“As I observed then, this would mean the vaxxed and unvaxxed pose a comparable danger to each other,” writes Shriver.
“All Covid apartheid schemes are therefore insensible.”

“Fresher information has fortified this conclusion of the summer. In every age group over 30 in the UK, the rates of Covid infection per 100,000 are now higher among the vaxxed than the unvaxxed. Indeed, in the cohorts aged between 40 and 79, infection rates among the vaccinated are more than twice as high as among the unvaccinated. PHE’s fruitlessly rechristened body, the UK Health Security Agency, frantically clarifies that the data ‘should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness’, a caveat which I include for the sake of accuracy. But the differences in the infection rates are drastic enough for you to draw your own conclusions.”



Shriver then summarizes how that data demolishes the reason for implementing vaccine passport schemes.

“Gatekeeping of pleasure palaces promotes the wrong impression — statistically, the lie — that the unvaccinated riff-raff exiled to the pavement pose a far graver threat of communicable disease than the diners in the nearby banquette who, like you, have righteously got the shot. In truth, the double-jabbed airline passenger in 24A can be just as risky a seat-mate as the great unwashed banished from the flight.”

“We noted that these data have been used to argue that vaccines are ineffective,” Humpherson subsequently wrote.

This new data might lend credence to the theory that the jab is intended to destroy the immune system (with each successive jab further eroding protection against common ailments, in addition to the medical problems caused directly by the jab itself):

If the jab doesn’t kill you itself, it makes it more likely something else will.