Meryl, our (USA) health authorities resemble a runaway train, barreling full speed downhill into oblivion. They have no idea of what is even going on outside of their comfy offices. No feedback whatsoever.

Regarding hybrid immunity and lack of severe disease: something is brewing and excess mortality is off the charts. Our current health situation is arguably worse than it was in 2020. To present the current situation as some kind of an improvement is very dishonest on the part of JCVI.

Things are getting worse rapidly and there is no endgame or exit strategy in sight.

Expand full comment

OMG, they finally rediscovered what has been known for how many years; natural immunity actually works! Freaking brilliant! Maybe they will stumble on cooking food next. Sorry, I'm in a bad mood tonight. Just hoping my mushroom garden in the closet flourishes.

Expand full comment

I guess they have not read the Clevland study, more shots increase your risk of contracting covid. Also, they may want to check out the New South Wales data for hospitalization, ICU and deaths by vaccination status. Almost all are vaccinated, the % in hospital, ICU and dead all exceed the population % vaccinated. Also, the more vaccines received the higher the % hospitalized, ICU and deaths. Let's not forget the excess mortality even after subtracting the covid deaths, sounds like ther logic is as long as the vaccine saved one person from dying of covid but killed two others that is a good deal, for Pfizer yes.

Expand full comment
Jan 26Liked by Meryl Nass

Meryl, the three sentences that don't make sense correspond to the response Prof. Fenton got, which is basically "From here on in, don't rely on statistics of vaccinated being ill or dying, to show the shots aren't working, because we can think of lots of ways our own data (now) isn't reliable."

Expand full comment
Jan 26Liked by Meryl Nass

this is your classic corporate postmortem meeting after a project fails. get ready for the next one. gates says 2025 but my thinking is that they'll jump the gun because of the backlash to the covid plandemic https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/exercises/2022-catastrophic-contagion/lessons.html

Expand full comment
Jan 26Liked by Meryl Nass

Again where is the missing 60s group? They keep missing those out.

"...800 persons aged 70 years and above... ...; 800 persons aged 70 years and above and for persons aged 40 to 49 years."

Do they not use the people in their 60s because they were not included in the so called clinical trials??

Expand full comment

"If reduction of severe disease was the desired endpoint, why did NONE of the vaccine clinical trials use severe disease as an endpoint?"

Because the whole Covid-19 vaccine program has been a scam, that's why.

Expand full comment

It’s good to see the official statements side by side with your comments and rhetorical questions (the answers to which you already know)

Expand full comment

It appears to me that an admission like this one can be used against them in any lawsuits for damages. Hopefully the balls will go down the middle of the alley and knock all the pins down so this doesn't happen again.

Expand full comment

Meryl Nass is a superhero. Children will learn about your courage in the future if we survive that long! Thank you for your constant hard work.

Expand full comment

The UK needs its money to pay for gas and oil, now. No so, here. Our level of inflation is quite a bit lower than the one in Europe.

Expand full comment
Jan 26·edited Jan 27

Our local CVS is also pushing the TDaP vaccine to cocoon newborns from family members. Only the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine doesn’t prevent spread as shown in 2 studies from 2014... so it never has. Your newborn is at more risk from the asymptomatic vaccinated. Here that grandparents, aunts and uncles? For the rest of the story read pp. 321-327 in Turtles All The Way Down. The CVS ad is posted on GETTR @Vicknaird.

Expand full comment
Jan 26·edited Jan 26

Maybe. Are their stats factual or have they been mutilated by the CDC or FDA or the NHS? Has billy g demanded he compile that stats? Maybe big pharma is compiling that stats. Who the heck knows and who can be trusted? At this point no government agency of any kind can be trusted for anything.

Expand full comment

This paper contradicts data showing increased infection of the vaccinated. I'm already highly suspect of these findings. And as usual no injury, death by vaccine, or pathogenic priming/immune enhancement/ADE included. How many died?? Science is only as good as the inputs and endpoints. What about 'all health outcomes' as an endpoint. Risk of Bias? Seems like a red flag to me.


Eleven studies of prior infection and 15 studies of hybrid immunity were included. For prior infection, there were 97 estimates (27 at moderate RoB and 70 at serious RoB), with the longest follow up at 15 months.

PE against hospitalization or severe disease was:

82·5% [71·8-89·7%] at 3 months,

74·6% [63·1-83·5%] at 12 months.

PE against reinfection was:

65·2% [52·9-75·9%] at 3 months,

24·7% [16·4-35·5%] at 12 months.

(you may get it again, but its not severe)

For HE, there were 153 estimates (78 at moderate RoB (RISK OF BIAS) and 75 at serious RoB), with the longest follow up at 11 months for primary series vaccination and 4 months for first booster vaccination. Against hospitalization or severe disease, HE involving either primary series vaccination or first booster vaccination was consistently >95% for the available follow up.

(who was available??)

Against reinfection, HE involving primary series vaccination was:

69·0% [58·9-77·5%] at 3 months after the most recent infection or vaccination,

41·8% [31·5-52·8%] at 12 months,

HE involving first booster vaccination was 68·6% [58·8-76·9%] at 3 months,

46·5% [36·0-57·3%] at 6 months.

Against hospitalization or severe disease at 6 months, hybrid immunity with first booster vaccination (effectiveness 95·3% [81·9-98·9%]) or

with primary series alone (96·5% [90·2-98·8%]) provided significantly greater protection than prior infection alone (80·1% [70·3-87·2%]),

first booster vaccination alone (76·7% [72·5-80·4%]),

or primary series alone (64·6% [54·5-73·6%]).

Results for protection against reinfection were similar.


Risk of reinfection with natural immunity (PE)at 3 months according to this study is 4% lower than HE, and at 12 months 24% compared to HE at 41%. This also contradicts waning immunity noted in many other studies. Waning immunity with natural infection has proven in other studies to be less than vaccination. This study's findings indicate that HE immunity wanes less over time than natural immunity. Again, a contradiction. Then they claim HE is better protection for hospitalization and severe disease, but aren't the new variants less severe?? And isn't this an assessment of those that didn't die? Still comparing both groups, these findings are weak.

6 months out severe disease:

HE with booster 95% effective

HE with primary vax 96% effective

PE alone 80%

Booster only no prior infection 76%

Primary vax alone 64%

So again, getting the virus is protective and will likely keep you in better health than being an experiment. HE gives a person 16% more protection...? Again, where are the deaths?? this paper leaves more questions than answers.


Expand full comment

They openly admit to such outrageously poor efficacy of the drug and there is no outcry at all from any legacy media. The medical authorities should be grilled on this and then explain why it was necessary to coerce the drug on everyone.

Expand full comment

At 82, not doing boosters or any more aside from the first two. Don't like living dangerously so gargle with diluted Betadine and Qtip the solution for my nose. Hope it works. I have lost faith in my government and see I'm not alone. And for the last few years skipped my annual flu shot after seeing they have been marginal anyway. I have had time to read and digest way too many articles from SubStack and elsewhere. It is sad that our health officials who ought to be chiming in on these various SubStack articles abstain. I am now convinced that Dr Atlas was right about the officials at the top not reading the science. Surprised that staff seems not to do that either. They are incapable of saying they don't know and will find out. The worse part is I do pay taxes that form their salaries.

Expand full comment