The latest data on vaccination rates as compared to the current spread in states shows that vaccines are less effective than government claims.  Arguments about bodily autonomy aside, what right should the government have to mandate a vaccine which does not show to be as effective as either the manufacturer or the government claim?

As I have stated many times here on RedState, I am fully vaccinated.  This isn’t some ivory tower virtue signaling, rather just a statement of fact, so you know from where I am coming.  I don’t judge the unvaccinated or advocate actively for people to get vaccinated.  I chose to early on as a result of having two 70+-year-old parents, who I visit often.  Yet, as time has gone on, and reading the data that has come out regarding those vaccines, I don’t necessarily find them dangerous as much as I do less effective than they are advertised to be.

This belief has been complicated by the government instituting various vaccine mandates on the local, state, and federal levels.  Regardless of how I feel about the vaccine, or my choice to be vaccinated, the decision to get vaccinated should remain a personal one, or at the very most, one made between the individual and their doctor.  The moment that government began extending their mask mandates, creating new vaccine mandates, and discussing perpetuity of those until which time more people are vaccinated, I returned to do what I do best:  Telling the Government to pound sand.  When just recently I was asked if I wanted to get the booster, I replied, “No, and that will continue to be ‘no’ as long as the government removes others’ choices in whether or not to be vaccinated at all.”

How could we tell if vaccines were as effective in reducing cases as they claim?  Well, as a particular state’s vaccination rate rose, it would certainly lead to a lower new case rate.  Additionally, those states with lower vaccination rates would have a higher new case rate than states with higher vaccination rates.  This isn’t rocket science.  A higher vaccination rate should be directly correlated to a lower number of new cases.

What states have the highest rates of vaccination?  Right now, Vermont has the highest at 71.5%, followed by Rhode Island at 71.2% and Connecticut at 70.9%.  Now for a reference, scientists have believed that 60-70% immunity levels are needed to achieve “herd immunity,” placing all three of these states at the top of places we could expect COVID numbers to be falling substantially.  It would not have just suddenly stopped the spread in those states, but it would have slowed significantly as they approached that 70% number.

Except it didn’t. Vermont now has a new case rate of 84 cases per 100,000 residents, placing it either at the top or near the top of worst in the country.  Rhode Island has 32 cases per 100,000 residents and Connecticut has 12.3 cases per 100,000 residents.  In other words, if this were truly correlated, those new case numbers 1) should be much more consistent, and 2) ascending as the states decreased in vaccination rate.  Neither of those things is happening.

I’m sure if we compare those numbers to the lowest of vaccinated states, we would see a different story, right?  Well no.

The states with the lowest vaccination rates (listed from last and increasing) are West Virginia, Idaho, and Wyoming.  West Virginia has a vaccination rate of 41.1%, Idaho is at 44.1%, and Wyoming is at 44.2%  For reference, Connecticut has a vaccination rate 26.7% higher than that of Wyoming, and Vermont has a vaccination rate 30.4% higher than that of West Virginia.  Their new case numbers should reflect that right?  Well, no.  In fact, West Virginia’s new case numbers are just 52 new cases per 100,000, 32 cases below that of Vermont.  The highest vaccinated state has 32 more new cases per capita than does the lowest vaccinated state.  While this seems like we can close the book on the discussion about vaccine effectiveness,  Idaho and Wyoming both have new case rates at 52 and 94 per 100,000 residents respectively.  Wyoming is higher than Vermont.  Does this mean there’s some correlation we are missing?

Again, no.  North Dakota has only a 47.7% vaccination rate, but just 80 new cases per 100,000 residents.  Louisiana, a 47.9% vaccination rate, and 13 new cases per 100,000 residents.  Tennessee?  47.9% vaccination rate to 18 new cases per 100,000 residents.  If the vaccines were as effective as they suggest, these states should be significantly worse.

Well with as horrible as the media has been telling us Florida is, shouldn’t we be able to find out just how horrible of a vaccination rate they have?  The vaccination rate in Florida is actually much higher than you’d probably expect, at 59%, 17.9% higher than West Virginia, and 12.5% lower than Vermont.  Right in the middle, so where do you think Florida’s current new case rate fell?  It is just a mere 7 new cases per 100,000 residents.  How does that stack up against a mandate pushing tyrant of a big state?  Say….. Gavin Newsom?  Even with all the mandates and vaccine giveaways, Newsom has had, California only has a vaccination rate 2.6% higher than that of Florida.   Newsom has also been very heavy-handed with mask and social distancing restrictions, so one could expect their new case number to be at least somewhere near Florida’s, right?  Wrong.  California has 21 new cases per 100,000 residents currently, three times higher than Florida.

What does this all mean?  Vaccines certainly do not currently correlate to lower new case numbers. That doesn’t mean there are not some medical benefits to the vaccines, but then those medical benefits should be a personal choice and not one mandated by government.  One can hope, though, that as more people begin to understand there is no correlation, more will begin to stand up to fight against these silly mandates.

All of the vaccination rates for various states were found here.

All of the new case numbers were found here.

All of the state populations were found here.