(slang, derogatory) An anti-vaccinationist.” Wictionary org gives a very similar, accurate definition: “(slang, derogatory) An anti-vaccinationist. ”
"Both definitions make the important point clear. The important part of the definition of an anti-vaxxer is not the meaning of the term ... anti-vaxxer is a negative, derogatory, slang term. It is used to insult people, to put them, their understanding, their ideas, their research, and everything about them and their friends into the “negative” box.... Anti-vaxxer is a contemptuous term for anyone who challenges any vaccine or vaccination information or dogma. It is also a contemptuous term for anyone who might listen to such a person, try to understand their position, or even dare to befriend them in any way.
In general the term anti-vaxxer is used by people who are anti-anti-vaxxer, who want to dismiss, insult, or worse, people who wish to make informed medical choices for themselves and their children. People who are anti-anti-vaxxers extend the term anti-vaxxer to anyone who makes the slightest challenge, question, or suggestion that vaccines are not akin to God.... The term anti-vaxxer is used to describe someone who is so bad that no further analysis is attempted. 
This is clearly seen in some of the more ridiculous definitions. Here’s the top version from UrbanDictionary.... “A person who thinks they know more about medicine and public health than the overwhelming majority of doctors, scientists, immunologists, and every major health organization across the whole entire planet. ‘Pfffft, I don't need to believe in "evidence based medicine" & fancy "science" made up by sheeple and shills! I'm an arrogant anti-vaxxer!’”
and another from UrbanDictionary of similar style[:] "A particularly toxic kind of narcissist who places their own science illiterate beliefs in woo over the welfare of their own children and that of the general population. "Oh great, another measles outbreak, thanks to those dumbass anti-vaxxers."
Note: Attempting to create an honest definition of “anti-vaxxer” is likely to have yourself labelled as one." (5) 

So the term has always been a smear, an ad hominem used to label and discredit some people's beliefs by attacking the people rather than dealing with the beliefs. But now, thanks to Merriam-Webster, I have been successfully labelled with it as well. But if I am to be defined and labelled by anyone (and with such a term!) , I should at least be allowed to define and label them in return.

Who has defined and labelled me this way? The Quora article calls them 'people who are anti-anti-vaxxers,' which gets our essential opposition across, but is way too long for a label. Therefore, I propose coining my own word – "vaxxer" (which I am claiming because I have failed to find any prior use) – and defining it as someone who believes the opposite of MW's anti-vaxxer:

Vaxxer: "a person who supports the use of vaccines AND regulations mandating vaccination." (stress added)

By this definition, everyone (with an opinion) is either a vaxxer or an anti-vaxxer, and no one is both. 

Let there be no confusion: "Vaxxer" does simply mean being pro-vaccination. It does not mean someone who gets vaccinated, or who supports or encourages vaccination: someone like me who does both of the latter, but opposes vaccine mandates, is an anti-vaxxer by MW's definition, and therefore not a vaxxer by mine. To make the distinction: Someone who is pro-vaccination is interested in getting vaccinated, and in letting or helping others get vaccinated; a vaxxer simply wants to vaccinate all of them. Like Caesar, who wanted the whole world to be taxed, vaxxers want the whole world to be vaxxed. They want a society where everyone is vaccinated. If possible, they would simply grab and jab them all, with or without their consent. Barring the legal power to do so, they advocate forcibly segregating the unvaccinated, excluding them from society as much as possible, entirely if they could. 

By the above definitions – MW's and mine – I am definitely, and defiantly, an "anti-vaxxer". I am not opposed to vaccination; but I am opposed to vaxxers and their schemes. Whether the scheme is to vaccinate everyone to get "herd immunity," or to get rid of the virus entirely, the effect is the same: Government power is being used to coerce people, to police everyone, to harass and stigmatize a minority, and to violate human rights. While some anti-vaxxers may pose some danger to me, some risk of infection, so does everyone else, including the Covid-vaccinated; that is something I have been able to deal with by social distancing, by sometime mask-wearing, and now by getting vaccinated myself. I see far more real danger from vaxxers and their plans, both to me and to my society, and no good way (other than vocal opposition) to deal with that risk.

References (accessed Nov. 6-7, 2021

(1) "Definition of anti-vaxxer," Oxford Learners' Dictionaries. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/anti-vaxxer

(2) Ruki Sayid, "Anti-vaxxer, willy-waver and Wagwan among new words in Oxford Dictionary - see list." Daily Mirror, Sept. 10, 2021. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anti-vaxxer-willy-waver-wagwan-24951465

(3) "Definition of anti-vaxxer," Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer 

(4) "Package-dealing, fallacy of," Ayn Rand Lexicon. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/package-dealing,_fallacy_of.html

(5) Tracy Kolenchuk, "What is the exact definition of an anti-vaxxer? Does it mean someone who opposes some vaccines, all vaccines, or only mandatory vaccines?", Quora, Aug. 27, 2018. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-exact-definition-of-an-anti-vaxxer-Does-it-mean-someone-who-opposes-some-vaccines-all-vaccines-or-only-mandatory-vaccines/answer/Tracy-Kolenchuk 

Canadian lawyers foresee wave of terminations

Canada faces wave of terminations as workplace vaccine mandates take effect: lawyer | CTV News - Brett Bundale, Canadian Press:

October 7, 2021 - " Canada is facing a potential wave of terminations tied to mandatory workplace vaccine policies as a growing number of employers require workers to be fully inoculated against COVID-19 - or risk losing their jobs, legal experts say.... As employer deadlines to be fully vaccinated approach, unvaccinated workers could soon be placed on unpaid leave or terminated altogether, lawyers say....

"'We've been contacted by thousands of people from across Canada who all have these ultimatums in front of them saying they have to be vaccinated by a certain date or risk losing their jobs,' employment lawyer Lior Samfiru, a partner with Samfiru Tumarkin LLP, said in an interview. 'We're going to see the biggest wave of terminations we've seen since the pandemic started,' he said, noting that his firm has been contacted by workers in a range of industries including health care, education, banks, construction and restaurants....

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled Canada's new mandatory vaccine policy on Wednesday [October 6]. It requires the core public service, air travel and rail employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by the end of October. The federal vaccine mandate mirrors provincial policies, such as in Nova Scotia where all school and health-care workers are required to have two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine by the end of November.

"Private companies have also developed corporate vaccine mandates, with looming deadlines for staff to be fully vaccinated. The situation has left legal experts grappling with the tension between protecting the rights of individual workers and ensuring employers meet their health and safety obligations toward staff, clients and the public. There's also the question of what reasonable accommodations or exemptions should be available to workers and whether unvaccinated employees who are ultimately terminated are owed compensation.

"'There's an overriding obligation on the employer to make sure the workplace is safe,” said Ron Pizzo, a labour and employment lawyer with Pink Larkin in Halifax.... Pizzo said his firm is getting quite a few calls from people who do not want to vaccinate and want to fight employer vaccination requirements. Still, he said he's not expecting mass resignations that will leave companies without enough workers given the relatively high vaccination rate among the general population. Slightly more than 80 per cent of all Canadians aged 12 and older are fully vaccinated....

"Wayne MacKay, professor emeritus at the Dalhousie Schulich School of Law, said employers have to balance the individual rights of workers, such as by offering reasonable accommodations, with maintaining a safe work environment. But he said a recent review of cases involving the balance between individual rights and public health have sided with the latter.... 'Most restrictions that governments are doing have been found to be reasonable given threat of COVID-19.' While these cases didn't deal specifically with vaccine mandates, he said the same reasoning would likely apply....

"As for whether workers who are terminated for refusing to vaccinate are entitled to compensation, he said it depends on the work environment, how valid the need for the policy is and whether the worker was unionized or not.

"Samfiru suggested terminated workers who are not paid sufficient compensation could claim wrongful dismissal. 'The employer is imposing a new rule, one that was not part of the original employment agreement,' he said. 'That becomes a termination without cause and severance has to be paid. Beyond that, there could be a human rights claim as well.'"

Read more: https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/canada-faces-wave-of-terminations-as-workplace-vaccine-mandates-take-effect-lawyer-1.5614688

Blood thinners cut Covid deaths almost in half

Blood thinners can reduce COVID-19 deaths by nearly half, study finds | CTV News - Anthony Vasquez-Peddie:

October 3, 2021 - "The use of blood thinners by COVID-19 patients, either before being infected with the disease or afterward, can reduce deaths by almost half, according to new research. The study, published in the open-access, peer-reviewed journal EClinicalMedicine, looked at ways to reduce clotting and hospitalizations related to COVID-19 through the use of prescribed blood thinners.

"'We know that COVID-19 causes blood clots that can kill patients,' Dr. Sameh Hozayen, lead author of the study and an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota Medical School, said in a news release.... 'Blood thinners are medications prescribed to prevent blood clots in patients with a prior blood clot in their lungs or legs. They also prevent blood clots in the brain secondary to abnormal heart rhythms, like atrial fibrillation. Blood thinners are the standard of treatment in these diseases, which is why we looked at data to see if it impacted hospitalizations related to COVID-19'.... 

"The study also found that patients on blood thinners before contracting the virus were admitted less often to hospital despite being older on average and suffering from more chronic medical conditions than their peers.

"The study evaluated 6,195 adult COVID-19 patients, including 598 who were immediately hospitalized and 5,597 who were treated as outpatients, between March 4 and Aug. 28, 2020. Among the outpatients, 160 were already on blood thinners, and 331 were eventually hospitalized. Outpatients who were on blood thinners at the time of diagnosis had a 43 per cent reduced risk of hospitalization. Hospitalized patients also benefitted from blood thinners regardless of the type or dose of medication used.

"Most medical centres around the world currently have protocols for starting COVID-19 patients on blood thinners upon hospital admission, according to Dr. Hozayen. It’s easy to keep track of prescription drug use while in hospital, but among those who have previously been prescribed blood thinners and may want to benefit from this study, one of the challenges is getting them to adhere to their drug regimen.

"'Unfortunately, about half of patients who are being prescribed blood thinners for blood clots in their legs, lungs, abnormal heart rhythms or other reasons do not take them. By increasing adherence for people already prescribed blood thinners, we can potentially reduce the bad effects of COVID-19,' he said. 'Outside of COVID-19, the use of blood thinners is proven to be lifesaving for those with blood coagulations conditions.'"

Read more: https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/blood-thinners-can-reduce-covid-19-deaths-by-nearly-half-study-finds-1.5609242 

Read study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537021004193

Early closings had no impact on Covid spread, Japanese study finds

Early Closure of Bars and Restaurants Had No Impact on the Spread of Covid in Japan | The Daily Sceptic - Noah Carl:

November 2, 2021 - "When comparing the impact of Covid in different countries, Japan is a clear outlier. In 2020, the country had zero days of mandatory business closures and zero days of mandatory stay-at-home orders. Despite seeing less change in mobility than major European countries, Japan has not had any excess mortality since the pandemic began....

"In January of this year, Japan introduced restrictions on businesses for the first time. Specifically, 11 prefectures (including the capital, Tokyo) prohibited bars and restaurants from selling alcohol after 7pm, and forced them to close at 8pm.

"In a recent preprint, Reo Takaku and colleagues investigated the impact of these measures on the spread of Covid. They began by checking whether the measures had their intended effect – of reducing the number of people frequenting bars and restaurants. This cannot be taken for granted: the night curfew in Greece had virtually no impact on mobility.

"The researchers analysed survey data collected in the autumn of 2020 (when there were no restrictions in place) and the winter of 2021 (when there were restrictions in place). As the chart below indicates, the measures do appear to have had their intended effects.

"The x-axis represents how far respondents lived from the border of a prefecture that introduced restrictions. The blue and green lines (corresponding to the right-hand y-axis) show the fraction of people who went to a bar or restaurant at least once in the relevant month. The blue line corresponds to the autumn of 2020, and the green line corresponds to the winter of 2021. Notice that the green line is substantially flatter than the blue line, but only on the right-hand side of the chart. This suggests that restrictions did reduce the number of people frequenting bars and restaurants.

"Next, the researchers examined whether the measures actually reduced the spread of Covid. To do this, they compared self-reported symptoms among individuals living either side of the border of a prefecture that introduced restrictions. They also controlled for a number of characteristics, such as age, marital status and household income....

"[T]hey found no evidence that the measures reduced the spread of Covid. Individuals living under restrictions were no less likely to report Covid symptoms than their counterparts on the other side of the border. This was true even for young people, and those who regularly used pubs and restaurants....

"'Given the large detrimental effects on employment,' the authors write, 'alternative measures for full-service restaurants and bars should be considered'."

Read more: https://dailysceptic.org/2021/11/02/early-closure-of-bars-and-restaurants-had-no-impact-on-the-spread-of-covid-in-japan/

Read study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.07.21261741v1

Immunologist banned from U of Guelph campus

Dr. Byram Bridle

Byram W. Bridle | University of Guelph, Ontario Veterinary College: 

"Dr. Bridle is a viral immunologist.... One arm of his research program is dedicated to designing and optimizing novel biotherapies ... to harness the natural power of a patient's immune system to eliminate their own cancer cells ... to treat cancers more effectively, safely, and at lower cost than current options. The second arm of his research program focuses on studying host responses to viruses and other inflammatory stimuli.... The Bridle lab is harnessing their expertise in making potent cancer vaccines and combining this with their interest in anti-viral immunity to develop vaccines to protect against infectious diseases such as those caused by highly pathogenic coronaviruses.... He also counts it a privilege to teach students in the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, graduate and undergraduate programs at the University of Guelph."
Read more: https://ovc.uoguelph.ca/pathobiology/people/faculty/Byram-W-Bridle

U of G prof says he is receiving workplace harassment after sharing vaccine concerns | Guelph Today - Kenneth Armstrong:
June 19, 2021 - "A University of Guelph professor says he is being harassed by colleagues after speaking out publicly about concerns he has with current COVID-19 vaccines. Byram Bridle is an associate professor of viral immunology at U of G and for over a year has been speaking publicly about concerns he has about current COVID-19 vaccines being offered to the public.... In a previous interview with GuelphToday, Bridle expressed concerns with vaccines, but did not label himself as anti-vaccination. 'As an immunologist, I like to point out that I really promote the value of vaccines,' he told GuelphToday last December. 

"Bridle ... was interviewed on a Global News radio program two weeks ago where he was asked if there could be a possible link between reports of heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccines. 'I felt I could express concern and that there might be a possible link between this heart inflammation that is occurring and these COVID-19 vaccines,' said Bridle. He said his life was turned upside down after the interview aired and likened the response by many to a nuclear bomb going off. 

'I have been undergoing daily attacks either through email or people attempting to call me,' said Bridle. “I should also mention I am experiencing harassment — lots of harassment — in the workplace'.... One form of harassment, said Bridle, is a web site that was registered under his name.... He said the web site that was created is libellous and a Twitter account that was also developed seeks to slander him. Bridle also claims that private medical information about his parents was leaked.... 

"Last year, a team of researchers that included Bridle received provincial funding to the tune of $230,000 to develop a potential COVID-19 vaccine. Bridle’s concerns with current COVID-19 vaccines has been adopted by many people online who believe them to be harmful."
Read more: https://www.guelphtoday.com/local-news/u-of-g-prof-says-he-is-receiving-workplace-harassment-after-sharing-vaccine-concerns-3888634

Controversial U of G prof criticizes school's vaccine mandate | Guelph Today - Daniel Caudle:
Sep 27, 2021 - "University of Guelph associate professor Byram Bridle has penned an open letter to U of G president Charlotte Yates calling for an end to the vaccine mandate. The letter from Bridle, associate professor of viral immunology at the Department of Pathobiology, requested the ‘favour of a reply’ from Yates, asking that the response not be deferred to public health officials or a committee. 'Instead, a reply with the scientific rigour expected from a scholarly colleague rebutting each of my comments and addressing each question' ... Bridle’s letter stated.

"Bridle’s letter states he could not be in stronger disagreement with Yates for forcing the current COVID-19 vaccines upon everyone who is part of the campus community. He outlines those with naturally-acquired immunity don’t need to be vaccinated and are at greater risk of harm if vaccinated and how testing for naturally-acquired immunity was a viable option but ignored. The U of G was reporting recently that of those who submitted information, 99 per cent are partially or fully vaccinated and one per cent have requested or been granted an exemption....

"Bridle said in his letter: 'My concern is not primarily for myself. I am using my case to highlight how wrong your vaccine mandate is. I am more concerned for the more vulnerable on our campus. I hold tenure, and if ever there was a time when this was important, it is now.'

"Going against the university's mandate which requires all faculty to have both doses of a COVID-19 vaccine or a medical exemption, Bridle said he has been 'banned' from campus for at least the next year. 'I can show proof of immunity against SARS-CoV-2 but you will not allow me to enter buildings. But someone else can show a receipt saying that someone saw two needles go into their arm and you will allow them to enter,' he said in the letter.... 

"'I have found it necessary to write this so you can fully understand my perspective. With my life and that of my family, many friends and treasured colleagues being destroyed under your watch, I figure the least you can do is read and consider this very carefully. It is incredible to note that many, if not most, of my on-campus detractors have judged me without reading any of my scientific arguments or talking to me about them.'"

Read more: https://www.guelphtoday.com/local-news/controversial-u-of-g-prof-criticizes-schools-vaccine-mandate-4456348

Bridle's Open Letter: https://www.jccf.ca/open-letter-to-the-president-of-the-university-of-guelph-from-dr-byram-bridle/

Greek curfew may have increased Covid spread

Night Curfew May Have Increased the Spread of COVID-19 in Greece | Daily Sceptic - Noah Carl: 

June 16, 2021 - "During the pandemic, many countries have imposed night curfews in an attempt to reduce the spread of COVID-19.... According to a recent study, they may have actually increased transmission.  

"Sotiris Georganas and colleagues took advantage of a natural experiment in Greece whereby the timing of night curfew shifted in one region but not in another. While a 9pm curfew had been in place throughout the country since November of 2020, a 6pm weekend curfew was introduced on 6th February in the Attica region (which includes Athens). The authors used Google mobility data to examine how time spent at home, and time spent at groceries/pharmacies, changed in the Attica region and the Epirus and Western Macedonia region (where the timing of night curfew did not shift). Specifically, they examined mobility data in each region in the five weekends before the shift, as well as the four weekends after....

"Compared to the Epirus & Western Macedonia region, the Attica region saw a small and statistically significant increase in time spent at home, as well as a small and non-significant decrease in time spent at groceries/pharmacies. In other words, the shift in the timing of night curfew had – at best – a marginal impact on mobility.

"Given that the shift reduced the time available for shopping by three full hours (a change of almost 20%), the overall effect will have been to increase crowding – by concentrating roughly the same amount of shopping into a shorter time period. As a consequence, it may well have led to a rise in transmission.  In the authors’ words, 'As more people were present simultaneously in high-risk places such as supermarkets, the early curfew backfired.' 

"This finding suggests that governments should focus on protecting care homes and hospitals, rather than trying to control the epidemic by tweaking people’s shopping habits."

Read more: https://dailysceptic.org/2021/06/16/night-curfew-may-have-increased-the-spread-of-covid-19-in-greece/

Read study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.13.21255091v1

Graph courtesy CTV News

Biden: Vaccinated are "not going to get Covid-19"

Fact check: Biden makes false claims about Covid-19, auto prices and other subjects at CNN town hall | CNN - Daniel Dale & Tara Subramaniam:

July 22, 2021 - "President Joe Biden participated Wednesday [July 21] in the second CNN town hall of his presidency, taking questions from anchor Don Lemon and local residents in Cincinnati. As he did at his February town hall, Biden made a number of false or misleading claims....

"Calling on Americans to get vaccinated against Covid-19, Biden said, 'If you're vaccinated, you're not going to be hospitalized, you're not going to be in the ICU unit and you're not going to die.' In another exchange moments later, Biden said that even if vaccinated people do 'catch the virus,' they are 'not likely to get sick.' But then, during a third exchange, Biden said that since the vaccines 'cover' the highly transmissible Delta variant of the virus: 'You're not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations'....

"Biden's second claim – that vaccinated people are 'not likely to get sick' – was accurate. But the blanket promises in his first and third comments – that vaccinated people are simply 'not going to be hospitalized,' 'not going to die' and, even with the very contagious Delta variant, 'not going to get Covid' – were inaccurate. Covid-19 vaccines are highly effective, and they sharply reduce the likelihood of infection, serious illness and death. However, contrary to Biden's categorical declarations, they do not guarantee that people will not get the virus or will not be hospitalized or die. Even vaccinated people on Biden's own staff have been infected. So have a senior aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, multiple Democratic state legislators from Texas who have been in Washington, DC, this month; and various other high-profile people....

"The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ... notes on its website that 'vaccine breakthrough cases will occur, even though the vaccines are working as expected' and 'there will be a small percentage of fully vaccinated people who still get sick, are hospitalized or die from Covid-19.'"

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/fact-check-biden-cnn-town-hall-july/index.html

Covid-19: Unvaccinated face 11 times risk of death from delta variant, CDC data show | British Medical Journal - Owen Dyer:

September 16, 2021 - "Unvaccinated Americans have died at 11 times the rate of those fully vaccinated since the delta variant became the dominant strain, indicate surveillance data gathered over the summer by the US Centers for Disease Control. Vaccinated people were 10 times less likely to be admitted to hospital and five times less likely to be infected than unvaccinated people, found one study that tracked adults across 13 states and cities.1

"Levels of protection were lower than were conferred by vaccines offered at the end of spring, the study found.... From 4 April to 20 June unvaccinated people died from covid-19 at 16.6 times the rate among the fully vaccinated (95% confidence interval 13.5 to 20.4). Between 20 June and 17 July that rate fell to 11.3 (9.1 to 13.9). Before 20 June admissions of unvaccinated people with covid-19 to hospital were running at 13.3 (11.3 to 15.6) times the rate among the vaccinated, but this had fallen to 10.4 (8.1 to 13.3) after that date. Unvaccinated people were infected at 11.1 (7.8 to 15.8) times the rate of the vaccinated before 20 June but at only 4.6 (2.5 to 8.5) times the rate thereafter. These figures represent declines in crude efficacy, for all vaccine types combined, from 94% to 91% for death, 92% to 90% for hospital admissions, and 91% to 78% for infection."

Read more: https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2282

Read study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e1.htm?s_cid=mm7037e1_w