Dr Clare Craig Profile picture
Jan 17, 2025 15 tweets 4 min read Read on X
How do we how well the covid vaccines performed?

We can look at this question from multiple angles and see. 🧵
First, there was the "secondary attack rate".

When someone tested positive this measure could be taken of the percentage of household contacts that later tested positive.

If vaccines reduced risk of infection this should have fallen.

It did not. Image
Another measure is how many people developed antibodies before and after vaccine. Image
Next we can turn to USA to look at what happened to the amount of virus in the sewage.

Something weird happened in early 2022 (shortly after massive booster campaign) but the post vaccine waves prior to that were same dimensions as before. Image
If vaccine reduced the susceptible population from 10% to 1% (which it didn't!) then a wave would take much longer to pass through the population (based on incorrect conventional beliefs) - because the virus would find it harder to find a new host.

The timing did not change. Image
What about serious illness?

As with every wave there were geographical outliers unaffected. In summer and autumn 2021 those included UK, Portugal and Ireland - the most westerly European populations.

Elsewhere, there was little change in hospital admissions - perhaps some. Image
Nor in intensive care admissions. Image
Covid labelled deaths appear a little lower but... Image
excess deaths match the virus in sewage trajectory.

The slight difference in spring 2021 is because of earlier deaths in the vaccinated who get their infections earlier because of immune suppression. Image
Even in the UK, the Delta wave was flatter but over its full course nothing much changed in hospitals.

Covid labelled deaths were lower - but there are good reasons to think they were overdiagnosed earlier on. Image
If there was a vaccine benefit then it should have been evident in geographical regions unaffected before 2022.

It wasn't.

Mortality was equivalent to US or Sweden in first wave.
To believe the vaccines were effective you need to believe all sorts of false assumptions fed into models by false prophets:

1. Everyone was susceptible to every variant
2. Lockdowns postponed a covid tsunami
3. Vaccines then stopped the covid tsunami
You also need to persuade yourself that the repetitive waves lasting ~16 weeks with peaks since at same times of year to before, are somehow different to what we should have expected all along.

You can comment that there is more virus around now... Image
That is because vaccinated people have a worse response to covid than the unvaccinated.

The third dose of mRNA presents a risk of the immune sytem switching to "let's ignore it as if it's food or pollen" response (IgG4 class switching).
There's plenty of evidence that the vaccinated had a higher risk of infection as a consequence.

Far from making things better the vaccines increased risk in the first two weeks from immune suppression.

Increased risk long term.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr Clare Craig

Dr Clare Craig Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ClareCraigPath

Jan 23
We now have death data for England for 2025.

What does it show?

2024 and 2025 has seen total mortality at about the same level as ONS predicted back in 2018 (already taking into account ageing and growing population).

Let's look in more detail
🧵 Image
Over 85 year old rate (based on ONS pop estimates) have returned to their 2016-2019 trendline.

Despite massive excess there was never the expected deficit.

The ONS predicted far too many deaths in 2024 and undercorrected for 2025 (green line). Image
The picture is similar for 75-84 year olds with far too many ONS predicted deaths in 2024 and an small correction for 2025. Image
Read 13 tweets
Nov 10, 2025
Four years on, we’re still being told “the virus was riskier than the vaccine.”

This is ALL WRONG.

The vaccine did not stop infections.

Vaccinated children were exposed to both risks - sometimes multiplied by several doses.

Breakdown of that paper:
🧵
dailymail.co.uk/health/article…
It is wrong to focus on only one adverse event to the exclusion of others.
+
Mild or asymptomatic myocarditis has been demonstrated post vaccine.

3% of teenage boys had evidence of dead heart cells (raised troponin) a third had symptoms after booster.

hartgroup.org/myocarditis-be…
Those are all massive caveats to looking at this data at all but when we do we see a whole heap of problems...
Read 20 tweets
Aug 27, 2025
🚨USA - your babies are dying.

This is a professional deep dive into the official data.

It explains the alarming numbers of deaths of under 1 year olds.

It’s time the authorities took notice and they won’t unless you make them.

These babies did NOT need to die 🚨
The green dots show the annual mortality rate for babies under 1 year old in USA each year.

These are too high in the last three years ('21-'23).

People draw different baselines to claim these deaths can be ignored but I will show you why they cannot be. Image
Data from '24 and '25 are incomplete but we can take a closer look at when the deaths increased.

Here are deaths in US baby girls.

Nothing happens from March '20 to March '21. From April '21 the babies start dying.

There is a winter reprieve in '21-'22 then it returns. Image
Read 14 tweets
Aug 26, 2025
USA - your babies are dying.

I have taken a deep dive to understand exactly what's happening with deaths of under 1 year olds.

Who wants to look at baby deaths?
I get it.
But DO NOT LOOK AWAY.
It is....
First of all I did this because of frustration with people arguing over what "expected" deaths should look like.

You can make up reasons for picking particular years and come up with a totally different story.

'99-'19 excess deaths from '21
'11-'16 deficit in deaths from '21 Image
What can we do to see if the rise is meaningful?

First we can look monthly ('24 and '25 data is incomplete)

Here are the monthly deaths for females which rises from March 2021 (having been below expected before) and stays high except for deficit in winter 2021-2022. Image
Read 13 tweets
Jun 6, 2025
The overall excess mortality has reduced to almost zero but this hides too many deaths in the young.

Thread of excess mortality in England based on gov estimates of population and death rate trends from 2014-2019.

0-24 year olds. Image
25-49 year olds Image
Read 8 tweets
Mar 20, 2025
One of the most important stories of lockdown has rarely been shared.

It is the story of Seattle.

They broke ranks and started an important experiment. 🧵
One research laboratory decided to break the rules for the sake of public health.

Rather than wait for a CDC approved covid test, they adapted an existing influenza test and started testing.

yahoo.com/news/seattle-l…
The regulator was not impressed.

This was a research laboratory doing clinical diagnostic testing and that was not allowed.

The lab was shut down on 9th March 2020.

nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/…
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(