What Happens in Japan and in Other Locales, Boosterwise

More proofs of booster harm and ADE, if anyone needs more proofs.

Guy Jin alerted my attention to the booster efficacy and safety statistics coming in from Japan, and he also wrote a a great post about it, “Wait Two Weeks! Evidence of higher Covid infection and death risk immediately after vaccination (Updated 7th April)“, on his substack.

But something else attracted my attention in the graphs from Japan in this post, namely the peak of morbidity and mortality 6-8 months after the primary “vaccination” completion in the “fully protected but yet unboosted”. Why would that be, if the adverse events are proximal in time to the time of the jab? The explanation is not that difficult to come by, as it turns out. Now, to the facts on the ground in Japan.

According to the Dec. 3, 2021 article, “Japan kicks off COVID-19 booster shot drive“: “Health authorities in Japan have started rolling out COVID-19 vaccine booster shots amid rising fears over the new Omicron variant. The goal is to prolong the effectiveness of coronavirus vaccines, which naturally declines over time. The target will be people over 18 who have received their second shot at least eight months previously. The government says over one million medical and healthcare workers are expected to get a booster by the end of the year. People over 65 years old will become eligible in January.“

From the vaccination stats at ourworldindata.org, we see the boosters being administered to 65+ starting Jan. 12, 2022, while the primary “vaccination commenced for the same age group sometime in June, 2021, or about 7 month prior, give or take:

And now to the graphs from the post of Guy Jin. Here’s the graph of severe illness and death by days after the last “vaccine” shot (“the time from last vaccination to symptom onset for the 61 severe and 225 fatal cases for which this data was known”), and also another one by days from “vaccination” to the same “event” split by the “vaccine dose (this statistic was released later, so there are very minor discrepancies between the two graphs):

We see the 2-month peak of morbidity/mortality in the 2x-jabbed centered exactly at 7 months post 2nd jab. This is a misnomer, actually, as these are the cases attributed to the 2x-jabbed within the 0-14 days of the 3rd jab (“dah booster”). Which is the usual legerdemain used by the “health authorities” around the globe to conjure up, out of thin air, the health benefits of every subsequent jab by shifting the bulk of the post-jab infections, deaths and morbidity from the current “savior” jab to the previous one, blamed in the process of losing its mojo exactly at that moment. This “technique” has been aptly laid out in El Gato Malo’s post from yesterday, “boosters associated with higher death rates“. Due to the variance in the exact time gap between the 2nd 3rd jab by age group/individual, we observe this delayed conjured-up peak in “2x-jabbed“ spread out to two months instead of being 2 week long.

And the peak of morbidity/mortality in the first 2 weeks post jab in the graphs above is, in fact, related to the period of weeks 3-4 post 3rd jab.

This is very clear-cut, as there were basically no 2nd jabs administered in Japan for at least a month before the boosters came on the stage, as it were.

To rub it in even more, here’s the chart of “Covid deaths” (should we call them “Booster deaths”?) and booster shots (thanks, Guy Jin):

To be fair, the other part of this 6-8 hump in severe&fatal cases may be the manifestation of ADE (antibody disease enhancement) being present with the Omicron variant and subsequent new variant coming on the scene since December 2021. I refer you to the great piece by El Gato Malo from today, “covid is becoming increasingly vaccine enabled“ for details. The hump shape is then the artifact of the shrinking 2x-jabbed population in favour of the expanding 3x-jabbed population.

Can we corroborate these findings through examples from other jurisdictions? We sure can! Big thanks to Public Health Ontario for its nice graphs on the same subject matter:

Special thanks for meticulously splitting the jabbed status in more ways than in all other official Ontario stats! Turns out they do collect these data, after all, and are just too modest, or too caring to reveal them to the already overwhelmed public! Here’s their own definition of the categories of jabbed (“cases not yet protected from vaccination“ isn’t my sarcastic take, if you wondered):

• Cases not yet protected from vaccination: Cases with a symptom onset date that was 0 to <14 days following the first dose of a Health Canada authorized COVID-19 vaccine. This time period from vaccination is not sufficient to develop immunity, therefore these cases are not considered protected from vaccination.

• Cases post-series initiation (i.e. cases following initiation but not completion of their primary series): Cases with a symptom onset date that was 14 or more days following the first dose of a two-dose series of a Health Canada authorized COVID-19 vaccine or 0 to <14 days after receiving the second dose of a two-dose Health Canada authorized COVID-19 vaccine series. Confirmed Cases of COVID-19 Following Vaccination in Ontario

• Cases post-series completion (i.e. cases following the completion of their primary series): Cases with a symptom onset date that was 14 or more days following the receipt of the first dose of a one-dose series or the second of a two-dose series of a Health Canada authorized COVID-19 vaccine (including mixed series of HC-authorized vaccine products), or 0 to <14 days after receiving a Health Canada authorized booster dose following their primary series.

• Cases post-booster dose (i.e. cases following completion of their primary series and a booster dose): Cases with a symptom onset date 14 or more days following receipt of a Health Canada authorized COVID-19 booster dose following their Health Canada authorized primary series, or 0 to <14 days after receiving a second Health Canada authorized booster dose following their primary series.

• Cases post-two booster doses (i.e. case following completion of their primary series and two booster doses): Cases with a symptom onset date 14 or more days following receipt of a second Health Canada authorized COVID-19 booster dose following their Health Canada authorized primary series.

Few explanations are in order at this juncture, as I hope you are scratching your head looking at the chart above as I did when I first saw it. Why on earth:

• “cases post-series initiation” and “cases post-booster dose“ start low for 2 weeks and then abruptly step up and stay elevated for good few weeks or months

• “cases post-series completion“, on the other hand, start strong for 14 days, then step down, only to pick up 6-8 months post day 0

That is because only “cases not yet protected from vaccination“ are clear-cut, 0-14 days post 1st jab and nothing else. The “weird” stats mentioned above are artifacts of the acts of combining two incongruent things in one category - what a mess!

Here’s the real state of affairs if the 0-14 post-jab period was included with the rest of corresponding post-jab statistic, after my crude way of applying Windows Paint:

All I can say, holy camoley! Being “not yet protected“ (1x-jabbed) caused massive initial morbidity in thankful jab recipients. The 2x-jab recipients fared much better, partially due to the fact that 2nd jabs were mainly administered in the middle of the summer in Ontario. But then, the 1st booster recipients had very rough first 2-3 weeks post booster jab - especially that much fewer Ontarians received 1st booster shots compared with 1st initial series shots:

The 2nd booster campaign is in it infancy, but we can also clearly observe the initial 2-week period of morbidity here.

Now to the “post-series completion” hump of morbidity 6-8 months in. If we trust Public Health Ontario classification above (a toll order, based on repeated precedents of duplicity, but we’ll take the high road this time, for the sake of argument), then this hump in severe outcomes for the “fully protected” is due to the same ADE for new variants, and it’s just a coincidence that Omicron came to Ontario just as the boosting was being ramped up:

The graph above would suggest that this hump of morbidity in “fully protected” is a mere artifact of the timing between the completion of 2x-jabbing and boosting, and the emergence of new infectious variants just as boosting started. Except that the lightning stoke twice into the same vaccination tree, as it were. Behold the hospital confirmed cases in Ontario below and compare it with the daily vaccine doses above for the two vaccination campaigns - the primary one and the booster one - above:

The concomitance of jabs and disease, and the one-to-one curve profile correspondence are too perfect in both campaigns to be a coincidence. A note: the “post-series initiation“ cases (magenta) in the chart above do not include the “cases not yet protected from vaccination“, the latter contributing to the spike in “unvaccinated” (remember the “deceits” mentioned above) in the period of March to June, 2021.

For the sake of completeness, same dynamics is being observed in another statistics-loving jurisdiction, namely Denmark, presented by El Gato Malo yesterday in his already-mentioned post “boosters associated with higher death rates“:

You can clearly see the “fully protected” (2 doses) bearing the brunt of recent morbidity, being helped by the growing cohort of 3x-jabbed, while the morbidity of “unvaccinated” is trending down - once the jabbing tempers down and, with it, the misattribution of cases of the freshly-jabbed to the “unvaccinated”.

In conclusion, I have to concur with El Gato on both counts:

• boosters associated with higher death rates, and

• Covid is becoming increasingly vaccine enabled, to boot.