O/T:- Vaccines: Pro/Anti & Conspiracy Theories [Originally Covid Pass and Meadow Ln.]

[upthemaggies]

Will mass vaccination against Omicron give the final blow?

Mass vaccination against Omicron will take away our very last opportunity to prevent SARS-CoV-2 from making a natural selection in favor of hosts who have preserved a fully functional innate immune defense.

Many scientists believe that the multitude of mutations found in the Omicron variant constitute an evolutionary disadvantageous change that drives the virus into a mild course of disease and possibly even into endemicity or extinction altogether. Once again, predictions lose their credibility when natural evolutionary trends are countered by large-scale human intervention. In case of the current viral pandemic, the most worrisome threat is posed by the ongoing mass vaccination program that is only expanding, ignoring concerns related to the evolutionary capacity of this virus.

In order to understand why mass vaccination with updated (i.e., ‘anti-Omicron’) C-19 vaccines is at risk of entailing a bioweapon-like disaster, one must follow the evolutionary consequences of population- level immune pressure on viral infectiousness, a phenomenon that is now widely acknowledged to be driven by mass vaccination campaigns (1). When a dramatic change in the antigenic constellation of the virus (e.g., the one represented by Omicron) occurs in the context of mass vaccination in the middle of a pandemic, there should be no doubt that widespread immune pressure is involved. But how can immune pressure on viral infectiousness, for which Omicron is now even affecting its very capacity to be neutralized, lead to a more clement viral behavior? The biggest lesson learned from this pandemic is that whenever we are puzzled about its evolutionary comportment, we should invoke the rules of...innate immunity! By evolving more and more resistance to S-directed, neutralizing antibodies (Abs), SARS-CoV-2 is increasingly setting free the host’s innate Abs (as they’re no longer suppressed).

As innate Abs clear the virus in ways that are not Ag-specific, natural selection of SARS-CoV-2 variants that could escape from innate Abs does not occur because such variants simply don’t exist. More specifically, although Omicron undeniably results from population-level immune pressure and represents a clear-cut example of how SARS-CoV-2 continues to unfold its evolutionary capacity when mass vaccination threatens its perpetuation, it cannot afford this evolutionary adaptation while continuing to outcompete relevant innate Abs. COVID-19 vaccine weekly surveillance reports (weeks 33 through 48), as published by UK Health Security Agency, strongly suggest that innate Abs, especially when thoroughly trained (such as, for example, in older age groups), can resist competition from vaccinal Abs and thereby dramatically reduce case rates in vaccinees (2). It is therefore not surprising that when the virus- neutralizing capacity of vaccinal Abs further diminishes (e.g., in Omicron), innate Abs regain their full- fledged virus-sterilizing capacity and hence dramatically diminish the incidence of disease in vaccinees.

On the other hand, lack of immune recognition of Omicron by previously acquired short-lived Abs in unvaccinated individuals (as a result of previous mild infection with the Delta variant) will also diminish the incidence of disease in younger unvaccinated individuals (note 1).As Omicron is extremely infectious, it ishighly likely that we’ll soon start to witness spectacular waves of infection (mostly exempt from severe disease) all over the world. However, these waves will be followed by a strong decline in viral infectious pressure. This would be the very last moment for halting all mass vaccination programs in order to enable the overall population to further diminish viral infectivity while implementing a widespread antiviral chemoprophylaxis program to further prevent transmission of this highly infectious variant.

Given the continued ignorance and lack of understanding of the pandemic & detrimental consequences of mass vaccination by public and global health authorities, the chances that the disaster I’ve previously alluded to can be prevented are slim (3). The scientifically corrupt narrative is likely to be further nurtured by more and more cases of disease that are likely to occur in vaccinees once they will have acquired short-lived Abs directed at Omicron’s spike protein as a result of previous mild infection. The latter can more easily outcompete innate Abs in vaccinees, the training of which was stalled as a result of their immune suppression by vaccinal Abs. Rapid re-exposure to the highly infectious Omicron variant could then make them much more susceptible to disease.

Geert Vanden Bossche

[upthemaggies]

Harvard Study Explodes Myths About ‘Vaccines’ Stopping the Spread – But It’s Even Worse Than That
December 9, 2021
by Kyle Becker

The Harvard study’s paper was accepted in the European Journal of Epidemiology.

A Harvard study of 68 nations and 2,947 counties in the United States published in the European Journal of Epidemiology is shattering the argument that the mRNA therapeutic drugs being marketed as “vaccines” do anything significantly to stop the spread of Covid-19.

It’s even worse than that. As Becker News suggested in September, there is a positive correlation between a nation’s vaccination levels and the “case” rates being reported. The scientific findings are a crushing blow to the argument that the vaccines have a “public health” purpose and that vaccine mandates are justified.

The Harvard researcher who co-authored the study, S. V. Subramanian of the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, teamed up with Canadian researcher Akhil Kumar to perform the research.

Their “bombshell” findings? Read them and weep:

At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.

As the Covid pandemic continues to defy predictions about when it will finally be ‘over,’ there is a curious phenomenon taking place across the United States and around the globe: Covid-19 case rates increasing alongside vaccination rates.

The textbook examples of this disturbing trend are the nations of Israel, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Israel is now experiencing its fourth wave, which is being accompanied by another round of ‘booster shots.’ Israel has 61.5% of all adults “fully vaccinated” (although the use of ‘booster shots’ throws the term into question.)

Israel was also one of the most suggestive cases for the above-cited Harvard study.

Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.

Where was the Omicron variant first detected? Botswana, followed by South Africa. Interesting.

The study also makes an interesting point about counties with extremely high vaccination rates: “Of the top 5 counties that have the highest percentageof population fully vaccinated (99.9–84.3%), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identifies 4 of them as ‘High’ Transmission counties.”

Thus, if you believe that getting nearly the entire local population “vaccinated” will do anything to stop the lockdowns and mandates, this data should make you think again. The agenda is political, and therefore, the solution will have to be political.

However, this isn’t stopping Pfizer’s CEO from making the unsubstantiated claim to sell the “booster” shots.
“Although two doses of the vaccine may still offer protection against severe disease caused by the Omicron strain, it’s clear from these preliminary data that protection is improved with a third dose of our vaccine,” Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla said. “Ensuring as many people as possible are fully vaccinated with the first two dose series and a booster remains the best course of action to prevent the spread of COVID-19.”

This is an absolute lie. It should be no surprise that a Big Pharma CEO would deceive the public about his product. But the U.S. government and the corporate press turning a blind eye to the false claim should have Americans outraged.

As a legal team recently explained in a lawsuit against the FDA, the “vaccines” have absolutely failed in preventing the spread of Covid-19. Thus, there is no legal, moral, or public health justification to mandate “vaccines.”

[sinophile]

Bossche is an outlier.

"Geert Vanden Bossche has recently published a letter in which he argues that the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 is going to precipitate a public health disaster because the vaccines will select for viral variants that can escape their protection and drive them towards higher virulence. His claims are speculative, he offers no evidence to support his arguments, and makes several comments which are blatantly incorrect. The core of his argument relies on the assumption that COVID-19 vaccines do not have a significant effect on transmission. This has been repeatedly confirmed to be false in multiple studies. Furthermore, even if his assumptions about the effects of the vaccine on transmission are true, his conclusions are incorrect based on established precedent from Marek’s disease, a viral illness of birds with a vaccine that does not strongly affect transmission- but it still shows meaningful public health benefits in the populations of chickens where it is used. The vaccines will absolutely be critical to ending the pandemic, and fortunately the modular nature of the technology allows for rapid reformulation and adjustment as necessary (and thus far, though precautions are being taken with novel variants to produce vaccines specific to their set of problematic mutations, there isn’t significant enough evidence to suggest that total reformulation of the vaccines is needed), but no issues raised in this letter warrant a re-evaluation of our current COVID-19 vaccination policy". Edward Nirenberg

[sinophile]

Likewise, the study by S. V. Subramanian is flawed.

"The mistake of this study is the inappropriate methodology they used for their conclusions. The methodology does not specify the degree of distortion and risk factors, which is the standard in studies that lead to conclusions evaluating the effect of drugs and therapies. In the study, I see two factors as major risks of distortion: 1. The authors compare the same time interval of 7 days in all countries included in the study, without taking into account the fact that some of the evaluated countries were before the third wave of the pandemic during this period (East Europe), while in others (Iceland, Portugal) this wave culminated (2, 3). In the countries of Eastern Europe (Slovakia, Romania, Serbia), at that time, despite the low vaccination rate, there were no increased numbers of new cases recorded, as the third wave had not yet started there. Two weeks later, these numbers were significantly higher and these days they record a daily increase of about 10-20 % of performed tests (4). In addition, the highest number of hospitalizations is in the least vaccinated regions. 2. Although the authors recalculated the number of new cases per 1 million inhabitants, they did not take into account the number and type of tests performed. It is logical that a higher number of tested individuals also means a higher number of new cases and vice versa. And here comes the biggest paradox that the authors have elevated to a scientific finding, namely that the most vaccinated countries, such as Iceland and Portugal, have the highest number of new cases. The authors contrasted South Africa and Vietnam, which they said had the lowest number of new cases and a vaccination rate of only 10%. Such a paradox should be explained in the study, and the demanding peer review of the peer-reviewed journal should filter out similar "revolutionary conclusions". Isn't the high vaccination rate factor also associated with high testing rates, especially in rich countries with a highly developed health care system as well as a data collection system? In contrast, WHO data from the reporting period do not support these findings (5). Do the authors suggest that the vaccination causes increase of the number of new cases? Do they have any other explanation for that? If we consider as a case every positive RT-PCR test (which is not correct), then the study is still full of speculative interpretations and especially conclusions about the motivation/discrimination of people to be vaccinated. Of course, the degree of motivation and discrimination is a matter of discussion, but this discussion should not create prejudices that lead to tendentious and erroneous conclusions of scientific work". Ivan Holko

The point of posting the above two is that there are outliers who publish results of their studies, which is fair enough. However, the vast majority of scientific thought is that vaccines are the only way out of the pandemic.

[upthemaggies]

Bossche is an outlier.

"Geert Vanden Bossche has recently published a letter in which he argues that the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 is going to precipitate a public health disaster because the vaccines will select for viral variants that can escape their protection and drive them towards higher virulence. His claims are speculative, he offers no evidence to support his arguments, and makes several comments which are blatantly incorrect. The core of his argument relies on the assumption that COVID-19 vaccines do not have a significant effect on transmission. This has been repeatedly confirmed to be false in multiple studies. Furthermore, even if his assumptions about the effects of the vaccine on transmission are true, his conclusions are incorrect based on established precedent from Marek’s disease, a viral illness of birds with a vaccine that does not strongly affect transmission- but it still shows meaningful public health benefits in the populations of chickens where it is used. The vaccines will absolutely be critical to ending the pandemic, and fortunately the modular nature of the technology allows for rapid reformulation and adjustment as necessary (and thus far, though precautions are being taken with novel variants to produce vaccines specific to their set of problematic mutations, there isn’t significant enough evidence to suggest that total reformulation of the vaccines is needed), but no issues raised in this letter warrant a re-evaluation of our current COVID-19 vaccination policy". Edward Nirenberg

""Firstly, I am not a public health expert, nor an expert on COVID-19, pandemics generally, virology, infectious disease, or medicine."
Edward Nirenberg

[upthemaggies]

"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said that it will take 75 years to process a Freedom of Information Act request relating to the release of important documents associated with the approval of the Pfizer vaccine. The FDA claims that it will take this long because it can only process 500 pages per month and there are tens of thousands of files which need to be reviewed before they are authorised for release, despite the same agency giving the green-light to the Pfizer jab in just over a 100 days after it was given access to those same documents. "

[sinophile]

Well, we can all find so-called experts on the internet who will push their particular theories. I'll stick to believing what the vast majority of health experts say. Others are perfectly entitled to believe the more extreme conspiracy theorists. Anyway, stay safe and protect others.

[Mapperleypie]

"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said that it will take 75 years to process a Freedom of Information Act request relating to the release of important documents associated with the approval of the Pfizer vaccine. The FDA claims that it will take this long because it can only process 500 pages per month and there are tens of thousands of files which need to be reviewed before they are authorised for release, despite the same agency giving the green-light to the Pfizer jab in just over a 100 days after it was given access to those same documents. "

Have you got anything from Right Said Fred or Ian Brown?

[upthemaggies]

Have you got anything from Right Said Fred or Ian Brown?

Ian Brown
"Care workers and NHS staff are amongst the lowest paid workers. Forcing them to take a medium/long term untested jab from big corps with indemnity from harm to keep their job is unjustifiable class war."

I'll get back to you on Right Said Fred

[BigFatPie]

Well, we can all find so-called experts on the internet who will push their particular theories. I'll stick to believing what the vast majority of health experts say. Others are perfectly entitled to believe the more extreme conspiracy theorists. Anyway, stay safe and protect others.

Yep it’s like getting 100 electricians round to your house, 99 of whom say it needs rewiring or the whole lot will go up, but going with the 1 who says no, don’t bother, everything’s safe.