https://hippocrates.com.au/hippocrates-news-archive/lies-damned-lies-and-atagi-statements/

Lies, Damned Lies, and ATAGI Statements…

Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)

Brief Extracts: It is clear that the Covid Omicron variant is able to evade vaccine-induced antibodies. Since vaccines only induce blood-borne antibodies rather than the mucosal antibodies that are required to neutralise a highly contagious, airborne respiratory virus, there is no possible way that any of the vaccines currently in use for COVID-19 can protect people against infection and spread of SARS-CoV-2.

The dense web of conflicts of interest of ATAGI members that has been meticulously documented by the Informed Medical Options Party. Here are the ”highlights”:

• ATAGI Chair Nigel Crawford is employed by Murdoch Children’s Research Institute which has received funding by vaccine manufacturers GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novavax, Sanofi and Sequiris, through the Vaccination and Immunisation Research Group.

• Deputy Chair Michelle Giles has received payments for travelling, accommodation and registration to a vaccine conference from Pfizer.

• Co-chair Christopher Blyth has received funding from Pfizer.

• Co-chair Allen Cheng is Director of Alfred Health, which has received payments from Merck, GSK, Gilead, Biocryst and George Clinical, all of which are involved in vaccine manufacturing.

• Voting member Katie Flanagan has been involved in research projects funded by grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (which profits handsomely from vaccine sales by holding corporate stocks and bonds in vaccine manufacturers including Merck, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi, whilst dodging tax on its profits) and has received travel and speaker fees from vaccine manufacturers Pfizer, Sanofi and Seqirus.

• Voting member Tom Snelling is Head of Infectious Disease and Implementation Research of Telethon Kids Institute, which is partnered with Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, GSK and Sanofi .

• Ex-officio member Kristine Macartney is Director of the National Centre for Immunisation Research & Surveillance (NCIRS) which receives its core funding from the Federal Government but also conducts vaccine industry-sponsored research.

But apart from that you could totally trust ATAGI to give completely unbiased advice on vaccination.

This is going to be a long post, as the ATAGI statement is a mammoth exercise in bureaucratic bullsh*t, so hang in there with me. The statement opens by acknowledging that “Preliminary data from large superspreading events in New South Wales involving younger people suggested that two doses of vaccine did not provide any significant protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection due to the Omicron variant.”  So far so good… however, it then claims – without citing any source – that “Strong evidence has accumulated over the past two weeks to indicate that booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines are likely to increase protection against infection with the Omicron variant.” Well, I’ll give them full marks for creativity, if not for accuracy. When I read the phrase “increase protection”, I assume that it means “getting a third dose will reduce your risk of being infected with Omicron”, not “getting a third dose will reduce your risk of being infected with Omicron compared to getting two doses, but you’d actually have a lower risk if you didn’t get the vaccine at all”. But that’s precisely what both the UK and Danish data show. Remember, the ONS found that people who had received the booster had 4.45 times greater odds of being infected with Omicron than the unvaccinated, while those who had received two doses had 2.26 times greater odds. Meanwhile, analysis of the Danish data taking into account rates of single, double and triple vaccination calculates negative vaccine efficacy for single, double and triple vaccination:

In case you haven’t already twigged, let me spell it out for you: “negative efficacy” means, quite simply, you’re more likely to get infected with the Omicron strain if you’ve been jabbed than if you weren’t. It’s just that having three shots doesn’t increase the likelihood as much as having two. That’s what ATAGI calls “increased protection”. Like I said, full marks for ‘creative interpretation’. The Federal Government “base[s] their decisions on the advice of ATAGI” and referred to the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) as providing “trusted medical advice from experts in the field”.

COMMENT: What a Disgusting Criminal-like Setup in a Proclaimed ‘Democratic’ Society…  What Disgusting People.