I can’t read the article, but guessing it puts very little weight on the severity reduction vaccines grant. Or is there new data showing that’s not a thing?
I don't see anything about severity reduction in the article. The argument it has lies in >As the World Health Organization puts it, “if mandatory vaccination is considered necessary to interrupt transmission chains and prevent harm to others, there should be sufficient evidence that the vaccine is efficacious in preventing serious infection and/or transmission.” For Omicron, there is as yet no such evidence. And > T…
] During the COVID-19 pandemic, Montagnier was criticised for using his Nobel prize status to "spread dangerous health messages outside his field of knowledge"[6] for promoting the conspiracy theory that SARS-CoV-2 was deliberately created in a laboratory. Such a claim has been refuted by other virologists.[7][8][9][10]
Of course there's no reason to trust Wikipedia. My point is to challenge the idea that because someone got a Nobel Prize on one topic, that makes them a credible source on even related topics.
RationalWiki has a much lower threshold than Wikipedia and at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nobel_disease writes of Montagnier support for "[h]omeopathy, water memory, autism quackery, AIDS cured by nutrition and vaccine hysteria", linking to https://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/01/14/the-nobel-dise... for support.
It was easy to find L Montagnier et al 2011 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.306 012007, "DNA waves and water" https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/306/1/0... which, if true, would indeed overthrow science, and deserve another Nobel Prize.
Yet it's almost only cited by homeopaths, and more broadly "alt. medicine" sources. The setup doesn't look complicated, so should be easily reproducible. Almost as if it wasn't correct - just like we would expect.