CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

CDC Confirmed Post-Vaccination Death From Blood Clotting Two Weeks Before Alerting Public: Emails
By Zachary Stieber
June 25, 2022

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed in late 2021 that a person died from blood clotting after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine that had been linked with an increased risk of blood clotting, but did not alert the public for two weeks, newly obtained emails show.

Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a CDC official, told colleagues at the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Dec. 2, 2021, “We have confirmed a 9th TTS death following Janssen vaccination,” according to emails obtained by The Epoch Times through a Freedom of Information Act request.

TTS refers to thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, a condition that features low platelet levels combined with blood clots.

Officials had recommended a nationwide pause on the administration of the vaccine, produced by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) subsidiary Janssen, in April 2021 after six women experienced TTS after J&J vaccination and three died. But they lifted the pause after determining the vaccine remained safe and effective.

The condition was not discussed much in the ensuing months, despite the CDC later reporting that five additional deaths occurred before Aug. 31, 2021. Shimabukuro gave a single update, in mid-October 2021, saying five total deaths had been reported.

That was until December 2021. Twelve days after Shimabukuro alerted colleagues of the ninth death, the FDA urged healthcare workers not to administer the vaccine to people with certain conditions because of the TTS risk. Two days after that, Dr. Isaac See, another CDC official, informed the public during a meeting that nine deaths had occurred post-vaccination.

It’s unclear when the CDC learned of the sixth, seventh, and eighth deaths.

The CDC takes reports made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and attempts to confirm the reports, including post-vaccination deaths. A higher number of post-vaccination TTS deaths have been reported to the system than the number the CDC has verified.

One day after Shimabukuro confirmed the ninth death, his message was forwarded by Dr. Amanda Cohn, another CDC official, to CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky.

“See below, information on a 9th completely tragic death from TTS,” Cohn wrote.

“Many thanks for letting us know … any tragic case,” Walensky responded.

The emails were partially redacted; one was fully redacted.

Four days after Shimabukuro’s email, CDC officials gave an update on post-vaccination TTS to the COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group, part of the agency’s vaccine advisory panel, in a closed-door meeting. The Epoch Times has asked for presentations and audio from the meeting.

It took 14 days to update the public. That happened during a virtual meeting of the advisory panel that anyone was free to tune into.

Asked about the delay in making the public aware of the deaths, the CDC provided a comment from the team that works on verifying deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

“For all reports classified as serious (which includes deaths after vaccination), VAERS (within one business day of receiving the report) requests all available medical records, including death certificates and autopsy reports, for the reported patient. For some reports, including some potential reports of TTS, consultation with experts to determine if the report meets a standardized case definition is performed. Regarding verified reports of TTS where the patient died, these processes occurred during their usual timeframes,” the team said.

During the virtual meeting, advisers recommended the CDC say the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was not “preferred” because of its link to TTS. Walensky endorsed the recommendation.

But it wasn’t until five months later that drug regulators at the FDA formally restricted the use of the vaccine because of the blood clotting risk.

The agency said it conducted an updated analysis of reports and identified 60 confirmed cases, including nine confirmed deaths. It said it was limiting the availability of the shot because the reported cases and deaths were “not appreciably lower than previously reported.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Vaccines for 6-Month-Olds ‘Makes Absolutely No Sense’: Dr. Jeffrey Barke
There is no safety profile for the effects of vaccines on children
By Masooma Haq and Steve Lance
June 25, 2022

As the Biden administration rolls out vaccines for the nation’s youngest children (6 months to 5-year-olds), Dr. Jeffrey Barke, chief medical officer at the Convention of States, said there is absolutely no evidence supporting that these youngest children are at any serious risk of death from COVID-19 and should not get be broadly vaccinated.

“I think it’s important that we tell the truth first, and then let parents and adults make informed decisions about whether or not to get vaccinated,” Barke said during a recent interview with NTD’s Capitol Report. “And to recommend this product to 6-month-olds makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. So, to start with, there is no COVID emergency, especially as it relates to younger people. It simply doesn’t exist.”

Barke referenced the CDC’s own website, saying that according to the CDC’s data, just over 1,000 children have died since the beginning of the pandemic as of the interview. “While every death of course is tragic, the reality is every one of those deaths occurred in a child that had significant underlying comorbidities. Healthy children simply do not die from this illness,” said Barke.

Meanwhile, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha made a contrary statement, saying that the infant vaccines “have been thoroughly tested. Millions of children above the age of 5 have gotten these vaccines. They’re exceedingly safe,” Jha told CBS News in a June 20 interview.

The CDC last Saturday signed off on giving both Moderna’s and Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to infants and children between 6 months and 5 years old. It came after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel unanimously voted to authorize the use of the vaccines.

Jha also said while the majority of children likely have natural immunity, getting the vaccines will help keep children out of the hospital if they get it again.

The White House is echoing the FDA and CDC’s message to get young children vaccinated.

“COVID has been quite common in children actually. We think maybe almost 70 percent of kids have ended up getting infected with COVID, [but it’s] still worth getting the vaccine. It really offers an extra level of protection, an extra layer of protection,” said Jha.

Barke disagreed with Jha and said there is a risk to young children from vaccines themselves because they have no long-term safety profiles.

“It’s ridiculous what’s going on here. And the part that makes me the saddest is the FDA and the CDC already have trust issues amongst the American public, and for them now to authorize and recommend that a 6-month-old receive a COVID-19 vaccine when they’re not at risk, and there have been no long-term safety studies with these products, is going to erode whatever little trust is left in these organizations,” said Barke.

He added that if a child has an adverse reaction to the vaccine, that child’s parents could not sue for damages because the authorization prevents the companies from being held liable.

“[The vaccine] is experimental by definition. A product that’s being used under emergency use [EU] authorization definitionally is investigational, and it makes no sense whatsoever. The EU authorization gives these vaccine companies blanket liability protection,” said Barke.

In addition, the virus has mutated since the vaccines were developed, so we don’t know if these vaccines protect against strains like Omicron, Barke said.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX2w0Rd26Fg
International BA 5 wave
23 min 16 sec
Jun 25, 2022
Dr. John Campbell

Investigation of SARS-CoV-2 variants: technical briefings https://www.gov.uk/government/publica... BA.5 growing 35.1% faster than Omicron subvariant BA.2 BA.5 growing 19.1% faster than Omicron subvariant BA.2 US https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-trac... Increase in hospital patients, probably our best proxy Or test positivity, (14%) UK hospital data https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2... Australia https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/t... Professor Adrian Esterman, University of South Australia Basically of those subvariants ... are all in Australia at the moment and will be competing against each other At the moment BA.2 is the majority of cases in Australia, but BA.5 is starting to take over Australian Influenza Surveillance Report and Activity Updates – 2022 https://www1.health.gov.au/internet/m... 147,155 official notifications 55,101 in the last 2 weeks Influenza A, 83.4% H1N1, 0.8% A and B coinfections, less than 0.1% Highest notification rates in children Zoe data https://health-study.joinzoe.com/data New covid wave https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWrU0... Cases, + 225,464 Up 40% on the week Prevalence, one in 27 Scotland, one in 18 UK R = 1.1 BA.5 surge Similar transmissibility as BA.2 Immune escape More reinfections, from this year and last No increase in deaths, a little down on the week Hospitalisations, up 33% on the week Individual risk is less Increases in all age groups Increases in all regions Long covid New cases, + 3,851 (more than 3 months) Omicron, less likelihood of LC compared to delta infection More cases overall due to sheer numbers of infections Risk of getting LC with BA.1 One in 23 infections (more than a month) ONS data UK, 1.7 million infections last week https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati... 1,360,600 (1 in 40 people) in England 68,500 (1 in 45 people) in Wales 59,900 (1 in 30 people) in Northern Ireland 250,700 (1 in 20 people) in Scotland London, 25 to 34 year olds Antibodies, January to February 2022 Secondary school pupils 96.6% Primary school pupils 62.4% Dr. Rochelle Walensky (moderna) https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/06/... recommending a second safe and effective vaccine for children ages 6 through 17 years
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Shanghai reports zero COVID cases for first time in months
June 25, 2022

China reported zero new COVID-19 infections in Shanghai for the first time since March on Saturday, as the country's latest outbreak subsides after months of lockdowns and other restrictions.

China is the last major economy committed to a zero-COVID strategy, stamping out all infections with a combination of targeted lockdowns, mass testing and long quarantine periods.

The economic hub of Shanghai was forced into a months-long lockdown during a COVID surge this spring driven by the fast-spreading Omicron variant, while the capital Beijing shuttered schools and offices for weeks over a separate outbreak.

But infections have slowed to a trickle in recent days, with Shanghai on Saturday reporting zero locally transmitted cases for the first time since before the outbreak in early March.

"There were no new domestic COVID-19 confirmed cases and no new domestic asymptomatic infections in Shanghai," the city said in a statement.

The lockdown on Shanghai's 25 million residents was mostly lifted in early June, but the metropolis has struggled to return to normal as individual neighbourhoods have reimposed restrictions over new infections.

Millions of people in the city were temporarily locked down again two weeks ago after the government ordered a fresh mass testing campaign.

In Beijing, restrictions imposed in May were later eased as cases declined, but tightened again this month after a nightlife-linked infection cluster emerged.

After days of mass testing and localised lockdowns, the "Heaven Supermarket infection chain"—named after a popular bar visited by the patients—has now been effectively blocked, Beijing authorities said last week.

The city's education bureau said Saturday that all elementary and middle school students could return to their classrooms for in-person schooling on Monday.

Beijing reported only two new local infections on Saturday.

However, China's southern manufacturing powerhouse of Shenzhen said Saturday it would close wholesale markets, cinemas and gyms in a central district bordering Hong Kong for three days after COVID cases were discovered there.

Chinese officials insist the zero-COVID policy is necessary to prevent a healthcare calamity, pointing to unevenly distributed medical resources and low vaccination rates among the elderly.

But the strategy has hammered the world's second-largest economy and heavy handed enforcement has triggered rare protests in the tightly controlled country.

China's international isolation has also prompted some foreign businesses and families with the financial means to make exit plans.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
From Dr. Geert vanden Bossche
Open letter : Advice
Geert Vanden Bossche
2 hr ago

  • I am finalizing my analysis on the immune-epidemiologic consequences of the mass vaccination program. It will shed light on how the emergence of globally ongoing / starting epidemics of several different infectious diseases (meningococcal, TB, HIV, Herpetic diseases, etc.) as well as that of 2 major pandemics (even if not yet officially declared as pandemics), i.e., Monkeypox and Avian Flu are related to the mass vax program.

    Basically, the enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SC-2 (which results from their infection-enhancing vaccinal antibodies) sufficiently exhausts the innate and adaptive immune system to lower the population’s immune defense down to a level where these microorganisms can spread in the population. I will explain this in more detail but for now, I strongly advice all people who didn’t get the shot to:

  1. take extreme care of their health and lifestyle,
  2. not vaccinate against seasonal Influenza (!!) as this will only make you more susceptible to avian Flu (because of ADEI),
  3. for all those who didn’t get it in the past: get sooner or later the live attenuated, replication-competent smallpox vaccine (not yet available in sufficient supply but the expansion of smallpox is slower than that of avian Flu, so hope that this will allow for enough time to scale up production)
  4. make sure your young children do NOT get vaccinated with any of the C-19 vaccines (under no circumstances!) but get them properly vaccinated with the live attenuated childhood vaccines: Measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, as I predict that outbreaks will occur in countries / regions where herd immunity has dropped below the threshold
  5. not worry too much about C-19; most of us now have a level of trained innate immunity or even natural immunity that will protect us from moderate (and certainly from severe) disease. The situation will only further improve as the virus continues to select more resistant immune escape variants. I predict that even the unvaccinated vulnerable people will become less and less susceptible, but for now, some may still be vulnerable if they haven’t gotten any SC-2-infection experience yet.
  6. Avoid travel to other countries and follow the situation in your own region / country and also worldwide, especially re: avian influenza
  7. Consider removing your parents from the nursing home as we are up for outbreaks of RSV and seasonal Flu and having vulnerable people concentrated in the same place is just going to make it worse. Nevertheless, even the elderly and vulnerable people should stay away from seasonal Flu shots as they could be a death sentence if one gets hit by avian flu (ADEI!).

  • As already mentioned, I strongly recommend all fully vaccinated people to ensure access to antivirals.


Dr. Alexander, who often posts his agreement with Geert's ideas, reposted that letter but changed the paragraph on the monkeypox vaccine, I will post his changes:

(fair use applies)

Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche asked if I can share this widely and so I am, for your consumption, take what you can from it, discard what you do not agree with, but this is quite useful IMO
I have clarified the issue on smallpox and the link to the vaccine and monkeypox; the manner our public health is handling monkeypox can create a disaster for the rest of society outside of MSM
Dr. Paul Alexander
Jun 25


[snip everything that is copied and just posting what he added to paragraph 3 - bolded type]

3) for all those who didn’t get it in the past: get sooner or later the live attenuated, replication-competent smallpox vaccine (not yet available in sufficient supply but the expansion of smallpox is slower than that of avian Flu, so hope that this will allow for enough time to scale up production)

Smallpox vaccine will, indeed, protect against all poxviruses (e.g. monkeypox) as protection is based upon highly conserved, MHC cl I-restricted Tc epitope. In healthy, unvax’ed people < 55 year ( those who didn’t get it before!), the protection against Monkeypox can be reasonably expected to be 95%; this is a serious issue now given the poor response by public health in addressing the monkeypox outbreak and allowing it to expand into the low risk community outside of the high risk sub group. Persons vaccinated for C-19 will have compromised immune systems (innate and natural acquired) and as such will be more susceptible to monkeypox and a range of pathogen.

This is a protective measure now given the failure of the public health and the political games. This is why we argue no child, no healthy child must get these ineffective and harmful COVID-19 vaccines (sub-optimal non-neutralizing injections that enhance and facilitate infection to the vaccinated person), none! (This last portion are my words to clarify Geert’s on the word ‘smallpox’). Point is that it will go fast as highly vax’ ed populations are simply heavily immune-suppressed!! It is the immune suppression that we are heavily concerned with and think of what is to come now.


.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
3. This May Be the COVID Variant Scientists Are Dreading
“A pair of new subvariants of the dominant Omicron variant—BA.4 and BA.5—appear to be driving the uptick in cases in the U.K. Worryingly, these subvariants seem to partially dodge antibodies from past infection or vaccination, making them more transmissible than other forms of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
This May Be the COVID Variant Scientists Are Dreading

5. Covid: Omicron Sub-variants Evolving to Target the Lungs and Overcome Immunity
“The latest sub-variants of Omicron may have evolved to target the lung, prompting fears the next wave of the Covidcould be starting.”
Omicron Covid variants ‘evolving to target lungs and beat immunity’ as UK cases surge


Thank you for posting this. There are more points he made in that blog so I am posting it in full now.

(fair use applies)

VSS Scientific Updates During Pandemic Times #26
By Geert Vanden Bossche
June 25, 2022

1. Vaccines Roll Out for U.S. Children Younger Than 5
“It was a milestone in the coronavirus pandemic, 18 long months after adults first began to receive shots against the virus. But the response was notably muted from parents, with little indication of the excitement and long lines that greeted earlier vaccine rollouts. An April poll showed that less than a fifth of parents of children under 5 were eager to access the shot right away. Early adopters in this age group appeared to be outliers.”
Vaccines roll out slowly for U.S. children younger than 5.

2. Israel Sees 70% Spike in Number of Seriously Ill COVID Patients Within a Week
“While Israel has seen rising infection numbers for a few weeks, a rise in seriously ill patients marks a real concern as the country deals with the spread of the new variant BA.5, with experts warning that hospitals may need to reopen COVID wards. The number was up from 85 seriously ill patients on Friday last week.”
Israel sees 70% spike in number of seriously ill COVID patients within a week

3. This May Be the COVID Variant Scientists Are Dreading
“A pair of new subvariants of the dominant Omicron variant—BA.4 and BA.5—appear to be driving the uptick in cases in the U.K. Worryingly, these subvariants seem to partially dodge antibodies from past infection or vaccination, making them more transmissible than other forms of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
This May Be the COVID Variant Scientists Are Dreading

4. 38,983 Deaths and 3,530,362 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database
“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”
38,983 Deaths and 3,530,362 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database as Mass Funeral for Children Who Died After Pfizer Vaccine Held in Switzerland - Global Research

5. Covid: Omicron Sub-variants Evolving to Target the Lungs and Overcome Immunity
“The latest sub-variants of Omicron may have evolved to target the lung, prompting fears the next wave of the Covidcould be starting.”
Omicron Covid variants ‘evolving to target lungs and beat immunity’ as UK cases surge

6. Mathew Crawford: Fraud in the Military's Health Database?
“Crawford has uncovered what seems to be a smoking gun that someone altered the 2016-2019 data of the DMED database to hide an explosion of ill-defined health problems in 2021.”
Mathew Crawford: Fraud in the Military's Health Database?

7. Most Healthcare Interventions Tested in Cochrane Reviews Are Not Effective
“In this large sample of 1567 interventions studied within Cochrane reviews, effects of most interventions (94%) interventions were not supported by high quality evidence.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0895435622001007#!

8. Vaccines Roll Out for U.S. Children Younger Than 5
“It was a milestone in the coronavirus pandemic, 18 long months after adults first began to receive shots against the virus. But the response was notably muted from parents, with little indication of the excitement and long lines that greeted earlier vaccine rollouts. An April poll showed that less than a fifth of parents of children under 5 were eager to access the shot right away. Early adopters in this age group appeared to be outliers.”
Vaccines roll out slowly for U.S. children younger than 5.

9. Covid-19 Vaccination BNT162b2 Temporarily Impairs Semen Concentration and Total Motile Count
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/andr.13209

10. Serious Adverse Events of Special Interest Following mRNA Vaccination in Randomized Trials
“The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death.”

Serious Adverse Events of Special Interest Following mRNA Vaccination in Randomized Trials

11. South African Health Minister Backs Dropping Remaining Covid Curbs
“These include the wearing of masks and curbs on gathering sizes. Phaahla made those proposals following the decline in hospitalizations and reported cases, according to a statement dated June 20.”
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Another post from Geert.

(fair use applies)

We MUST prevent our children from getting jabbed, by all means!
By Geert Vanden Bossche
June 25, 2022

I guess you’ve seen this one:

World Health Network declares Monkeypox a pandemic

Within no time, they will also need to declare avian flu a pandemic (right now only pandemic threat)

I have little doubt that monkeypox and avian flu will also affect other mammalian species (i.e., other than monkeys and birds): especially cattle (not sure whether anybody followed up on massive death of cattle in Kansas? I don’t rule out avian flu…) and livestock in general

Why I am so sure?

Because all the pieces of the puzzle fit together. Believe it or not: It’s all the indirect consequence of C-19 mass vaccination.

We’re getting all this sh…while still awaiting the next C-19 super-pandemic caused by a highly infectious and highly virulent SC-2 immune escape variant. That one will be the direct consequence of the mass vax experiment. Here, the first indication will be a steep rise in hospitalizations in the younger vaccinated age groups that – on the other hand – will more and more successfully deal with SC-2 in the control group. Shortly thereafter, there will be massive casualties in the elderly. If we dare to vaccinate our children, there will be massive C-19 deaths there too (as vaccination simply irreversibly inhibits training of their innate immune system while driving Ab-dependent enhancement of infection and disease).

I hate to say this, but the combination of these 3 pandemics will truly drive natural selection in the human species. I guess I don’t need to tell you what the selection criterion is going to be (there is only a single one). The time where severe disease in vaccinees was primarily due to collateral immunological damage is gone; SC-2 will take over, very rapidly (as it will rapidly improve on getting into the lungs). No longer any protection against severe disease.

The immune system is the most sophisticated organ we have; it protects us against a zillions of hostile external influences; you ‘massively’ mess it up, well that’s what you’re gonna get.

OMG: ‘Look at what they’ve done to my …..world’…!

I am putting this in writing , so that you know that I am beyond serious about this and not into a doom-preaching mode! You don’t have to take me at my word, just look what’s happening and whether it fits my prediction.

It’s too late to stop this. But if we want to save our species we MUST prevent our children from getting jabbed, by all means!!

As I always said: Africa will win

.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
This was posted a few days ago for subscriber's only with a promise to open it for general viewing in 72 hours. I've been patiently waiting... :)

(fair use applies)

The news for Covid vaccines gets worse and worse
A big study says natural immunity protects against Omicron for over a year; mRNA shots fail in months. This is the third paper with awful mRNA data in a week. When will the media even pretend to care?
Alex Berenson
Jun 22

Two doses of Covid vaccines offer no protection against Omicron infection and may even increase the risk of infection within months, according to a new paper in the New England Journal of Medicine.

In contrast, people previously infected with earlier coronavirus variants had a 50 percent lower risk of Omicron infection. That protection remained steady even more than a year after the initial infection.

But the details of the paper are even more devastating for mRNA shot advocates than those topline figures.

(PAYWALL HERE; STORY AVAILABLE IN 72 HOURS, OR SIGN UP FOR A ONE-WEEK TRIAL SUBSCRIPTION)

The new paper comes from researchers in Qatar, the wealthy Gulf city-state, which has comprehensive data on both vaccinations and Sars-Cov-2 infections. The New England Journal, which published it last week, is among the world’s best medical research outlets.

SOURCE

The researchers examined Omicron infections in Qatar this winter, comparing people who had previously been infected and those who had received mRNA shots with “unexposed” people who had not previously been vaccinated or infected.
Such a study is said to have a “test-negative, case-control” design. Although they are not as powerful as randomized controlled trials, when properly conducted and designed to avoid bias, such studies can provide solid evidence.

(Unfortunately, the design can also be easily manipulated; the Centers for Disease Control has used “test-negative” studies as the basis for many junk Covid research papers.)

The Qatar researchers seem to have run the study without putting a thumb on the scale - and with a large enough sample that the results are relatively reliable.

Their findings add to the increasingly grim picture now emerging about mRNA shot protection against Omicron. A base regimen of two mRNA shots offered about 50 percent protection in the first three months, but by six months out it had fallen below zero, meaning people who had received the “vaccines” were more likely to be infected.

(Protection against Omicron from two Pfizer mRNA doses, over time):



The researchers found that a third mRNA dose briefly raised protection against Omicron over 50 percent, but after just one month it had declined to about 40 percent. (mRNA boosting started relatively late in Qatar, so the researchers did not have longer-term data.)

In contrast, protection that natural immunity offered against Omicron remained solid even a year after recovery:





Further, giving people who had natural immunity two shots of mRNA did nothing to increase that 50 percent protection. In other words, the public health argument that vaccination helps people even if they were already infected has proven wrong.

The authors acknowledged as much:

The protection conferred by hybrid immunity of previous infection and two-dose vaccination was similar to that of previous infection alone, at approximately 50%, which suggests that this protection originated from the previous infection and not from vaccination.

Meanwhile, while they acknowledged the failure of the mRNA shots against infection, the authors repeatedly insisted that the jabs still worked against hospitalizations and deaths - the final, endlessly repeated defense that vaccine advocates offer.

In fact, though, their data suggested that vaccine effectiveness against severe disease and death fell to about 70 percent for people who had received two shots; prior infection provided protection against severe disease that was at least as strong - and stronger, compared to the Moderna shots.





This paper provides a population-level counterpart to the bench findings published in the Lancet last week that showed vaccinated people had little antibody or T-cell protection against Omicron within months - even after a third dose. The shots simply do not work against Omicron. Whether they will provide any protection at all against severe outcomes within a few months of being dosed remains unclear. What to do next is also unclear.

Whether the media and public health authorities will be honest about any of this is clear, though: they won’t.

First, do no harm.

And if you can’t do no harm, ignore it!
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Dramatic Decline in Births in Germany
Must be the weather
Igor Chudov
Jun 25

Germany is experiencing a strange decline in births in the first quarter of 2022, totally inconsistent with their experience in recent years.



Strange, right?

Fortunately, the vaccine-crazy German government already has the answer: it says people had so many children already, that they no longer want any.



Makes sense, right?

Just how stupid does one have to be to believe any of this?

Strangely enough, the German government did not yet blame global warming.

Babies born in Q1 2022, were conceived in Q2 or 2021. Here’s a chart for BELGIUM (not Germany) from Our World in Data. (Sorry, Germany is not in that data set). The arrow show vaccination of 18-24 and 25-49 year olds.



18-49 year olds were substantially vaccinated in Q2 (up to 30%) and then continued to be rapidly vaccinated in Q3. So the German govt is a bit liberal with the truth here.

North Dakota — Same Stuff, Different Place

Our reader Biswrest pointed out a most unlikely counterpart to Germany — North Dakota. Look what happened there. Per Provisional Data Reports for 2021-2022:



UK: 10% Decline



Taiwan: 23% Decline

Per taiwan government household report.



Switzerland



Most Important Question

If this is happening in Q1 in Germany after a MINORITY of 18-49 yo were vaccinated in Q2 2021, what will happen in subsequent quarters? Will the birth rate decline even further?
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Latest survey shows the COVID vaccines are a disaster: over 800,000 dead in US
In US, 5M people who got the vaccine are now unable to work and over 800,000 are dead. The rate of heart issues is 6.5%, far more than they claimed. No wonder our government isn't doing these surveys!
Steve Kirsch
Jun 25




Note

I’m updating this based on the latest survey. some of the numbers are the old survey, some are the new survey.
All the numbers are correct, just not on the same survey.

I have COVID right now so am spending a lot of time sleeping, so I’ll be updating this by end of day Jun 25.
I posted the links to the two most recent surveys so you can see for yourself.

Executive summary

Our latest polls are devastating for the official narrative: a 6.5% rate of heart injury, 2.6% are unable to work after being vaccinated (5M people), 8% had to be hospitalized, and you’re more likely to die from COVID if you’ve taken the vaccine.

It also showed that almost as many (87.1% to be more exact) households lost someone from the vaccines as from COVID.

In short, if you believe that 1M people in the US have died from COVID, then this survey indicates that 871,187 people died from the vaccine (19.14/21.97).

Surprisingly, the ever-vigilant CDC hasn’t found anyone who has died from the mRNA vaccines. Someone isn’t telling you the truth.

Anyone can run our poll for $500 if you don’t believe us. I predict nobody in mainstream media will touch this because they don’t want to know the truth.

This is a poll that nobody who is pro-vaccine wants you to see. The poll will be ignored by the mainstream media, even when we rerun it with 8,000 people and get the same results. You can bank on that.
Introduction

We used a professional to draft the survey questions and skip logic for our Jun 24 survey. We updated the survey to add additional questions for the Jun 25 survey.

The Jun 25 survey added questions that showed that:

1. myocarditis rates are off the charts. They are much higher than the government is telling us: 6.5% rate of heart injury post-vaccine according to the poll (25/380 [Q3])​
2. 64% believed that the hospital treatments for COVID were responsible for killing people that they lost, not COVID [Q20]​

3. It appears that 25% of if the population (123/500 in Q24) has severely impaired critical thinking skills and will do whatever the government says, even if there is a 5% chance it could disable them for life. We’ll have to change the question to a 5% chance it will kill them and see if that changes the numbers at all.​

Here are the key takeaways from the Jun 24 survey:

1. 4.3% of the households (21.97/500) had someone who died from COVID [Q17]​
2. 3.8% of the households (19.14/500) reported a death from the vaccine in their household [Q13]. This is stunning because it shows that the vaccine has killed almost as many people as COVID has. The authorities say that COVID has killed over 1M people in the US so this would mean that 870,000 people were killed by the vaccine (19.14/21.97). How can that be a “safe” vaccine? Computed another way, there are 123M households in the US. If 3.8% of those experienced just one vaccine death, then that is 4.6M deaths. Even if this is overestimated by a factor of 10X, this is devastating for the vaccine narrative. There is simply no way to spin this. This is why the “fact checkers” won’t touch this survey.​
3. compares to the 6.2% number in our earlier survey (but that was based on raw counts rather than stratified counts). [Q6]. So this is 5.4% of the 200M vaccinated people ages 18 and older: >10M severely injured people. I don’t know how they will spin this as a positive.​
4. 15.7% (59/374) of the people who took the vaccine consider themselves vaccine injured [Q2]. So that’s >30M vaccine injured. I don’t know how they will spin this as a positive.​
5. 10% (38/374) of the people who took the vaccine had to seek medical help for their injury. [Q3]. That’s 20M doctor visits. I don’t know how they will spin this as a positive.​
6. 8% (30/374) of the people who took the vaccine had to be hospitalized for their vaccine injury [Q4] That’s 16M hospitalizations. I don’t know how they will spin this as a positive.​
7. if you got COVID, it was 5% more likely you got COVID after getting the vaccine (46.22/43.99) [Q15] But they told us we are supposed to be 90% less likely to get COVID after the vaccine. While there is a longer time period after the vaccine rolled out than before the vaccines rolled out, the newer variants are less deadly.​
8. 90% of the people who died from COVID had received at least one COVID vaccine [Q18]. This is interesting because it’s the opposite of what we are being told. We are told that the vaccine would save us from dying, but the percentages show that actually increases our chance of dying. Only 78.7% of people are vaccinated and if vaccination worked, we should see that fewer than 78.7% of the deaths are vaccinated. Instead, we see 90%. This could be caused by a higher percentage of the elderly being vaccinated and elderly people are more likely to die.​
9. 42% are planning on getting more vaccines [Q19], probably because they don’t know what this survey showed. I wonder what that number would be when they find out the truth? We’re going to ask that question in the next survey.​
10. When we [it stops here, I didn't cut it off/HD]​

The survey and underlying data

Latest survey

Here is the skip logic



Earlier survey


Fact checkers welcome

We’ll happily do an interactive session where we show you all the data and the poll results so you can verify they weren’t tampered with. You can even reach out to Pollfish to verify the survey results are legit. We have nothing to hide.

But nobody’s going to fact check this because it would just draw attention to it. So they will have to ignore this and pretend it didn’t happen. That’s what fact checkers do when the facts are undeniable.

Next step


We’ll adjust some of the questions again (the myocarditis question will ask about the rates of each type of heart damage).
Then we’ll increase the size to 8,000 people to overcome the “it was a small sample” objection.

Summary

The bottom line is this: the mainstream media, the medical community, public health officials, members of Congress, CDC, the “fact checkers,” or anyone else who is pro-vaccine will never run a poll like this to find out the truth.

They don’t want to know the truth and, more importantly, they don’t want you to know the truth either.

Please share this with all your friends.

And if you aren’t a paying subscriber yet and like the work we are doing, please consider subscribing to help support our work.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Lost my internet again. This time with a power outage. Last night it just went out (no reason). It's going to be a long summer. I just have 3 more substacks to post....


(fair use applies)

The TruthLion Cometh
Testimony and emerging scientific data regarding the genetic inoculations
Robert W Malone MD, MS
Jun 25

“Well, you know what you can do with that pipe dream now, don't you?”
The Iceman Cometh; Eugene O'Neill (1939)

The data concerning SARS-CoV-2 genetic vaccine safety and effectiveness are coming in fast and furious. Time for a news roundup.

Hope is a marketing slogan, not a basis for mandating Federal public health policy compliance.

Starting at the top, many have long been troubled by the “what in heavens name were they thinking?” question regarding the White House Coronavirus Task Force circa 2020. Just to recap, the chairperson for the task force was U.S. vice president Mike Pence, and Dr. Deborah Birx (a former Fauci post-doctoral trainee) was named the response coordinator.

Dr. Birx, who has retired from her decades as a public servant, was brought to testify on the hill on June 23 of 2022 before the House select subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis, which is led by Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C). It appears that the intention had been to provide Dr. Birx an opportunity to refute the allegations of Dr. Scott Atlas, MD in his new book “A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America”.

Here is an excerpt from the book synopsis provided by the publisher:

“When Dr. Scott W. Atlas was tapped by Donald Trump to join his COVID Task Force, he was immediately thrust into a maelstrom of scientific disputes, policy debates, raging egos, politically motivated lies, and cynical media manipulation. Numerous myths and distortions surround the Trump Administration’s handling of the crisis, and many pressing questions remain unanswered. Did the Trump team really bungle the response to the pandemic? Were the right decisions made about travel restrictions, lockdowns, and mask mandates? Are Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx competent medical experts or timeserving bureaucrats? Did half a million people really die unnecessarily because of Trump’s incompetence?
In this unfiltered insider account, Dr. Scott Atlas brings us directly into the White House, describes the key players in the crisis, and assigns credit and blame where it is deserved.
The book includes shocking evaluations of the Task Force members’ limited knowledge and grasp of the science of COVID and details heated discussions with Task Force members, including all of the most controversial episodes that dominated headlines for weeks. Dr. Atlas tells the truth about the science and documents the media’s relentless campaign to suffocate it, which included canceled interviews, journalists’ off-camera hostility in White House briefings, and intentional distortion of facts. He also provides an inside account of the delays and timelines involving vaccines and other treatments, evaluates the impact of the lockdowns on American public health, and indicts the relentless war on truth waged by Big Business and Big Tech.
Before Dr. Birx had a chance to speak, Representative Jim Jordan (R, OH) asked,

“Dr. Birx, why should Americans believe anything the government says about COVID? I mean, last summer, President Biden said this quote, ‘You’re not going to get COVID. If you have these vaccinations.
If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the ICU.
Doctor Birx, can vaccinated people get COVID? Have vaccinated people been hospitalized with COVID?
Birx answered yes to both questions. Vaccinated people can get COVID, and vaccinated people have been hospitalized with COVID. As I covered recently in another article, the data are irrefutable, and furthermore in most countries with intact reporting systems, the majority of people hospitalized and dying with COVID are vaccinated. The genetic vaccines do not stop infection, replication, or spread of the Omicron variants. They are not fulfilling their intended purpose.

Representative Jordan then proceeded:

“According to your testimony, it wasn’t just President Biden who said things that were not accurate or not true. Your testimony, that you provided the committee, you said beginning in 2021, the beginning in the Biden administration, again, these are your words, ‘agencies provided muddled and contradicting information or partial information that implied we knew something we didn’t, which they later had to correct, which accelerated the loss of respect and trust in the federal government.’
So I’ll come back to my original question, why should we believe anything the government tells us about COVID?”

I really do not enjoy saying “I told you so”, but there it is. Reality bites.

Here is Dr. Birx’ answer to that key question:

I knew that people who were naturally infected were getting reinfected. And that was quite evident from South Africa. And I’ve included it in my slides. But I think the reason I knew that is, South Africa did a remarkably good job in measuring baseline antibody with their first cert. And so they knew 50, 60, 70% of some of their population had been reinfected.”

Note the deflection? She did not actually address the question.

Rep. Jordan replied:

“Wow. When the government told us that the vaccinated couldn’t be transmitted, was that a lie? Or was that a guess? Or is it the same answer?

To which Dr. Birx responded:

I think they were hoping, but you should know in those original phase three trials that were done in this country, that we only measured for symptomatic disease. So we weren’t proactively testing everybody in those trials to see if they got infected with mild or asymptomatic disease. And so people had to present within the clinical trial. We never had the data that it was going to protect against asymptomatic diseases.”

Again, more deflection wrapped in an excuse.

OK, just to put a fork in it and call it done, this means that the fact that the vaccines were not effective at preventing infection, replication, and transmission of the virus were known to the Response Coordinator of the White House Coronavirus Task Force during the Trump administration, and furthermore, Dr. Birx explicitly acknowledged that the clinical trials were not designed to assess whether the genetic vaccines could enable herd immunity (to achieve which requires a product that can block or seriously reduce transmissibility of the pathogen). Therefore, these facts were known by Dr. Birx well before the time when the Washington Post was accusing me of being a liar for stating precisely this truth on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. Of course Youtube has deleted videos of that speech, but it can still be found on Rumble, and the prepared text is still available here.

Suffice to say, Hope concerning effectiveness of a vaccine using previously untested genetic modification technology is not sufficient justification for federal action to block early treatment options, mandate administration of unlicensed Emergency Use authorized vaccine product candidate to all members of the US Military, mandate administration of said product to airline personnel, mandate administration to federal employees and contractors, mandate administration to hospital employees, and attempting to mandate administration to private sector employees. There is no clause concerning Hope as an indicator of efficacy or effectiveness in the Emergency Use Authorization statute 21 U.S. Code § 360bbb–3.

Just to reinforce the point, the US Constitution does not mention regulation of public health or medical practice as a Federal Government role or responsibility, and therefore the right to manage public health and medical practice practices vests with the States, not with unelected federal bureaucrats such as Dr. Birx and her mentor Dr. Fauci.

There must be accountability and restitution for the damages incurred to those who were mandated by the US Federal Government to receive the unlicensed, Emergency Use Authorized products.

Moving on to other news…


Nature magazine, arguably one of the three most prestigious scientific journals in the world, has come out with three important new additions which advance understanding of the current state of the COVIDcrisis.

First, the recent review written with informed laypersons and non-specialist scientists and in mind:

What Omicron’s BA.4 and BA.5 variants mean for the pandemic
The lineages’ rise seems to stem from their ability to infect people who were immune to earlier forms of Omicron and other variants.


23 June 2022 by Ewen Callaway

Mere weeks after the variant’s BA.2 lineage caused surges globally, two more Omicron spin-offs are on the rise worldwide. First spotted by scientists in South Africa in April and linked to a subsequent rise in cases there, BA.4 and BA.5 are the newest members of Omicron’s growing family of coronavirus subvariants. They have been detected in dozens of countries worldwide.

The BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants are spiking globally because they can spread faster than other circulating variants — mostly BA.2, which caused a surge in cases at the beginning of the year. But so far, the latest Omicron variants seem to be causing fewer deaths and hospitalizations than their older cousins — a sign that growing population immunity is tempering the immediate consequences of COVID-19 surges.
In answer to the question “why are these variants spreading globally”;

“the rise of BA.4 and BA.5 seems to stem…, from their capacity to infect people who were immune to earlier forms of Omicron and other variants, says Christian Althaus, a computational epidemiologist at the University of Bern. With most of the world outside Asia doing little to control SARS-CoV-2, the rise — and inevitable fall — of BA.4 and BA.5 will be driven almost entirely by population immunity, Althaus adds, with cases increasing when protection lulls and falling only when enough people have been infected.
On the basis of the rise of BA.5 in Switzerland — where BA.4 prevalence is low — Althaus estimates that about 15% of people there will get infected. But countries are now likely to have distinct immune profiles because their histories of COVID-19 waves and vaccination rates differ, Althaus adds. As a result, the sizes of BA.4 and BA.5 waves will vary from place to place. “It might be 5% in some countries and 30% in others. It all depends on their immunity profile,” he says.”

What impact will BA.4 and BA.5 have on society?
“In Portugal — where COVID-19 vaccination and boosting rates are very high — the levels of death and hospitalization associated with the latest wave are similar to those in the first Omicron wave (although still nothing like the impact caused by earlier variants).
One explanation for the difference could be Portugal’s demographics, says Althaus. “The more elderly people you have, the more severe disease.” Jassat thinks that the nature of a country’s immunity can also explain varying outcomes. About half of adult South Africans have been vaccinated, and just 5% have taken up a booster. But this, combined with sky-high infection rates from earlier COVID-19 waves, has erected a wall of ‘hybrid immunity’ that offers strong protection against severe disease, particularly in older people, who are the most likely to have been vaccinated, she adds.”

How well do vaccines work against the variants?

“Lab studies consistently suggest that antibodies triggered by vaccination are less effective at blocking BA.4 and BA.5 than they are at blocking earlier Omicron strains, including BA.1 and BA.226. This could leave even vaccinated and boosted people vulnerable to multiple Omicron infections, scientists say. Even people with hybrid immunity, stemming from vaccination and previous infection with Omicron BA.1, produce antibodies that struggle to incapacitate BA.4 and BA.5. Research teams have attributed that to the variants’ L452R and F486V spike mutations
One explanation for this is the observation that BA.1 infection after vaccination seems to trigger infection-blocking ‘neutralizing’ antibodies that recognize the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2 (the one that vaccines are based on) better than they recognize Omicron variants2,7. “Infection with BA.1 does induce a neutralizing antibody response, but it appears to be a little bit narrower than one would expect,” leaving people susceptible to immune-escaping variants such BA.4 and BA.5, says Ravindra Gupta, a virologist at the University of Cambridge, UK.”

Based on the published peer-reviewed studies that I have been reading lately, I conclude that the problem is a bit more profound that Dr. Gupta indicates. The viral variants appear to be evolving to exploit aspects of the immunologic phenomenon of “immune imprinting”.

What will come next?

“Increasingly, scientists think that variants including Omicron and Alpha probably originated from months-long chronic SARS-CoV-2 infections, in which sets of immune-evading and transmissibility-boosting mutations can build up. But the longer Omicron and its offshoots continue to dominate, the less likely it is that a totally new variant will emerge from a chronic infection, says Mahan Ghafari, who researches viral evolution at the University of Oxford, UK.”[/QUOTE]
And those chronic infections seem to be occurring in the immunologically compromised and the fraction (30% to 60%, depending in part on how long since last dose) of vaccinated-then-infected persons that are susceptible (for whatever reason) to frequent re-infection by Omicron variants.
“To succeed, future variants will have to evade immunity. But they could come with other worrying properties. Sato’s team found that BA.4 and BA.5 were deadlier in hamsters than was BA.2, and better able to infect cultured lung cells6. Epidemiology studies, such as the one led by Jassat, suggest that successive COVID-19 waves are getting milder. But this trend should not be taken for granted, Sato cautions. Viruses don’t necessarily evolve to become less deadly.”

As Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, DMV, PhD has been darkly warning for some time now.

"It’s also unclear when the next variant will appear. BA.4 and BA.5 started emerging in South Africa only a few months after BA.1 and BA.2, a pattern now being repeated in places including the United Kingdom and United States. But as global immunity from repeated vaccination and infection builds, Althaus expects the frequency of SARS-CoV-2 waves to slow down.
One possible future for SARS-CoV-2 is that it will become like the other four seasonal coronaviruses, the levels of which ebb and flow with the seasons, usually peaking in winter and typically reinfecting people every three years or so, Althaus says. “The big question is whether symptoms will become milder and milder and whether issues with long COVID will slowly disappear,” he says. “If it stays like it is now, then it will be a serious public-health problem.”
[continued next post]
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
[continued from post above]

Other recent “Nature” branded papers which merit reading and consideration include:

Clinical outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant and BA.1/BA.1.1 or BA.2 subvariant infection in southern California

“Epidemiologic surveillance has revealed decoupling of COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths from case counts following emergence of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) SARS-CoV-2 variant globally.”
Basically, that means that Omicron appears to be less severe compared to prior. But is this true for one of the newer Omicron variants (BA.2), or is that one worse?​
“Infections with the Omicron BA.2 subvariant were not associated with differential risk of severe outcomes in comparison to BA.1/BA.1.1 subvariant infections.”

So there is the answer to that question. So what?

“Lower risk of severe clinical outcomes among cases with Omicron variant infection should inform public health response amid establishment of the Omicron variant as the dominant SARS-CoV-2 lineage globally.”

In other words, it is time to change public health policies to reflect the new reality.

What about the newer Omicron variants?

BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 escape antibodies elicited by Omicron infection

“SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 exhibit higher transmissibility over BA.21. The new variants’ receptor binding and immune evasion capability require immediate investigation. Here, coupled with Spike structural comparisons, we show that BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 exhibit comparable ACE2-binding affinities to BA.2.”
“Our results indicate that Omicron may evolve mutations to evade the humoral immunity elicited by BA.1 infection, suggesting that BA.1-derived vaccine boosters may not achieve broad-spectrum protection against new Omicron variants.”

To be blunt, now may be the time to relax restrictions, and we definitely need to stop administering leaky vaccines to everyone that can be compelled or enticed to accept same, but absolutely not the time to celebrate victory and spike the ball. Vigilance is going to be required for the foreseeable future.

Then, from Childrens Health Defense, we have this article revealing why the CDC has missed the largest vaccine safety signal in history. Basically, by not looking for it in their own database.

CDC Admits It Never Monitored VAERS for COVID Vaccine Safety Signals

In response to a Freedom of Information Request submitted by Children’s Health Defense, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week admitted it never analyzed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System for safety signals for COVID-19 vaccines.


June 21, 2022 by Josh Guetzkow, Ph.D.

“In a stunning development, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last week admitted — despite assurances to the contrary — the agency never analyzed the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for safety signals for COVID-19 vaccines.
The admission was revealed in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by Children’s Health Defense (CHD).”

This one, based on preliminary scientific reports, may reflect “The Guardian” fearporn, but it bears close monitoring for additional developments:

New omicron variants target lungs and escape antibodies

Preliminary research from the University of Tokyo has sparked a debate about whether the newest omicron variants are of great concern or not


June 22, 2022 By Gitanjali Poonia

The risk that strains BA.4 and BA.5 pose “to global health is potentially greater than that of original BA.2,” said Dr. Kei Sato, the study’s lead author, per The Guardian.
“It looks as though these things are switching back to the more dangerous form of infection, so going lower down in the lung,” said Dr. Stephen Griffin, a virologist at the University of Leeds, per the report.”

Here is the source pre-print article:

Virological characteristics of the novel SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants including BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5

“After the global spread of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 lineage, some BA.2-related variants that acquire mutations in the L452 residue of spike protein, such as BA.2.9.1 and BA.2.13 (L452M), BA.2.12.1 (L452Q), and BA.2.11, BA.4 and BA.5 (L452R), emerged in multiple countries. Our statistical analysis showed that the effective reproduction numbers of these L452R/M/Q-bearing BA.2-related Omicron variants are greater than that of the original BA.2. Neutralization experiments revealed that the immunity induced by BA.1 and BA.2 infections is less effective against BA.4/5. Cell culture experiments showed that BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/5 replicate more efficiently in human alveolar epithelial cells than BA.2, and particularly, BA.4/5 is more fusogenic than BA.2. Furthermore, infection experiments using hamsters indicated that BA.4/5 is more pathogenic than BA.2. Altogether, our multiscale investigations suggest that the risk of L452R/M/Q-bearing BA.2-related Omicron variants, particularly BA.4 and BA.5, to global health is potentially greater than that of original BA.2.”

And from the New England Journal of Medicine, we have this little gem, with a conclusion written to be as supportive of the approved narrative as possible, but the data are the data..

Effects of Previous Infection and Vaccination on Symptomatic Omicron
Infections


RESULTS

The effectiveness of previous infection alone against symptomatic BA.2 infection was 46.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.5 to 51.9). The effectiveness of vaccination with two doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was negligible (−1.1%; 95% CI, −7.1 to 4.6), but nearly all persons had received their second dose more than 6 months earlier. The effectiveness of three doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was 52.2% (95% CI, 48.1 to 55.9). The effectiveness of previous infection and two doses of BNT162b2 was 55.1% (95% CI, 50.9 to 58.9), and the effectiveness of previous infection and three doses of BNT162b2 was 77.3% (95% CI, 72.4 to 81.4). Previous infection alone, BNT162b2 vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity all showed strong effectiveness (>70%) against severe, critical, or fatal Covid-19 due to BA.2 infection. Similar results were observed in analyses of effectiveness against BA.1 infection and of vaccination with mRNA-1273.
CONCLUSIONS
No discernible differences in protection against symptomatic BA.1 and BA.2 infection were seen with previous infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity. Vaccination enhanced protection among persons who had had a previous infection. Hybrid immunity resulting from previous infection and recent booster vaccination conferred the strongest protection.”​

Jaded eyes, grown weary from reading chronic NEJM spin regarding the genetic inoculations being marketed as vaccines, interpret the data slight differently;

“This study was huge in scale, sifting through data collected from over 100,000 people infected by the Omicron variant. It lends credibility to the statistical significance of the findings, which are absolutely startling. Here are the key points:
Those who have been "fully vaccinated" with two shots from Moderna or Pfizer are more likely to contract Covid-19 than those who have not been vaccinated at all
Booster shots offer protection approximately equal to natural immunity, but the benefits wane after 2-5 months
Natural immunity lasts for at least 300-days, which is the length of the study; it likely lasts much longer”
“The authors of the study found that those who had a prior infection but no vaccination had a 46.1 and 50 percent immunity against the two subvariants of the Omicron variant, even at an interval of more than 300 days since the previous infection.
However, individuals who received two doses of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine but had no previous infection, were found with negative immunity against both BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron subvariants, indicating an increased risk of contracting COVID-19 than an average person.
Over six months after getting two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, immunity against any Omicron infection dropped to -3.4 percent. But for two doses of the Moderna vaccine, immunity against any Omicron infection dropped to -10.3 percent after more than six months since the last injection
Though the authors reported that three doses of the Pfizer vaccine increased immunity to over 50 percent, this was measured just over 40 days after the third vaccination, which is a very short interval. In comparison, natural immunity persisted at around 50 percent when measured over 300 days after the previous infection, while immunity levels fell to negative figures 270 days after the second dose of vaccine.
These figures indicate a risk of waning immunity for the third vaccine dose as time progresses.
The findings are supported by another recent study from Israel that also found natural immunity waned significantly more slowly compared to artificial, or vaccinated, immunity. The study found that both natural and artificial immunity waned over time.
Individuals that were previously infected but not vaccinated had half the risks of reinfection as compared to those that were vaccinated with two doses but not infected.
“Natural immunity wins again,” Dr. Martin Adel Makary, a public policy researcher at Johns Hopkins University, wrote on Twitter, referring to the Israeli study.
“Among persons who had been previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, protection against reinfection decreased as the time increased,” the authors concluded, “however, this protection was higher” than protection conferred in the same time interval through two doses of the vaccine.”

The truth will out. We just need to set it free, and it will defend itself. The lion abides.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Immune Imprinting, Comirnaty and Omicron (part 2)
More details emerge on why the mRNA vaccines are not preventing Omicron infection
Robert W Malone MD, MS
22 hr ago




Recently a series of high profile, “fully vaccinated” (four dose) pro-vaccine mandate politicians and bureaucrats have developed COVID-19 disease. In Part 1 of this two part series, a wide range of both primary data and mostly peer-reviewed academic publications relating to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant “breakthrough infections” were reviewed, multiple working hypotheses for what might be the cause of “negative effectiveness” of the genetic vaccines were described, and one of the hypotheses with the strongest supporting data (“Immune imprinting”) was discussed. This discussion was structured around the introductory section and references cited in a peer reviewed manuscript published in Science magazine, entitled:

Immune boosting by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) depends on previous SARS-CoV-2 exposure

Catherine J Reynolds, Corinna Pade, Joseph M Gibbons et al, Science, June 14 2022 doi: 10.1126/science.abq1841


This is not an easy paper, although not as challenging as the 17 June, 2022 Nature pre-print titled “BA.2.12.1, BA.4 and BA.5 escape antibodies elicited by Omicron infection” which was briefly reviewed here. The Reynolds et al Science paper is well structured, with clearly labeled subsections throughout the overall results section, key findings of which will be briefly summarized below.

Results

B cell immunity after three vaccine doses


Health care workers (HCW) were identified with mild and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection by ancestral Wuhan Hu-1, B.1.1.7 (Alpha VOC), B.1.617.2 (Delta VOC) and then B.1.1.529 (Omicron VOC) during successive waves of infection and after first, second and third mRNA (BioNTech BNT162b2) vaccine doses. By three vaccine doses antibody responses had plateaued, regardless of infection history. We found differences in immune imprinting indicating that those who were infected during the ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 wave showed a significantly reduced anti-RBD (receptor binding domain) titer against B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) compared to infection-naïve HCW.
Simplifying, if you were first infected with Wuhan Hu-1, then vaccinated, then infected with Omicron, your antibody levels against the important part of Spike (the receptor binding domain) were lower than those who had not been infected.
Memory B cell (MBC) frequency against ancestral Wuhan Hu-1, B.1.617.2 (Delta) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 (the extracellular part of Spike that includes the RBD) protein was boosted 2-3 weeks after the third vaccine dose compared to 20-21 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Irrespective of infection history, the MBC frequency against Wuhan Hu-1 and B.1.617.2 (Delta) S1 were similar, but significantly reduced against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 2-3 weeks after the third vaccine dose and at 20-21 weeks after the second dose. Differences between VOC (variant of concern) RBD and whole spike binding and nAb (neutralizing antibody) IC50 with live virus indicated that antibody targeting regions outside RBD/spike or conformational epitopes exposed only during infection may contribute to neutralization.

Memory B cells are what gives rise to future ability to develop antibodies. MBC frequency is an indirect indicator of long term protection. The numbers of MBC capable of producing antibodies reactive against Spike S1 subunit were increased by a third injection relative to two injections, regardless of whether or not the patient was previously infected, but in the case of Omicron, these levels dropped after either two or three doses of vaccine. These effects were independent of prior virus infection history. Which is more evidence of immunologic escape of Omicron from B-cell mediated (antibody) control.

T cell immunity after three vaccine doses


We next compared T cell responses in triple-vaccinated HCW 2-3 weeks after the third dose, who were either infection- naïve or had been infected during the Wuhan Hu-1, B.1.1.7 (Alpha) or B.1.617.2 (Delta) waves. … for S1 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) protein we found a significantly reduced magnitude of response. Overall, more than half (27/50; 54%) made no T cell response against S1 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) protein, irrespective of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection history, compared to 8% (4/50) that made no T cell response against ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 S1 protein.

This is problematic. Half failed to generate T cells to Omicron. T cells are major contributors to the protection, and generating both B and T cell responses is the whole reason to use an mRNA vaccine.

To investigate T cell recognition of VOC (variant of concern) sequence mutations, we used a peptide pool specifically designed to cover all of the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 and S2 spike mutations and a matched pool containing the Wuhan Hu-1 equivalent sequences. T cell responses against the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) peptide pool were reduced compared to the Wuhan Hu-1 pool, irrespective of previous infection history [fold-reduction in T cell response against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) peptide pool compared to equivalent ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 peptide pool was 2.7-fold for infection-naïve, 4.6-fold for previously Wuhan Hu-1 infected, 2.7-fold for previously B.1.1.7 (Alpha) infected and 3.8-fold for previously B.1617.2 (Delta) infected. In fact, 42% (21/50) of HCW make no T cell response at all against the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) VOC mutant pool. Overall, our findings in triple-vaccinated HCW with different previous SARS-CoV-2 infection histories indicated that T cell cross-recognition of B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 antigen and peptide pool was significantly reduced.

Not good. A large fraction of fully vaccinated (regardless of prior infection history) do not make good T cell responses. So now we have evidence suggesting both poor B and poor T responses to Omicron, or in other words Omicron has evolved to escape both B and T cell adaptive immunity (relatively speaking, compared to other variants).

But why and how?

B.1.1.529 (Omicron) spike mutations encompass gain and loss of T cell epitopes


Immunizing HLAII transgenic mice with either ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 or B.1.1.529 (Omicron) sequence specific peptide pools allowed us to investigate differential, sequence-specific T cell priming that occurs as a consequence of B.1.1.529 (Omicron) spike mutations. We showed that priming with one pool resulted in impaired responses to the other.
The G142D/del 143-5 mutation created a gain of function epitope, switching from a region not recognized by T cells, to one that induced a Th1/Th17 effector program. We have previously shown that the N501Y mutation converts a T cell effector-stimulating epitope to an inducer of immune regulation.

B cell immunity after B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection

Next, we studied triple-vaccinated HCW 14-weeks after their third dose, who had suffered breakthrough infection during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave. Previously infection-naïve triple-vaccinated HCW made significantly increased cross-reactive antibody binding responses against all VOC and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself after infection during the B.1.1.5129 (Omicron) wave: S1 RBD, whole spike and nAb IC50. However, antibody binding and nAb IC50 were attenuated against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself with a 4.5-fold reduction in S1 RBD binding (p = 0.001) and 10.1-fold reduction in nAb IC50 (p = 0.002) against B.1.1.529 compared to ancestral Wuhan Hu-1. Thus, infection during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave produced potent cross-reactive antibody immunity against all VOC, but less so against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself. Importantly, triple-vaccinated, infection-naïve HCW that were not infected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave made no nAb IC50 response against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) 14 weeks after the third vaccine dose indicating rapid waning of the nAb IC50.

Omicron infection boosted immunity to prior strains in triple vaccinated HCW, but not so much against itself. For the triple vaccinated HCW who had not been infected by prior viral strains including Omicron, the neutralizing antibodies against Omicron were rapidly lost after third vaccination.

HCW with a history of prior Wuhan Hu-1 infection that were also infected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave showed no increase in cross-reactive S1 RBD or whole spike antibody binding or live virus nAb IC50 against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) or any other VOC, despite having made a higher N antibody response. Thus, B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection can boost binding and nAb responses against itself and other VOC in triple-vaccinated previously uninfected infection naïve HCW, but not in the context of immune imprinting following prior Wuhan Hu-1 infection. Immune imprinting by prior Wuhan Hu-1 infection completely abrogated any enhanced nAb responses against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) and other VOC.
Basically, if the HCW were first infected by the original Wuhan strain (as I was), they do not make an increased neutralizing antibody response after Omicron infection (compared to those who are triple vaccinated but not previously infected by the original Wuhan strain). So, prior infection by Wuhan seems to block production of neutralizing antibody responses during/after Omicron infection. And that is pretty much proof of the immune imprinting effect.

In summary, B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection resulted in enhanced, cross-reactive Ab responses against all VOC tested in the three-dose vaccinated infection-naïve HCW, but not those with previous Wuhan Hu-1 infection, and less so against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself.

So, we have immune imprinting with B cell/antibody responses, what about T cell responses?

T cell immunity after B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection


We next explored T cell immunity following breakthrough infection during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave. Fourteen weeks after the third dose (9/10, 90%) of triple-vaccinated, previously infection-naïve HCW showed no cross-reactive T cell immunity against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 protein.

Post vaccination, rapid loss of any detectable T cell immunity against S1, which is the main antigen in the vaccines. Not good.

HCW infected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave showed similar T cell responses against spike MEP, ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 S1 and B.1.617.2 (Delta) S1 proteins, but significantly reduced T cell responses against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 protein.
Although breakthrough infection in triple-vaccinees during the Omicron infection wave boosted cross-reactive T cell immune recognition against the spike MEP pool (p = 0.0117), ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 (p = 0.0039), B.1.617.2 (Delta) (p = 0.0003) and B.1.1.529 (Omicron) , the T cell response against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 protein itself compared to spike MEP (p = 0.001), Wuhan Hu-1 (p = 0.001), and B.1.617.2 (Delta) (p = 0.001) was significantly reduced.

Fully vaccinated but post infection with Omicron, significantly reduced T cell responses against Omicron S1 protein, but still boosted responses to the preceding strains. This is basically a set up for either chronic Omicron infection or rapid Omicron re-infection.

Importantly, none (0/6) of HCW with a previous history of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Wuhan Hu-1 wave responded to B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 protein (Fig. 5A). This suggests that, in this context, B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection was unable to boost T cell immunity against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself; immune imprinting from prior Wuhan Hu-1 infection resulted in absence of a T cell response against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1 protein.
The findings show consistently that people initially infected by Wuhan Hu-1 in the first wave and then reinfected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave do not boost T cell immunity against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) at the level of nAb and T cell recognition.
[continued in next post]
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
[continued from post above]

In these HCW, if you were infected with the original Wuhan strain, then vaccinated, then reinfected with Omicron you do not make good neutralizing antibody or T cell responses to Omicron. Very bad news. Yet more evidence for initial immune imprinting reinforced by repeated vaccination with the original Wuhan virus-derived spike mRNA vaccine causing an inability to respond to Omicron. Really sounds like these sorts of patients may become the breeding ground for the next wave of Omicron variants.

Prior infection differentially imprints Omicron T and B cell immunity


To investigate in more detail the impact of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on immune imprinting, we further explored responses in our longitudinal HCW cohort. We looked initially at the S1 RBD (ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 and Omicron VOC) antibody binding responses across the longitudinal cohort at key vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection timepoints, exploring how different exposure imprinted differential cross-reactive immunity and durability. This revealed that at 16-18 weeks after Wuhan Hu-1 infection or B.1.1.7 (Alpha) infection, unvaccinated HCW showed no detectable cross-reactive S1 RBD binding antibodies against B.1.1.529 (Omicron).

In other words, Omicron has evolved to completely evade any antibodies generated from natural infection by either the original Wuhan or the Alpha strains.

Hybrid immunity (the combination of prior infection and a single vaccine dose) significantly increased the S1 RBD binding antibodies against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) (p < 0.0001) compared to responses of infection-naïve HCW, which were undetectable after a single vaccine dose. This increase was significantly greater for prior Wuhan Hu-1 than B.1.1.7 (Alpha) infected HCW.

Good news. Prior infection with either original Wuhan or Alpha strains, followed by a single mRNA dose, resulted in detectable antibodies to Omicron, although this worked better if you were first infected with the original Wuhan rather than the Alpha strain.

However, 20-21 weeks after the second vaccine dose, differential B.1.1.529 (Omicron) RBD Ab waning was noted with almost all (19/21) of the HCW infected during the second B.1.1.7 (Alpha) wave no longer showing detectable cross-reactive antibody against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) RBD.

Oops. One dose of the mRNA vaccine after natural infection is good. Two doses not good.

This indicates a profound differential impact of immune imprinting on B.1.1.529 (Omicron) specific immune antibody waning between HCW infected by Wuhan Hu-1 and B.1.1.7 (Alpha) as this differential is not seen in Ab responses to ancestral WuhanHu-1 spike S1 RBD.

Fourteen weeks after the third vaccine dose previously infection-naïve HCW infected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave showed increased S1 RBD B.1.1.529 (Omicron) binding responses, but prior Wuhan Hu-1 infected HCW did not, indicating that prior Wuhan Hu-1 infected individuals were immune imprinted to not boost antibody binding responses against B.1.1.529 (Omicron) despite having been infected by B.1.1.529 (Omicron) itself.

Three doses of mRNA vaccine in people never infected with virus shows antibody production against Omicron spike protein, but not if the HCW were previously infected with the original Wuhan strain first.

In fact, infection during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave imprinted a consistent relative hierarchy of cross-neutralization immunity against VOC across different individuals with potent cross-reactive nAb responses against B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta) and B.1.617.2 (Delta) (Fig. 6, D and E). Comparative analysis of nAb potency for cross-neutralization of VOC emphasized the impact of immune imprinting which effectively abrogates the nAb responses in those vaccinated HCW infected during the first wave and then reinfected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave.

If the HCW were first infected by the Wuhan strain, then vaccinated, then reinfected with Omicron, the immune imprinting associated with being first infected and then vaccinated pretty much destroyed their ability to respond effectively to Omicron.

Yes, Virginia, forcing HCW who were previously infected with Wuhan strain to take three doses of the mRNA vaccine actually pretty much destroyed their ability to mount a potent immune response against Omicron.
Unresolved is whether those fully vaccinated people who land in the hospitals and/or die from Omicron were first infected with another strain prior to becoming fully vaccinated.


What do the authors conclude about all of this?

Discussion

Molecular characterization of the precise mechanism underpinning repertoire shaping from a combination of Wuhan Hu-1 or B.1.1.7 (Alpha) infection and triple-vaccination using ancestral Wuhan Hu-1 sequence, impacting immune responses to subsequent VOCs, will require detailed analysis of differential immune repertoires and their structural consequences. The impact of differential imprinting was seen just as profoundly in T cell recognition of B.1.1.529 (Omicron) S1, which was not recognized by T cells from any triple-vaccinated HCW who were initially infected during the Wuhan Hu-1 wave and then re-infected during the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) wave. Importantly, while B1.1.529 (Omicron) infection in triple-vaccinated previously uninfected individuals could indeed boost antibody, T cell and MBC responses against other VOC, responses to itself were reduced. This relatively poor immunogenicity against itself may help to explain why frequent B.1.1.529 (Omicron) reinfections with short time intervals between infections are proving a novel feature in this wave. It also concurs with observations that mRNA vaccination carrying the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) spike sequence (Omicron third-dose after ancestral sequence prime/boosting) offers no protective advantage.

In summary,
these studies have shown that the high global prevalence of B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infections and reinfections likely reflects considerable subversion of immune recognition at both the B, T cell, antibody binding and nAb level, although with considerable differential modulation through immune imprinting. Some imprinted combinations, such as infection during the Wuhan Hu-1 and Omicron waves, confer particularly impaired responses.

And we continue to have the government advise that all of our children, most of whom have already been infected and have cleared the virus with very little problem, should get vaccinated?

These data may help explain the negative effectiveness being observed with “full” mRNA vaccination in those who have been infected by Omicron.

For example, please see the latest clinical data from Canada and Portugal.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

A FOIA request came in for Nova Scotia
Here's what it showed.
Jessica Rose
Jun 25

Please refer to the recently FOIAed document received from the Nova Scotia Office of the Deputy Minister Health and Wellness Department. There they go again with that fast and loose use of the word ‘Health’. It is dated June 1, 2022. Thank you to the person who made this request.

The document shows that COVID-19 injectable product use has a dose response: more doses = more cases = more hospitalizations = more deaths, in a nutshell.

See the following bar graphs I transcribed from their .pdf Tables listed in the document. I normalized the data according to absolute number per 100,000 in each respective 0, 1, 2 and >=3 dose populations based on world population review data for Canadian provinces (Nova Scotia).1

Let’s count ‘cases’ as a marker of effectiveness of the products. If these COVID-19 injectable products were effective at lowering transmission rates, then the frequency of reporting of cases would decrease with increasing distribution of the products. We can see in Figure 1a (from the absolute counts from this Freedom of Information Requested - NOT offered freely for the public to see) data, that the frequency of case reports is proportionally related to the dose → more doses = more cases. This is the definition of an ineffective product with regard to reduction of transmission and is a FAILED ‘VACCINE’. But we need to check the normalized charts as well.


Figure 1a: Transcribed from Table 1 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia

Figure 1b shows the normalized data - a very quick and dirty normalization - the population of Nova Scotia is estimated to be ~992,000 where ~90%, 85% and 50% are 1, 2 and >=3 dosers. Even though the relative rates for 0 dosers are higher than the 1 and 2 dosers by comparison, the rates per 100,000 3 dosers remain highest of all groups starting March 3, 2022. So yes, these are ineffective products with regard to reduction of transmission according to this data.


Figure 1b: Normalized from Table 1 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia COVID-19 Tracker Canada - Provincial Vaccination Tracker

What was it you said? Injected individuals are 95% less likely to get COVID-19 over uninjected individuals? How many ways can I say this: you were wrong. Damage control this. The data is clear.

Let’s count ‘hospitalizations’ as effectiveness as well but this time, let’s use it to assess whether or not the COVID-19 injections reduced the likelihood of ending up in the hospital. Figure 2a shows that the absolute counts of hospitalizations are proportionally related to dose → more doses = more hospitalizations. This is the definition of an ineffective product with regard to a reduction in severity of symptoms and is a FAILED ‘VACCINE’. But we need to normalize the data to definitively draw this conclusion, don’t we?


Figure 2a: Transcribed from Table 2 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia

When the data is normalized per 100,000, it appears as though the individuals who are being hospitalized with the highest frequency are the no dosers. Now let me be very clear here. I calculated the ratio of hospitalizations/100,000 individuals who were uninjected: the 10% or so of the population of Nova Scotia who didn’t get jabbed, assuming that the absolute counts of the 0 dosers who were hospitalized were actually 0 dosers and not people who had been injected and simply in that ‘special’ 14-day period following dose 1 when they are considered to be ‘unvaccinated’.


Figure 2b: Normalized from Table 2 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia

The most recent hospitalization rates (May 5, 2022) are pretty much equal when comparing the 0 and 3 dosers. I would say, based on this data, the 1 dosers win, but I would also say that it seems pretty clear to me that 0 doser data belongs in 1 doser data. A close eye should be kept on how this pans out in the coming months. But, it also makes me wonder, what of pre-existing immunity prior to injection? Where is that data? Do these 1 dosers just appear to win out because of pre-existing immunity? My bet is on 0 dosers = 1 dosers.

Let’s count ‘deaths’ as the worst outcome of a product that is meant to promote longevity, vitality and health. What we see from the absolute counts, (note that the death data is more sparsely populated that the case and hospitalization data), is that the number of deaths is proportionally related to dose → more doses = more deaths.

N.B. The deaths in the uninjected individuals in early 2022 are likely the elderly. I don’t have the data stratified by age, so that’s just a guess. But you’ll also notice that the deaths in the uninjected group wanes as time is passing. It appears as though death counts are also starting to go down in the 3 dosers. It will be interesting to see what the numbers look like at the end of 2022. Let’s normalize.


Figure 3a: Transcribed from Table 3 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia

When the data is normalized for deaths, again the adjusted data shows that the 0 dosers are reporting more deaths from COVID-19 in the beginning of 2022 until about mid-March. Sparse data, don’t forget. And perhaps, again, the 0 dosers are actually 1 dosers.


Figure 3b: Normalized from Table 3 in 2022-00662-HEA | Information Access | Nova Scotia COVID-19 Tracker Canada - Provincial Vaccination Tracker

From March 18, it appears as though the number of individuals reported to be dying from COVID-19 with highest frequency are the 3 dosers. I would take this result with a grain of salt - we need more, and reliable, death data. Again, it will be very interesting to see how this plays out in the coming months. I would still call this a failed product. I always will.
I would also point out here that I usually don’t touch data that involves ‘cases’ and ‘deaths’ with a 10-foot pole because I think it’s all flawed since a ‘case’ is defined by PCR and this DNA amplification technique is done more for people who are NOT injected, in many cases. And deaths, well, reassessment of death certificates has resulted in many back-tracks of those numbers. Many individuals who presumably died ‘from’ COVID-19 actually died ‘with’ COVID-19. So, there’s that grain of sodium chloride again.

In any and all cases, it is up to the individual if they want to be a 0, 1, 2 or a 3!

These data contradict the efficacy claims and expletives being repeated over and over again by the FDA and the CDC: these products are NOT EFFECTIVE and NOT SAFE (not necessarily based on this data - you need adverse event data for that).

I will ALWAYS choose natural immunity.

Here’s a slide I made that omits the 0 dosers. I made it just to better compare the data from the dosers. I think it’s better to compare the dose data since I believe the 0 dose data is not actually 0 dose data: I think it’s 1 doser data.Anyway, I’m staying away from case and death data from now on. It’s too floopy.



I also made a slide where I swap the 0 and 1 doser data. See how that looks to ya. It seems more in-line with other data and adverse event data as well.





1 Nova Scotia Population 2022
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
Good Lord.

I think he’s panicked, or panicking!
That scares me.
What’s scary is that he’s not an apocalyptic nut or a conspiracy theorist but a scientist. I don’t sense that he’s panicked but that he’s angry at what is taking place that can’t be stopped.
I just feel numbed by all of this. My sense is that we’re going to be in major trouble by October on many fronts. And we may not make it that far.
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
At about the 20 minute mark he states that BA 4&5 is still evolving and that in 6 to 7 weeks we will see it evolve into a much more deadlier variant. He predicts the crash of the healthcare system as well a financial crash. He is sounding very doomdayish. He said in two months we will be living in a different world.
He says that the young people will be more susceptible to monkeypox and you really need to listen from the 50 minute mark down to the 52 minute mark where he’s predicting the end of western civilization.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic


Thank you! I can't wait to watch this, I've been waiting for a more recent video.

PS - I don't want you to get in TB trouble ;). The rule for posting videos is you need a runtime and a description, I will do it for you. That's why I do it on all the videos I post...

Geert Vanden Bossche with Clas Sivertsen on where the world is heading from July 2022 forward
54 min 53 sec
Jun 19, 2022
Assaya

In this talk with Assaya's founder Clas Sivertsen, Geert predicts in this video that a new flu epidemic will soon emerge from an animal reservoir, and that the world (except Africa) will experience another wave of hospitalizations and economic collapse. He also discusses vaccinated vs unvaccinated responses to infection by new and future emerging variants, as well as describing what it will take to reach herd immunity. Clas discusses his detailed tracking of eCT values during his recent Covid-19 Omicron infection, and go through some of the histopathology and disease progression, lack of symptoms, etc.
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
Thank you! I can't wait to watch this, I've been waiting for a more recent video.

PS - I don't want you to get in TB trouble ;). The rule for posting videos is you need a runtime and a description, I will do it for you. That's why I do it on all the videos I post...

Geert Vanden Bossche with Clas Sivertsen on where the world is heading from July 2022 forward
54 min 53 sec
Jun 19, 2022
Assaya

In this talk with Assaya's founder Clas Sivertsen, Geert predicts in this video that a new flu epidemic will soon emerge from an animal reservoir, and that the world (except Africa) will experience another wave of hospitalizations and economic collapse. He also discusses vaccinated vs unvaccinated responses to infection by new and future emerging variants, as well as describing what it will take to reach herd immunity. Clas discusses his detailed tracking of eCT values during his recent Covid-19 Omicron infection, and go through some of the histopathology and disease progression, lack of symptoms, etc.
I didn’t know it needed a preview and run time so thank you for that. He’s predicting the end of western civilization in this video
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

China reports 106 new COVID cases for June 26 vs 116 day earlier
Reporting by Shanghai newsroom, Writing by Liz Lee;
Sun, June 26, 2022, 10:30 PM

SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Mainland China reported 106 new coronavirus cases for June 26, of which 39 were symptomatic and 67 were asymptomatic, the National Health Commission said on Monday.

That compared with 116 new cases a day earlier - 39 symptomatic and 77 asymptomatic infections, which China counts separately.

There were no new deaths, keeping the nation's fatalities at 5,226.

As of Sunday, mainland China had confirmed 225,565 cases with symptoms.

China's capital Beijing reported three new local symptomatic cases, compared with one a day earlier, and a new local asymptomatic case compared with none the previous day, the local government said.

Shanghai reported two new local symptomatic cases, compared with zero a day earlier, and two local asymptomatic cases versus none the previous day, local government data showed.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

BOLDING IN ORIGINAL

40,000 National Guard Troops Face Unemployment As Vaccine Deadline Imminent
by Tyler Durden
Sunday, Jun 26, 2022 - 06:00 PM

Up to 40,000 Army National Guard troops - around 13% of the force - could be fired for not getting the mandated COVID-19 vaccine (which has limited efficacy against Omicron, doesn't stop transmission, has been linked to elevated heart problems, and has been mandated for a healthy demographic that rarely dies of the disease).

Guard soldiers have until Thursday to get the jab, according to the Associated Press, which notes that between 20% and 30% of Guard soldiers in six states remain unvaccinated.

"We’re going to give every soldier every opportunity to get vaccinated and continue their military career. Every soldier that is pending an exemption, we will continue to support them through their process," Lt. Gen. Jon Jensen, director of the Army National Guard, told AP. "We’re not giving up on anybody until the separation paperwork is signed and completed. There’s still time."

Last year, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered all service members to get the vaccine, with different branches maintaining different deadlines for the jab. The Army National Guard was given the maximum amount of time, largely because its roughly 330,000 soldiers are scattered throughout the country, including remote locations.

The Army Guard’s vaccine percentage is the lowest among the U.S. military — with all the active-duty Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps at 97% or greater and the Air Guard at about 94%. The Army reported Friday that 90% of Army Reserve forces were partially or completely vaccinated.
The Pentagon has said that after June 30, Guard members won’t be paid by the federal government when they are activated on federal status, which includes their monthly drill weekends and their two-week annual training period. Guard troops mobilized on federal status and assigned to the southern border or on COVID-19 missions in various states also would have to be vaccinated or they would not be allowed to participate or be paid. -AP

Complicating matters is a rule that Guard soldiers deployed on state active duty may not require a vaccination, depending on state-level mandates.

According to the report, at least seven governors have asked Austin to reconsider, or drop, the vaccine mandate for National Guard members - with some having filed or joined lawsuits to that end.

Austin, apparently following his own special brand of science, told them to pound sand, saying that Covid-19 "takes our service members out of the fight, temporarily or permanently, and jeopardizes our ability to meet mission requirements," adding that troops will either need to get vaccinated or lose their Guard status.

"When you’re looking at, 40,000 soldiers that potentially are in that unvaccinated category, absolutely there’s readiness implications on that and concerns associated with that," said Jenson, adding "That's a significant chunk."

AP reports that around 85% of Army Guard soldiers are fully vaccinated, while 87% are at least partially vaccinated.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
THE COMPANION PIECE TO THIS WAS POSTED THIS AFTERNOON. SCROLL UP TO POST 63,530

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(fair use applies)

Depopulation of Taiwan
Birth Rate Dropped by 23% in ONE YEAR -- And it is NOT Covid
Igor Chudov
13 hr ago

This is a continuation of my post from yesterday about a massive 13% decline in births in Germany. Such a decline is a nine-sigma event, meaning that it is so unlikely to occur by chance, that it would naturally happen as rarely as an asteroid striking the Earth.


My article explored several more locales (UK, North Dakota, and Switzerland).

But no other place stands out as much as Taiwan does.

23% Drop in Birth Rate in Taiwan

According to a Taiwan government report, the birth rate dropped by 23.24% in May 2022, compared to May 2021.



I inputted historical birth rate data from Macrotrends for the years 2009-2021, and added the year 2022 as year 2021 adjusted down by 23.24%. Obviously, 2022 is not over and the number of Taiwanese babies to be born this year (or during the next 12 months) is unknown. So the chart below is an illustration of what would happen in the next 12 months if the 23.24% drop stays constant.



When expressed in “sigmas”, units of standard deviation, the 23.24% drop in the birth rate in Taiwan is a 26-sigma event!



This is can be described as “unimaginable” in terms of the likelihood of happening due to random chance.

The Wolfram-Alpha illustration of likelihood by sigma only goes to ten-sigma. They thought that it would be pointless to show more sigmas. Except a 26-sigma drop in birth rate just happened in Taiwan.




What Happened In Taiwan?

Health experts are quick to blame Covid for all sorts of health problems afflicting those they advised to vaccinate.

It is not the vaccine, they say, it is Covid. We tried to protect you with the vaccine, they would always insist. But you got Covid anyway, thanks to the evil antivaxxers, and your problems are due to Covid — that’s their explanation.

We know for certain, though, that the drop in birth rate in Taiwan is NOT due to Covid. Yes, Taiwan is suffering from a terrible COVID pandemic right now (despite being 91% vaccinated), however, Covid in Taiwan only started around April 21 of 2022, and could not impact May birth rates much.



To see what could cause the extreme drop in births, go back 9 months from May 2022, so to September 2021.

Taiwan was a poster child for successful vaccination. 91% of all Taiwanese residents received a vaccine dose. By October 1, 2021, 56% of ALL people of Taiwan received Covid vaccines.



They got a fairly usual mix of “safe and effective” AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines.



People of Taiwan got their shots, felt assured that Covid-19 stops with every vaccinated person, and moved on with their lives.

I doubt that the people of Taiwan noticed anything at the end of September. They knew for sure that their vaccines were safe and effective and would not affect their sperm or pregnancies. So they proceeded with family plans just as before, trying to make babies on purpose, or partying and having fun and getting pregnant accidentally, just as people do elsewhere.

Except for 9 months later, they only gave birth to 77% of the number of babies expected.

I hope that the people of Taiwan will start asking their authorities: what is happening to us?

A Glimmer of Hope

If you are like me, and you like babies, children, and grandchildren, you are probably upset by now and are wondering what will happen to all of us. Let me mention a possibility that, although unlikely in my opinion, may make this drop in birth rates temporary.

Covid vaccines are known to “disrupt the menstrual cycle” and lower sperm counts. It is possible that some women, for a period of several months, could not conceive and become pregnant due to these disruptions. Because all Taiwanese women were vaccinated at almost the same time, those disruptions created a precipitous drop in birth rates.

My hope, as someone who likes people, is that this will turn out to be the case. However, in my opinion, we will likely see the opposite, and reductions in birth rates will be permanent. Why? Because vaccinating young people was a crime. It was not a mistake. Let me not explain why, in this article.

Crimes like this are NOT perpetrated to achieve a two-month drop in birth rates. Criminals of such nature who gave young people shots that they did not need, for sinister reasons, go for the jugular. Of course, not all people participating in vaccination campaigns were having such sinister intentions. But it is possible that some persons on top had criminal motives that they did not disclose.

Again, I hope that the preceding paragraph will turn out to be unfounded. I was, and am, against any of that happening, do not support anything that is happening in Taiwan, and I am very worried.

Time will tell.

They Told Us it is Safe

This fact check from Dec 5, 2020 says that the vaccine is definitely safe for pregnancy “because there is no evidence that it is unsafe”. No trial specifically for pregnancy and fertility was conducted. They just lied to us that it is safe — but had no way of knowing.



Let us know what you think, in the comments section!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Igor made the following comment in the comment section:


Igor Chudov
11 hr ago Pinned

NOTE: I added a section to this very upsetting article that shows why these reductions in birth rates happened, and why they might be of temporary nature.

While I do not believe they will be temporary, I hope that they will be.

Please read the last section of my article and comment if you agree or disagree with it.

.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Pfizer documents: A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA (LNP) Formulation Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats; dramatic increases in ovaries
Table 1, page 23 shows Total Lipid Concentration at 48 hours; very ELEVATED LNP concentrations in adrenals, injection site, liver, ovaries, bone marrow; ovaries dramatic increases 0.25 min to 48 hours
Dr. Paul Alexander
2 hr ago

This document (tissue distribution study) was hidden among Pfizer documents and was ordered to be released by the courts. This was one of the documents Pfizer wanted kept hidden for 75 years.

In terms of lipid nano-particle tissue distribution from the Pfizer injection: A key finding is that lipid concentration rises from 0.104 at 0.25 minutes post injection to 12.261 at 48 hours in ovaries. This is a red flag for damage to fertility and these findings (concentration levels and increases in tissue across time) mirrors the Japanese biodistribution Pfizer study (FOIA) data.

Background:

‘Wistar Han rats (21 male and 21 female) each received a single intramuscular dose of [ 3 H]-08-A01-C01 at a target mRNA total dose of 50 µg/animal (1.29 mg/animal total lipid dose). The content and concentration of total radioactivity in blood, plasma and tissues were determined at pre-defined time points following administration. Whole blood and tissue samples were collected at 0.25 1, 2, 4, 8, 24 and 48 hours post-dose (three animals/sex/timepoint) and plasma was subsequently separated from blood by centrifugation. The concentration of total radioactivity was measured by liquid scintillation counting (LSC).’



ENLARGED:



SOURCE
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

BREAKING: Newly released documents show that the W.H.O. is orchestrating the FDA's scheme to skip all future clinical trials for Covid-19 shots
Injections forever, no safety data, brought to you by the W.H.O./Gates/C.C.P.

Toby Rogers
4 hr ago

I. Introduction: the FDA always rigs the game on behalf of Pharma

Late Friday afternoon, the FDA released its agenda for the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting that will vote on the Orwellian “Future Framework” on Tuesday June 28. Then on Saturday morning the FDA released a briefing document in connection with this scheme to end science as we know it in connection with future Covid-19 shots. (Much appreciation to the brilliant James Roguski for alerting me to these documents). In this article I will explain what is in the briefing document, what is likely to happen at the meeting, and what can be done about it.

II. The FDA’s “Future Framework” briefing document

The briefing document is 18 pages of text, 1.5 line spacing, with just 19 references — 9 of which are pre-prints or from the CDC’s in-house newsletter (MMWR) which means they are not peer reviewed. Any true believer in The Narrative(TM) could have written this in a few hours. To base the entire future of Covid-19 shots on this glorified undergrad term paper is madness.

As I predicted, even though the April 6 meeting was presented as an exploratory initial conversation that reached no conclusions whatsoever, the “Future Framework” is now being presented by the FDA as a done deal, fait accompli, you’d have to be crazy to insist on proper safety studies.

The core argument of the briefing document is hilarious (or rather, it would be hilarious if it was not a plan to permanently institutional genocide and hide the evidence). In several places the FDA argues (colloquialisms mine):

1. These Covid-19 shots really work great, miracles really, incredibly effective, boy howdy do they work well! Boosters too, total home run, the Israelis even have 10-weeks of data showing that they might help old people. What more evidence could you want?

2. Okay, well, it depends on what you mean by work. These shots do not stop infection, transmission, hospitalization, nor death, even though that’s why we licensed them. Any protection wears off fairly quickly, but It’s Not Our Fault(TM) because This Wily Virus(TM) mutates too fast and no one told us that it would ever mutate.

3. So these shots must be reformulated but we cannot possibly ask Lord Pharma to do proper clinical trials ever again because we already know that these shots work great (see point #1)!

The briefing document literally states:

The evaluation of modified vaccines for the purpose of vaccine strain composition decisions will need to rely mainly on comparative immunogenicity data due to the time constraints involved in vaccine manufacturing and clinical efficacy evaluation.

Did you catch that? The evaluation “will need to rely on” (no decision to be made here) on measures other than actual health outcomes because “time constraints.”

Ah $cience!

Moderna, Pfizer, and Novavax are all developing reformulated Covid-19 shots. But they know that the FDA is not going to look at health outcomes so they are going to great lengths to jack up the antibody response. Pfizer tested a double-strength dose (60 mcg of mRNA instead of 30 mcg) even though they had previously ruled out a higher dose because of safety concerns. So the antibody levels are through the roof. But the VRBPAC admitted on April 6 that there are no known correlates of protection (meaning: antibody levels do not tell you who will be immune) so these antibody measures are medically meaningless.

Sane people realize that if you turbo charge the immune response, you may also turbo charge adverse events. But the “Future Framework” allows pharmaceutical companies to skip clinical trials altogether.



Furthermore all of these companies are developing shots to target the original Omicron strain (BA.1) even though it has already been supplanted by other variants (BA.4 and BA.5). The FDA and these companies claim that shots targeting BA.1 will be effective against later variants but I do not know how they can possibly argue that given the total absence of actual health data.

Words that you will NOT find in the FDA “Future Framework” briefing document:

• original antigenic sin,
• antibody dependent enhancement,
• prion disease,
• myocarditis,
• VAERS
• adverse events, or
• side effects.

So the FDA is literally not looking out for any of the worst case scenario possibilities.

The “Future Framework” is a plan to base the entire Covid-19 vaccine program on magical thinking rather than science.

III. What’s likely to happen at the VRBPAC meeting on Tuesday, June 28

The cartel is predictable because they follow a playbook and they use the same cast of characters over and over again.

The first presentation will be by CDC staffer Heather Scobie. She will likely take her slides from the June 7, 2022 VRBPAC meeting, change the date on the first slide, and update them a bit to show that Omicron has become the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in the U.S. The gist will be that there is no point in vaccinating against the “prototype” Wuhan lab leak variant, nor Alpha, Beta, Delta, or Gamma, because it’s all Omicron right now.

What she will NOT tell you is that Moderna and Pfizer are designing shots to target the BA.1 version of Omicron and now that variant is waning and being replaced by BA.4 and BA.5. Furthermore she will not mention the fact that these shots are fueling the evolution of variants that evade any protection from vaccines.

Dr. Scobie will be followed by another CDC staffer, Ruth Link-Gelles who will likely dust off one of her slide decks from the four VRBPAC and four ACIP meetings that have already happened this month and discuss Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness in adults. RLG cracks me up because she absolutely does not give a f*ck. She shows slide after slide of negative efficacy from these worthless shots and she does not care because she knows that the VRBPAC will approve anything that has the word vaccine on the vial. RLG’s presentations are a token attempt to play it straight with the data but then all of her data is instantly memory holed and never spoken of again.

Then, I’ve really got to hand it to the cartel for choosing their next speaker — Justin Lessler, from the University of North Carolina. Dr. Lessler has gotten TEN grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in recent years (see pages 26 to 30 of his CV here). Then he’s gotten another TEN grants from NIH and/or Tony Fauci’s NIAID.

Given that, what are the odds that Dr. Lessler will criticize The Narrative(TM)? Zero.

Gates and Fauci literally have their guy inside the meeting doing the modeling about how we should think about the future epidemiology of Covid-19. Gates figured out in 2017 that modeling is the tail that wags the dog of policy and has invested heavily in it ever since. Dr. Lessler is soaked head to toe in conflicts of interest — he should not be allowed within 100 miles of this committee — and yet the FDA will not even require a conflict waiver from this guy.

Cartel gonna cartel.

After a short break, Stephen Hoge President of Moderna, Dena Swanson, VP of Pfizer, and Greg Glenn, President of Novavax will explain how wonderful their reformulated Covid-19 shots are but they will argue that there is simply no time to conduct proper clinical trials anymore. None of their data will be peer reviewed so it will all be fanciful fiction — 95% to 100% efficacy based entirely on belief.

Then the FDA will bring in two closers (and this is where it gets really interesting).

Kanta Subbarao, Director of the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) Collaborating Center in Melbourne, Australia will present on “Considerations for Vaccine Strain Composition from the W.H.O. TAG CO-VAC.” I did not understand until just yesterday (as I started to write this article) that this entire “Future Framework” is actually coming from the W.H.O. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest voluntary contributor to the W.H.O. so Gates is likely directing the play. Gates requires that W.H.O. use the McKinsey consulting firm so this is probably a McKinsey operation (and McKinsey also works for Pharma so this is a huge conflict of interest). As Naomi Wolf points out, the involvement of the W.H.O. also raises troubling questions about the influence of the Chinese Communist Party over this process.

As far back as January 2022, the W.H.O./Gates/McKinsey junta realized that these shots were terrible and so they decided to use that as an opportunity to seize even more power and control. The W.H.O. set up a Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition (TAG-CO-VAC) to implement these Orwellian “Future Frameworks” across the developed world to lower manufacturing costs for Pharma and avoid bothersome health data that might hurt profits. All of the messaging that we have seen from FDA and leaked to the press was initially developed and released by TAG-CO-VAC.

Before joining the W.H.O., Kanta Subbarao was at NIAID for 14 years, so she’s a loyal lieutenant for Fauci. She will polish off her slides from the April 6 VRBPAC meeting to argue that Covid-19 is similar to influenza, that strain selection must be coordinated globally, and that multivalent New & Improved(TM) Covid-19 Shots Now with Omicron!(TM) will save the day and end the pandemic. None of her claims will be true but they are what the cartel wants said and this is more like a well-funded hostage video than anything else so that’s what we’re going to get.

Finally, the FDA will bring in Jerry Weir, who looks like a cross between Yosemite Sam and Sam Elliott. He’ll slightly update his slides from April as well and then just go round and round with droll observations about the (failed) flu strain selection process and how it should be a model — until the committee is dizzy and willing to agree to anything.

Officially the question that will be voted on is:
Does the committee recommend inclusion of a SARS-CoV-2 Omicron component for COVID- 19 booster vaccines in the United States?
This language obscures at lot. Boosters are the market now. By calling them boosters instead of reformulated shots (which is what they actually are), they will not go through new clinical trials. Over the summer, earlier versions of the shot will quietly be withdrawn from the market and the reformulated shots that skipped clinical trials will become the only option.
So this is the FDA’s weasel word way of sliding down the slippery slope into no more clinical trials for Covid-19 shots ever again.

If the FDA stated plainly what they are up to there would be riots.

IV. What is to be done

We only have about 24 hours to act so let’s leave it all on the field!

Please submit a formal comment to the regulations.gov website stating that the FDA must reject the “Future Framework” and that all reformulated Covid-19 shots must go through proper human clinical trials. The docket number is FDA-2022-N-0905. The docket will close Monday night June 27, 2022 at 11:59 eastern time. Click (here) to go to the relevant page on the regulations.gov website and look for the blue comment button in the upper left hand corner. The FDA lies about the number of comments submitted but we have a lawsuit going about that so the more comments we can submit (that they will subsequently hide) the better for our case.

In addition, here are the email addresses for everyone at the FDA/VRBPAC who has a say in this matter. It is our right to share with them our thoughts and concerns about this process. You can share your own story or copy and paste the message below.

Subject line: All reformulated Covid-19 shots MUST go through proper clinical trials

The safety and efficacy of all reformulated Covid-19 shots must be evaluated through:

• Large (50,000+ person) double-blind randomized controlled trials with inert saline placebos conducted by an independent third party.

• The treatment and control groups must be followed for life to monitor adverse events and all-cause mortality (no more wiping out the control group after 6 months to hide bad outcomes).

• We also demand greater than 90% efficacy against infection with less than 0.1% Grade 3 or higher adverse events; proper monitoring for carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, and impairment of fertility; and immediate release to the public of all clinical trial documents submitted to the FDA.

sean.mccluskie@hhs.gov, commissioner@fda.hhs.gov, DeanofPublicHealth@brown.edu, Aux7@cdc.gov, Peter.Marks@fda.hhs.gov, Hong.Yang@fda.hhs.gov, Richard.Forshee@fda.hhs.gov, Huilee.Wong@fda.hhs.gov, Leslie.Ball@fda.hhs.gov, Doran.Fink@fda.hhs.gov, jerry.weir@fda.hhs.gov, hanae@bcm.edu, paula.annunziato@merck.com, adam.berger@nih.gov, hbernstein@northwell.edu, acohn@cdc.gov, anc0@cdc.gov, hjanes@fredhutch.org, hgans@stanford.edu, david.kim@hhs.gov, asmonto@umich.edu, offit@chop.edu, spergam@fredhutch.org, Jportnoy@cmh.edu, erubin@hsph.harvard.edu, erubin@nejm.org, ashane@emory.edu, swamy002@mc.duke.edu, fullerao@umich.edu, RandyHawkins@cdrewu.edu, officeofthepresident@mmc.edu, JYLee@uams.edu, ofer.levy@childrens.harvard.edu, wayne_marasco@dfci.harvard.edu, cmeissner@tuftsmedicalcenter.org, mrn8d@virginia.edu, stanley-perlman@uiowa.edu, mhsawyer@ucsd.edu, mew2@cdc.gov, jlessler@unc.edu

A special welcome to everyone who subscribed after seeing me on Bannon's War Room! ✨
Blessings to the warriors!

Prayers for everyone fighting against Pharma fascism.

In the comments, please let me know how you are going with contacting these people and anything else that is on your mind.

As always, I welcome any corrections.

Let’s go!!!!!!!!!
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

UNDERSTANDING THE CNS AND PERIPHERAL NERVOUS SYSTEM PATHOLOGY OF COVID AND LONG COVID FROM AN ALZHEIMER’S PERSPECTIVE: A HYPERACCELERATED HYBRID OF ALZHEIMER’S (AD) AND PARKINSON’S DISEASE (PD)
The Spike Protein and the systemic hyperphosphorylation of Tau
Walter M Chesnut
10 hr ago

MY MOST IMPORTANT FINDING TO DATE.



It was once believed that Amyloid plaques were the cause of Alzheimer’s Disease. However, it has since been discovered that the PRESENCE of Amyloid greatly ACCELERATES the deposition of Tau. This is most likely why the elderly, and those that have certain Amyloid-expressing conditions, experience more severe disease. This may also be why some develop Long COVID, while others do not. As an aside, I am concerned that repeated exposure to the Spike Protein may accelerate the seeding process. For example, advancing the Amyloid/Tau state of a 20 year old to that of a 30 year old, etc. per exposure.

Why Tau?

The first question we should ask ourselves is, why is Tau the “villain” in this story? The reason is that it is one of the Intrinsically Disordered Proteins (IDP) in the human body.



IDPs are able to cause hyperphosphorylation. Please note that the S1/S2 cleavage site of the Spike Protein is NOT ONLY AN INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED PROTEIN, but the sequence at Spike S1/S2 site (the most disordered part) also enables cleavage by furin and phospho‑regulation in SARS‑CoV2 BUT NOT in SARS‑CoV1 or MERS‑CoV!

It is highly phosphorylated Tau which is toxic, neurodegenerative and fibril-producing. In AD, it has been observed that only 1% of Tau is of this hyperphosphorylated species.

This occurs through a process called liquid-liquid-phase-separation (LLPS). In it, the cell reacts by creating an organelle which AGGREGATES HYPERPHOSPHORYLATED TAU PERFECTLY! Also! You many not find amyloid! The process can occur without the presence of Amyloid. Yet, the presence of Amyloid seems to greatly enhance/accelerate the process.

What is occurring, I believe, is that the S Protein is inducing these organelles and hyperphosphorylating Tau. This would clearly explain the observed hyperphosphorylated Tau in the autopsies mentioned below.

HOWEVER! It is most important to understand that in COVID-19 autopsies, the neuronal cell death upon viral infection by SARS-CoV-2 was preceded by aberrant intraneuronal localisation and hyperphosphorylation of Tau protein, similar to the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. Therefore, it is almost certain that FAR more than 1% of Tau is being hyperphosphorylated by SARS-CoV-2 infection/transfection.

Why do I say transfection?

Interactions between SARS-CoV-2 spike S protein and its receptor ACE2 similarly contributed to the spreading of cytosolic prions and Tau aggregates. Also, coculture with aggregate-bearing HEK donors overexpressing spike S increased aggregate induction in recipients.

Therefore, I believe the Spike Protein is inducing massive amounts of hyperphosphorylated Tau, which is creating the fibrils. This explains the AD, PD and even can explain the sudden cardiac deaths, as Tauopathies effect both the CNS and the peripheral autonomic nervous system.







PLEASE NOTE ABOVE. INDUCTION OF TAU VIA VIRUS. (Perhaps the net effect of the Spike Protein)

This should be stern warning of a clear and present danger which must be explored fully.

Potential Pathways of Abnormal Tau and α-Synuclein Dissemination in Sporadic Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Diseases

Catch me if you can: SARS-CoV-2 detection in brains of deceased patients with COVID-19

Roles of tau protein in health and disease

SARS-CoV-2 Infection Triggers Phosphorylation: Potential Target for Anti-COVID-19 Therapeutics

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-74101-0.pdf?origin=ppub

Studying the Progression of Alzheimer's Disease with Bradley Hyman MD PhD - Shiley Endowed Lecture
1 hr 3 min 23 sec
Aug 24, 2018
University of California Television (UCTV)

How do you model a disease process that stretches out over 20 years in a way that helps you intervene in that process? In the inaugural Shiley Endowed Lecture, Bradley Hyman, MD, PhD shares his research on the progression of Alzheimer's disease. Series: "The Brain Channel" [Show ID: 33992]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_2yH2n3k_I




.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Posted for fair use.....

COVID-19’s 6th wave begins, with more seriously ill and more deaths
According to the Health Ministry, 11,438 tested positive for the virus on Sunday, 68,000 during the past seven days.
By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH

Published: JUNE 27, 2022 16:39
Updated: JUNE 27, 2022 20:22

Medical centers around the country have reported an increase in hospitalized patients, those who are seriously ill and the number who have died.

The internal medicine department at Ziv Medical Center in Safed is the most overburdened, at 123% capacity, followed by Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera, at 121%.
"If the criteria for being in another COVID-19 wave is an extreme increase in the number of positive tests, then we are in the midst of a wave."
Dr. Nadav Sorek

On Sunday, 11,438 people tested positive for coronavirus, and 68,000 tested positive over the past seven days, the Health Ministry reported Monday. At last count, 53,828 people had an active infection, most of them with the BA5 subtype of the Omicron variant.




There were 285 in serious condition and 56 in critical condition, the ministry said. Fifty were on a respirator, and one was connected to an ECMO machine that takes over for the heart and lungs.

Current COVID numbers
The Health Ministry continues to recommend wearing face masks indoors, especially in crowded places, but it has not ordered it except in medical institutions, despite the rise in infectious and serious cases.

Dr. Nadav Sorek, director of the infectious disease lab at Samson Assuta Ashdod Hospital, on Monday said 25% of antigen tests for coronavirus were now positive, compared with 10% last month.

“The significance is twofold and worrying in light of the increase in the number of tests,” he said. “If the criterion for being in another COVID wave is an extreme increase in the number of positive tests, then we are in the midst of a wave. In recent weeks, we have witnessed an increase in positive tests from the total number of tests to detect and identify corona, and if we take into account that the number of tests has increased at the same time, then the reality is even more complex.

“What mainly worries the healthcare system is an increase in infection among medical staffers, along with an increase in the number of critically ill patients as a result of an increase in the general patient rate. However, compared with the waves of the past and in light of the experience we have gained, vaccines and medications, most of our attention and concern is given to patients over the age of 60 who were infected along with suffering from chronic diseases,” Sorek said.





The Rabin Medical Center-Beilinson Campus in Petah Tikva on Monday said it had 36 coronavirus patients in its reopened ward, including six in serious condition.

A total of 10,940 people in Israel have died from the pandemic in the last two years, including 26 over the past week. More than 825,000 people above age 60 have received the fourth vaccination, and 4.5 million Israelis have received three shots.
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
Posted for fair use.....

COVID-19’s 6th wave begins, with more seriously ill and more deaths
According to the Health Ministry, 11,438 tested positive for the virus on Sunday, 68,000 during the past seven days.
By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH

Published: JUNE 27, 2022 16:39
Updated: JUNE 27, 2022 20:22

Medical centers around the country have reported an increase in hospitalized patients, those who are seriously ill and the number who have died.

The internal medicine department at Ziv Medical Center in Safed is the most overburdened, at 123% capacity, followed by Hillel Yaffe Medical Center in Hadera, at 121%.


On Sunday, 11,438 people tested positive for coronavirus, and 68,000 tested positive over the past seven days, the Health Ministry reported Monday. At last count, 53,828 people had an active infection, most of them with the BA5 subtype of the Omicron variant.




There were 285 in serious condition and 56 in critical condition, the ministry said. Fifty were on a respirator, and one was connected to an ECMO machine that takes over for the heart and lungs.

Current COVID numbers
The Health Ministry continues to recommend wearing face masks indoors, especially in crowded places, but it has not ordered it except in medical institutions, despite the rise in infectious and serious cases.

Dr. Nadav Sorek, director of the infectious disease lab at Samson Assuta Ashdod Hospital, on Monday said 25% of antigen tests for coronavirus were now positive, compared with 10% last month.

“The significance is twofold and worrying in light of the increase in the number of tests,” he said. “If the criterion for being in another COVID wave is an extreme increase in the number of positive tests, then we are in the midst of a wave. In recent weeks, we have witnessed an increase in positive tests from the total number of tests to detect and identify corona, and if we take into account that the number of tests has increased at the same time, then the reality is even more complex.

“What mainly worries the healthcare system is an increase in infection among medical staffers, along with an increase in the number of critically ill patients as a result of an increase in the general patient rate. However, compared with the waves of the past and in light of the experience we have gained, vaccines and medications, most of our attention and concern is given to patients over the age of 60 who were infected along with suffering from chronic diseases,” Sorek said.





The Rabin Medical Center-Beilinson Campus in Petah Tikva on Monday said it had 36 coronavirus patients in its reopened ward, including six in serious condition.

A total of 10,940 people in Israel have died from the pandemic in the last two years, including 26 over the past week. More than 825,000 people above age 60 have received the fourth vaccination, and 4.5 million Israelis have received three shots.
Here we go.
 

Tristan

Has No Life - Lives on TB
At about the 20 minute mark he states that BA 4&5 is still evolving and that in 6 to 7 weeks we will see it evolve into a much more deadlier variant. He predicts the crash of the healthcare system as well a financial crash. He is sounding very doomdayish. He said in two months we will be living in a different world.
He says that the young people will be more susceptible to monkeypox and you really need to listen from the 50 minute mark down to the 52 minute mark where he’s predicting the end of western civilization.


At the end Geert says he's focusing on getting his family ready for the chaos to come...

The whole vid was well, well worth the listen. (And a save, as well...)
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Be interested in your thoughts after you watch

Good video. He mostly reiterates his prediction that a new variant will emerge that will be more virulent and will effect the vaccinated who have no innate immunity after being vaxxed. He also added his theory that monkeypox will effect vaccinated children with the customary vaccines given to kids, regardless of whether or not they got the covid vaccine (I dont' think he said why) and a new flu from mink or avian will emerge and effect mostly older people who got flu vaccines (for similar reasons covid will effect those vaxxed, immune escape, etc). He said it will be worse in the months to come than he originally thought. Thanks for posting the link. The picture for me was really small so I couldn't see the graphs they held up. I wish he had talked about NK but he wasn't asked about it. Interestingly, the interviewer has a medical company that I think does testing so a lot of it focused on that aspect. A good watch, if anyone has time to watch it they should.

HD
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

US grapples with whether to modify COVID vaccine for fall
LAURAN NEERGAARD - AP
Mon, June 27, 2022, 11:00 AM·5 min read

U.S. health authorities are facing a critical decision: whether to offer new COVID-19 booster shots this fall that are modified to better match recent changes of the shape-shifting coronavirus.

Moderna and Pfizer have tested updated shots against the super-contagious omicron variant, and advisers to the Food and Drug Administration will debate Tuesday if it’s time to make a switch — setting the stage for similar moves by other countries.

“This is science at its toughest,” FDA vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks told The Associated Press, adding that a final decision is expected within days of the advisory panel's recommendation.

Current COVID-19 vaccines saved millions of lives around the world in just their first year of use. And the Moderna and Pfizer shots still offer strong protection against the worst outcomes -- severe illness and death — especially after a booster dose.

But those vaccines target the original coronavirus strain and between waning immunity and a relentless barrage of variants, protection against infections has dropped markedly. The challenge is deciding if tweaked boosters offer a good chance of blunting another surge when there's no way to predict which mutant will be the main threat.

In an analysis prepared for Tuesday's meeting, FDA officials acknowledged targeting last winter's version of omicron is “somewhat outdated" since it already has been replaced by its even more contagious relatives.

“We would obviously like to get it right enough," Marks said, so that with one more shot “we get a full season of protection.”

Many experts say updated boosters promise at least a little more benefit.

“It is more likely to be helpful” than simply giving additional doses of today’s vaccine, said epidemiologist William Hanage of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

That’s assuming the virus doesn’t throw another curve ball.

“We’re following rather than getting ahead which is so vexing -- that we haven’t come up with a better variant-proof vaccine,” said Dr. Eric Topol, head of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, who has urged a major government push for next-generation immunizations.

Adding to concern about a winter COVID-19 wave is that about half of Americans eligible for that all-important first booster dose never got it. An updated version might entice some of them.

But “we do need to change our expectations,” said Dr. William Moss of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who noted that studies early in the pandemic raised unrealistic hopes of blocking even the mildest infections. “Our strategy can’t be booster doses every couple of months, even every six months, to prevent infections.”

The top candidates are what scientists call “bivalent” shots — a combination of the original vaccine plus omicron protection.

That’s because the original vaccines do spur production of at least some virus-fighting antibodies strong enough to cross-react with newer mutants -- in addition to their proven benefits against severe disease, said University of Pennsylvania immunologist E. John Wherry.

“Being able to push the boost response a little bit in one direction or the other without losing the core is really important,” he said.

Moderna and Pfizer found their combo shots substantially boosted levels of omicron-fighting antibodies in adults who'd already had three vaccinations, more than simply giving another regular dose.

Recipients also developed antibodies that could fight omicron’s newest relatives named BA.4 and BA.5, although not nearly as many. It's not clear how much protection that will translate into, and for how long.

Antibodies are a key first layer of defense that form after vaccination or a prior infection. They can prevent infection by recognizing the outer coating of the coronavirus -- the spike protein -- and blocking it from entering your cells.

But antibodies naturally wane and each new variant comes with a different-looking spike protein, giving it a better chance of evading detection by remaining antibodies. Separate studies published this month in Nature and the New England Journal of Medicine show the newest omicron relatives are even better at dodging antibodies — both in the vaccinated and in people who recovered from the original omicron.

That first booster people were supposed to get strengthened immune memory, helping explain why protection against hospitalization and death is proving more durable. If the virus sneaks past antibodies, different defenders called T cells spring into action, attacking infected cells to curb illness.

“T cells recognize the virus in a fundamentally different way,” not hunting for disguised spike protein but for parts of the virus that so far haven't been altered as much, said Penn’s Wherry.

Still, as people get older, all parts of their immune system gradually weaken. There’s little data on how long T cell protection against COVID-19 lasts or how it varies with different mutations or vaccines.

Wherry and dozens of other scientists recently petitioned the FDA to quit focusing solely on antibodies and start measuring T cells as it decides vaccination strategy.

The Biden administration has made clear that it needs Congress to provide more money so that if the FDA clears updated boosters, the government can buy enough for every American who wants one. And Dr. Anthony Fauci, the government's top infectious disease expert, told Congress last week more research funding also is critical to create better next-generation vaccines, such as nasal versions that might better block infection in the nose or more variant-proof shots.

“The virus is changing and we need to keep up with it,” Fauci, said.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

FDA panel to advise on whether — and how — Covid vaccines should be updated
By Helen Branswell
June 27, 2022

The Food and Drug Administration faces an important decision in coming days — whether to instruct companies that make Covid-19 vaccines to update the viral strain or strains of SARS-CoV-2 those products target.

It seems almost a given that the FDA will tell manufacturers that it is time to change the composition of Covid vaccines, with an eye to a rollout of updated vaccines to be administered in the autumn. But how and to what are questions that still need answering.

The agency is seeking the advice of its independent panel of vaccine experts, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC, to help it decide how, in the words of senior FDA official Peter Marks, to predict the future. VRBPAC meets Tuesday to discuss the issue.

“This is actually one of the more challenging scientific and scientifically nuanced decisions that FDA has to make because, in a sense, we are trying to predict the future based on probability and odds and the best scientific data that we have, knowing full well that this virus has surprised us previously,” Marks, director of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, told STAT in an interview late last week.

To date, Covid vaccines target the original strain of SARS-2 that first started sickening people in Wuhan, China, in late 2019. As new versions of the virus have emerged with mutations that help it evade immune responses we’ve developed through vaccination, infection, or a combination of the two, manufacturers have made and tested updated versions of the vaccine.

Prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant in late November, it didn’t seem like updating the vaccine strain would lead to enough of a gain, protection-wise, to warrant the work involved. But the calculus appears to have changed with Omicron — which has evolved into a series of subvariants over time. Omicron is so different than the strains that came before it that it is able, more commonly, to evade the immune response the vaccines generate. Since the emergence of the variant, there has been an increase in breakthrough infections, even among people who have had booster shots.

In fact, a committee that advises the World Health Organization, the Technical Advisory Group on Covid-19 Vaccine Composition, recently recommended that vaccines be updated to include an Omicron-based viral target, as a means of broadening the protection the vaccines induce.

“I think most people think that continuing to vaccinate with the same product is not the optimum way to get a breadth of response,” Kate O’Brien, the WHO’s technical lead for vaccines, said in an interview.

Marks said it now seems clear that targeting Omicron will improve the performance of the vaccines. But the question remains: Should the vaccines be updated to include two strains — the original virus and a version of Omicron, a bivalent vaccine — or just Omicron itself?

“We have to have a dialogue at this meeting about what you might buy by moving to a new vaccine composition and what you might lose and whether there’s some balance,” he said. “In other words, do you fully shift to a new vaccine composition, all Omicron? Do you potentially shift to 50-50 — our current vaccine 50%, plus Omicron 50%? And so that will be the discussion that’s going to occur to try to come to the best place we can to protect the population as we go forward.”

The FDA’s decision will influence the products vaccine manufacturers can bring to the American market. But the importance of this market means that its decision may impact what will be available to people far beyond the country’s borders as well.

The WHO’s committee has suggested that including a version of the Omicron variant in Covid vaccines will broaden the immune system’s capacity to recognize and fight off SARS-2 viruses, because Omicron, of all the variants that have emerged so far, is the most different from the original or index virus.

The committee suggested vaccines should either be reformulated to include two versions of the SARS-2 virus — a bivalent vaccine targeting the index virus and an Omicron version, BA.1 — or that a booster-only vaccine be created that targets Omicron alone.

It did not support the idea that an Omicron-only shot could be used as a first vaccination, a primary series vaccine that would be given to anyone who hasn’t yet been vaccinated, or, going forward, babies 6 months or older who are being vaccinated against SARS-2 for the first time.

“That doesn’t broaden the response,” O’Brien said of a monovalent vaccine only targeting the Omicron variant. “So if you’re coming with a monovalent product, then probably that product would only be used as a booster dose.”

The WHO has been working for months with regulatory agencies from around the world to try to develop a unified approach to updating Covid-19 vaccines, similar but not identical to the system used to change the composition of flu vaccines.

Will the U.S. follow the WHO’s advice here? Marks seemed to indicate there may be an interest in using a monovalent Omicron vaccine as a primary series. Data released by Pfizer and BioNTech over the weekend suggested the antibody levels induced by an Omicron-only vaccine were greater than what was seen with a version that included the index virus and Omicron.

The FDA in general tries to follow the WHO’s advice on influenza vaccine composition, Marks said, “but I think there will be a discussion here.”

Likewise, the FDA is asking its advisory committee to discuss whether using the BA.1 version of Omicron — which has been replaced by other subvariants of Omicron in the United States — is appropriate, or whether using BA.4 or BA.5 makes more sense. Those two subvariants are making up a growing share of infections in this country and elsewhere.

There are pros and cons to the various options. For instance, using different formulations for a primary series vaccine and booster shots creates delivery challenges — doctors’ offices and pharmacies would need to keep stocks of both on hand. Targeting Omicron alone would protect people against the strain of viruses that is actually circulating, Marks said.

But the WHO’s position is that the goal of updating the vaccines isn’t to try to keep up with the evolving virus — an approach that is used with flu vaccines — but rather to expose the immune system to another very different version of SARS-2 to teach it to better recognize and respond to both current and hopefully future strains of the virus. Think of it as making a wanted poster using multiple photos of a fugitive, taken from different angles.

“We’re not trying to say: Put Omicron in it because we think Omicron is what’s going to be around for the rest of time,” O’Brien said. “What the composition committee is saying is: We think that what will protect people best against whatever is going to come in the future is a broad immune response. And for the vaccines, the variant that is most different on the evolutionary tree from the ancestor strain, the index variant, is Omicron. That’s why they’re recommending Omicron.”

O’Brien noted that if another variant of concern replaces Omicron, the vaccines might not require updating, if testing shows that their protection holds up against the new strain. In this way, she said, the system being devised to update Covid vaccines is not like the one used to modify the composition of flu shots — which must include viral targets that are as close as possible to circulating strains to be effective.

“The point is not to copy and paste what has been done with flu but it’s more to get inspiration, basically, from the flu process,” O’Brien’s WHO colleague, Sylvie Briand, agreed. Briand is director of the global health agency’s epidemic and pandemic prevention and preparedness department.

One area in which the proposed updating of vaccines will likely follow the influenza model — and where the FDA will likely follow the WHO’s advice — relates to the way updated vaccines will be authorized for use. When the viral targets in flu vaccines are updated, the vaccines are not deemed to be new products and they do not have to undergo wide-scale efficacy testing. Instead, strain changes follow an accelerated regulatory pathway.

Updated vaccines will be authorized for use based on small safety trials and what is known as immunobridging — comparing the antibody levels induced by the updated vaccines to those generated by earlier versions. If they are similar, the assumption will be that antibody levels that protected against earlier versions of the virus will be protective again.

Marks said the FDA is aided in this task by the fact that as each variant of concern has emerged, Pfizer and Moderna have developed and tested prototypes against the new strains, generating immunogenicity and safety data that the agency has studied.

“So, we have a sense by looking at all of those data that we know with these mRNA vaccines that you seem to be able to change the sequence and get a good immune response and have a safe vaccine,” he said. “So I think that part of the discussion that will occur at the VRBPAC [meeting] is, ‘Look, given that we’ve now seen that this can be done … can we do something that’s very analogous to what we do with influenza?’”

Though the messenger RNA vaccines — those made by Pfizer and Moderna — are the easiest to update, Marks said whatever decision is made about updating the vaccines will probably apply to all vaccines sold in the U.S. market.

“I think that it’s going to probably be most easily implemented by the mRNA vaccines, or most rapidly implemented, but I would assume our recommendations will go across the different vaccine platforms,” he said. “But again, that may be discussed at the VRBPAC meeting as well.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Court revives block of vaccine mandate for federal workers
By KEVIN McGILL
yesterday

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — In a reversal for President Joe Biden, a federal appeals court in New Orleans on Monday agreed to reconsider its own April ruling that allowed the administration to require federal employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

The new order from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans vacates an earlier ruling by a three-judge panel that upheld the mandate. The new order means a block on the mandate imposed in January by a Texas-based federal judge remains in effect, while the full court’s 17 judges take up the appeal.

Biden had issued an order Sept. 9 requiring that more than 3.5 million federal executive branch workers undergo vaccination, with no option to get regularly tested instead, unless they secured approved medical or religious exemptions.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, who was appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of Texas by then-President Donald Trump, issued a nationwide injunction against the requirement in January. At the time, the White House said 98% of federal workers were already vaccinated.

Brown’s ruling was followed by back-and-forth rulings at the 5th Circuit.

In February, a 5th Circuit panel refused to block Brown’s ruling pending appeal.

But after hearing arguments in March, a different panel ruled 2-1 that Brown did not have jurisdiction in the case. The panel said those challenging the requirement could have pursued administrative remedies under Civil Service law.
Although the ruling was issued in April, it was not to officially take effect until May 31.

Judges Carl Stewart and James Dennis, who were nominated to the 5th Circuit by Democratic President Bill Clinton, were in the majority. Judge Rhesa Barksdale, a senior judge nominated by Republican President George H.W. Bush, dissented, saying the relief the challengers sought does not fall under the Civil Service Reform Act cited by the administration.

Barksdale is a senior judge, meaning he has a reduced case load and is no longer on active status at the court. Because he was part of the ruling panel he can participate in the reconsideration with the active judges. Of the 17 judges currently listed as active judges at the 5th Circuit, 12 are appointees of Republican presidents, including six nominated to the court by Trump.

When the case was argued before the three-judge 5th Circuit panel in March, administration lawyers had noted that district judges in a dozen jurisdictions had rejected a challenge to the vaccine requirement for federal workers before Brown ruled.

The administration argued the Constitution gives the president, as the head of the federal workforce, the same authority as the CEO of a private corporation to require that employees be vaccinated.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

No Safety Data to Back CDC’s Recommendation on Co-administering COVID-19 Injections and Other Vaccines in Children
BY Meiling Lee
June 27, 2022

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in updated guidance on June 24, says that children as young as 6 months may simultaneously receive COVID-19 injections and other routine vaccines on the same day, although no safety study has been conducted by the vaccine manufacturers.

The guidance comes after the CDC recommended mRNA COVID-19 injections—a three-dose primary series from Pfizer or a two-dose primary series from Moderna—for children aged 6 months to 5 years on June 18.

Before that, both Pfizer and Moderna had told members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which provides the CDC with recommendations on vaccines, that they did not have such data, as their studies only focused on the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 mRNA shot.

“We did not allow concomitant immunization for kind of this first path study,” Dr. Rituparna Das, vice president for COVID-19 vaccines at Moderna, told panelists during a meeting on June 18. “We did ask the investigators to offset flu vaccine by about two weeks and offset other routinely administered vaccines by four weeks.”

“And so, we do not have concomitant administration data yet. Fully take the point that that is an important piece, and our future studies will look at concomitant administration, both in terms of immunogenicity and reactogenicity,” she added.

Dr. William Gruber, a senior vice president of vaccine clinical research and development at Pfizer, said that his company also didn’t have data regarding this issue because Pfizer had investigators wait two weeks before and after children received the COVID-19 shot prior to being administered inactivated vaccines and rotavirus, and four weeks for other live virus vaccines.

Yet, the CDC went ahead to recommend co-administration of COVID-19 shots and other routine immunizations, while admitting that there was a lack of safety data.

“COVID-19 injections may be administered without regard to timing of other vaccines,” the health agency wrote. “This includes simultaneous administration of COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines on the same day.”

“Data assessing the outcomes of simultaneous administration of COVID-19 vaccines with other vaccines are limited currently, including any potential increase in reactogenicity when COVID-19 and other vaccines are administered at the same visit,” the CDC added.

The CDC did not reply to an inquiry on whether it will make further updates to its co-administration recommendation since Pfizer and Moderna have yet to conduct the necessary trials.

Loose Requirement for Co-administration Safety Studies

After the Pfizer COVID-19 shot was authorized for children 5 through 11, The Epoch Times reached out to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the CDC to inquire about the safety studies that were relied upon to make the recommendation that a COVID-19 vaccine may be simultaneously administered with other vaccines in this age group.

The CDC did not reply to The Epoch Times’ multiple inquiries, while the FDA only said that “the fact sheets for each authorized vaccine state that there is no information on the co-administration of the specific COVID-19 Vaccine with other vaccines.”

Our query was eventually answered during a question-and-answer session at a June 15 meeting of the FDA advisory committee.

FDA scientist Dr. Doran Fink, in a reply to a question about co-administration studies, said that the federal health regulator hasn’t “routinely requested or required” such studies unless the company is applying for vaccine licensure for infants younger than six months.

“We have routinely requested co-administration studies in licensure applications of vaccines that are intended for the very young infants, you know, those who are younger than 6 months of age, because the immunization schedule is so compressed and it is difficult to avoid co-administration,” Fink said.

“We have not routinely requested or required co-administration studies for older children, but we have always encouraged vaccine manufacturers to study safety and evaluate for immune interference of co-administration when introducing a new vaccine into the pediatric schedule and we do expect that studies will be done going forward,” he added.

Dr. Michael Nelson, a member of the FDA advisory panel, is concerned about the lack of evidence on simultaneous vaccine administration.

“I will tell you that if we don’t get a quick answer to the co-administration question, it will serve as a barrier to completion of these three-dose series for this vaccine, and likely the Moderna vaccine,” Nelson said. “Having to get it in isolation is going to be a great challenge for families and children here in the U.S.”

Old Study Cited

The CDC’s recommendation of simultaneous administration of COVID-19 shots with other vaccines is based on a 1994 study cited on ACIP’s webpage to back its claim that “experimental evidence and extensive clinical experience provide the scientific basis for administering vaccines simultaneously.”

However, that study only assessed safety and immunogenicity data of non-mRNA pediatric vaccines during the first two years of life.

Researchers of a 2019 Swiss study—who examined 50 studies that compared co-administration with separate administration of the same vaccines in children between 1999 and 2019—found that there was inconclusive data on the safety of simultaneous administration with multiple vaccines.

“The evidence about the safety of co-administered vaccines compared to separately administered vaccines is mainly based on clinical trials that were primarily designed to evaluate efficacy rather than safety differences,” the authors wrote.

They added, “In summary, there is limited and inconclusive evidence available about the difference in safety of vaccine co-administration compared to separate vaccine administration in children.”

They also noted that there needed to be larger post-licensure studies conducted to address the safety of the co-administration issue.

“Our findings indicate that dedicated studies on vaccine co-administration with a larger sample size are required to obtain statistical evidence on a potential increase or decrease of adverse events following co-administration,” they said.

Dr. James Johnston, a family practice doctor, says that parents should consider the option of spacing out the vaccines if they have concerns about their child receiving multiple vaccines on the same day.

“I am for patient choice. I think patients, parents should look at the risk and the benefits of each vaccine, look at the disease and its prevalence and its treatability, and space out those vaccines that they consent to, so as to give the immune system the maximum chance to recover from that fake war,” Johnston told The Epoch Times in January 2022.

He added, “In vaccine speak, you’re trying to induce immunity without the actual infection. You’re creating a fake war to trick the immune system into producing immunity, so space out those wars as much as possible and you’re going to have less untoward side effects in my opinion.”
 
Top