Coronavirus

[Dachsie]

https://trendingpolitics.com/new-yor...m_source=ElWiz


New York City is Inflating ‘Covid Hospitalizations’ Over 100% to Justify Its Authoritarian Response

by Kyle Becker
a day ago
updated about 5 hours ago



“Data published by New York State’s Department of Health includes the number of Covid patients that were admitted because of severe complications with the virus and the number admitted with Covid who came to wards for another issue, such as a fall, but then tested positive,” the report clarified. “Of the 670 ‘Covid’ patients currently on its wards, there are 293 who were admitted for the virus and 377 who have tested positive but were admitted for something else.”

“The proportion of the city’s ‘Covid’ patients who are ill from the virus has risen slightly from last week, but it has remained well below half of all patients since the start of February,” the report noted.

The Covid hospitalization data is scientifically invalid because it fails the mutual exclusivity test. It misrepresents the data by cherry picking the category and presenting it without necessary additional context.

Thus, it is “missing context” as the ‘fact checker’ racket would say.

The Covid data fraud is consistent with New York’s track record of deceiving the public about the severity of the disease, while implementing scientifically baseless policies such as Covid vaccine passports in New York
City.

[Dachsie]

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/e...tFrfeVnA6M&s=r



Ten different surveys all show the vaccines are not "safe and effective" -- not even close


This is my most important article since I started writing on Substack. It shows how anyone can prove to themselves that I've been telling the truth the whole time.

Steve Kirsch

Summary

I’ve written over 700 articles on my Substack. This is my most important article to date because it provides objective proof, that anyone can verify with their own surveys of their own friends, that I have been telling the truth since I first became a “misinformation spreader” on May 25, 2021 with an article on TrialSite News entitled “Should you get vaccinated?”.

Here is a summary video of the two most recent surveys I did which show the vaccines increase cancer, cause excess deaths comparable to COVID deaths, and dramatically increase miscarriage rates.

If you only watch one video this year, that is the one to watch.

Also recommended is another 17-minute summary video that has the highlights from 8 surveys I recently did earlier.

The surveys are of my readers and some people believe my readers give biased results to these questions. Of course they do. All surveys are biased. That’s why you should repeat these surveys yourself with your friends.

The point of this article is to summarize the results to date from my readers. Even with biases, it would be hard to overcome a signal this large.

For example, how do you explain an embalmer where over 90% of her cases had severe blood clots if the vaccines are perfectly safe. How do you explain that? The survey results need to be consistent with reality.

If people weren’t dying, I’d wait for the survey results on a broader audience (which we began on May 23, 2022 using a third party polling organization). The precautionary principle of medicine compels me to publish these preliminary findings now.

The preliminary findings from these polls show:

The vaccines have already killed about the same number of Americans as COVID has.

For kids 5-11, the 5-11 death report data indicates we are killing 336 kids for every child we might save from COVID if the vaccine was 100% perfect in protecting against death.

The second shot is the most dangerous and appears to increase all-cause mortality (ACM) over the next 30 days by approximately 8X, the first and third shots raise ACM by approximately 6X and 4.8X respectively. Even to me, this seems too high to believe, but that’s what the numbers say.

It appears that the true number of COVID deaths, vaccine deaths, and annual deaths from heart attacks are relatively comparable with each other (within a factor of 2) since January 2020 to the present. This suggests that only around 700,000 people actually died from COVID and a comparable number from the COVID vaccines. This is in line with our VAERS minimum estimate of excess deaths caused by the vaccine: 12,000 VAERS excess deaths in the US * 41 (the minimum under-reporting factor) = 492,000 deaths which we knew was a minimum.

For people who did not die, if you have cancer before the shot, 55% of the people had their cancer got dramatically worse after the shot. In 20% of the cases, the cancer remained the same. Nobody’s cancer got better after the shot. 0%. That is really stunning. How will the CDC explain that one? Check it out, especially the comments to the poll.

Miscarriages aka spontaneous abortions increased dramatically since 2021. Over 80% of the women who miscarried were vaccinated. This should not be a surprise at all since VAERS shows the #1 elevated symptom post vaccine is heavy menstrual bleeding which is elevated at 8,800 times normal. We’ve known that for a long time, but the CDC won’t admit it. Don’t take my word for this. Check out this Gab poll I just did.

The VAERS under-reporting factor for deaths could easily be 100 or more. Of the vaccine deaths that were reported, fewer than 1% were reported to VAERS. However, not all these people were familiar with all details of the death. What we can say is that it appears that at least 0.7% of all deaths and vaccine-related miscarriages were reported to VAERS. None of the 15 deaths of kids 18 and under were reported to VAERS. In other words, the VAERS URF for deaths is highly likely less than 142.

These are all estimates, but the numbers are so absurdly high that even if you factor in survey biases, nobody should be taking these vaccines, especially kids. It’s unethical.

All surveys have biases and confounders. We are certainly open to hearing from anyone who thinks that they have a more accurate survey or analysis method. Instead of shooting holes in the survey, it’s more constructive to show us the “right” way or the “objective” audience for the survey. In order to attack this research, you need to attack the data or the methodology or both using data to prove we got it wrong, not hand-waving arguments.

This work will never be published in a medical journal because it is counter-narrative. Starting on May 23, 2022, it will be “peer-reviewed” by hundreds of thousands of people who will be looking for an error and they will post it here. Check the comments if you want to see the “peer review.”

I encourage you to replicate the surveys yourself if you don’t believe me and publish them.

We are in the process of repeating these questions with a randomly selected group of people with the survey being done by an independent polling company. We should have the results by May 27, 2022. Note that some of the survey firms want to change the questions so that they are biased in favor of making the vaccine look safe. Wow. This is why we encourage you do it yourself.

As I mentioned earlier, the statisticians I work with tell me the signals observed here are too large to be explained by bias and they are also very consistent with previous estimates.

For example, I’ve walked into several large venues I’ve never been in before and asked the audience “how many people do you know who died from any cause right before they were going to get their first vaccine dose? How many after?” The results are always stunning. It’s the quickest way to wake up a group to being receptive to the possibility that they’ve been misled.

If you think that people are primarily honest and answer objective questions honestly, you should keep reading. Also, if you are willing to survey your own followers, keep reading as well.

Finally note that a small fraction of the data is gamed and/or in error.
May 21

SNIP

_________

Dachsie comment:

This is good to have this further confirmation. Actually this is more factual and objective than any statistics peddled to us by our crooked health agencies that are about to hand over our national sovereignty to the One World Death and Slavery System for All.

[Dachsie]

https://justthenews.com/politics-pol...mit-misconduct


In rebuke to Pentagon, Navy board finds 3-0 for vax objector amid questions of mandate's lawfulness

"[W]e are encouraged that the truth was revealed in this Board, and we hope this ground-breaking case sends a strong message to the Department of Defense," said counsel for Navy Lt. Billy Moseley.


In a stinging rebuke to the Pentagon, a Navy administrative separation board voted unanimously to retain an officer who refused to comply with the military's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Navy Lt. Billy Moseley, who has been an officer for 22 years, could have chosen to retire from the military when he was ordered to receive the COVID vaccine. He also could have submitted a Religious Accommodation Request, since he objected to the vaccine for religious reasons.

Risking his retirement, Moseley chose instead to take his case to the administrative separation board after learning "that the Navy and the other services intended to implement a blanket denial policy," according to a press release from his attorney, R. Davis Younts.
File
Moseley Press Release.pdf

Moseley consulted with legal and medical experts and "became convinced that as an officer he had an obligation to take a stand against the unlawful order and be a voice for thousands of enlisted Sailors," the press release continued.

Younts told Just the News Moseley is one of the first Navy service members — maybe even the first officer — to go to the board over the COVID vaccine mandate.

Any service member who has been in the military for more than six years is entitled to the board for due process. In the Navy, the board's recommendation on whether to retain or separate (another term for firing) a member of the service is binding.

Younts argued at the board hearing that the mandate for the experimental COVID vaccines was not a lawful order since the military has not made fully FDA-approved versions of the vaccines available to military members.

The military defense attorney told Just the News that the attorneys for the Navy agreed with him that there are no FDA-approved vaccines available, only interchangeable vaccines. Younts added that if there are no FDA-approved vaccines available, then the president would have to authorize the experimental shots that are currently available, which hasn’t happened.

On Friday, the board voted 3-0 that Moseley's failure to follow the COVID vaccine order did not count as misconduct and that he should remain in the Navy. Younts said that the board members weren't convinced that the vaccine order was lawful.

He added that this precedent "puts the Navy in an interesting position" regarding the other service members who have also refused the COVID vaccine.

While this is "only one case of thousands and we have many more clients facing prosecution by the military, we are encouraged that the truth was revealed in this Board, and we hope this ground-breaking case sends a strong message to the Department of Defense," Younts' press release concluded.

____________________


Summary version

In a stinging rebuke to the Pentagon, a Navy administrative separation board voted unanimously to retain an officer who refused to comply with the military’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Navy Lt. Billy Moseley, who has been an officer for 22 years, could have chosen to retire from the military when he was ordered to receive the COVID vaccine.

Moseley attorney Younts argued at the board hearing that the mandate for the experimental COVID vaccines was not a lawful order since the military has not made fully FDA-approved versions of the vaccines available to military members.

The attorneys for the Navy agreed with him that there are no FDA-approved vaccines available, only interchangeable vaccines. Younts added that if there are no FDA-approved vaccines available, then the president would have to authorize the experimental shots that are currently available, which hasn’t happened.

The board voted 3-0 that Moseley’s failure to follow the COVID vaccine order did not count as misconduct and that he should remain in the Navy. Younts said that the board members weren’t convinced that the vaccine order was lawful.[/SIZE]

[Dachsie]

Quote Dr. Robert Malone regarding monkeypox.

"Malone set the propagandists straight, writing:

"The monkeypox virus, which originates in various regions of Africa, is related to SmallPox (Variola), which are both members of the genus Orthopoxvirus. However, it is important to understand that Variola (major or minor) is the species of virus which is responsible for the worst human disease caused by the Orthopox viruses. For example, Cowpox, Horsepox, and Camelpox are also members of this genus, none of which are a major health threat to humans, and one of which (Cowpox) has even been (historically) used as a Smallpox vaccine. My point is that just because Monkeypox is related to Smallpox, this does not in any way mean that it represents a similar public health threat. Anyone who implies otherwise is basically engaged in or otherwise supporting weaponized public health-related propaganda. In other words, spreading public health fearporn."

Source:

https://trib247.com/articles/dr-malo...ign=Newsletter

Dr. Malone separates monkeypox facts from fear porn

by: WorldTribune.com 05/23/2022 Source: WorldTribune.com

[Dachsie]

Dachsie comment:
This is a very informative comprehensive article. The practice of medicine has been starkly changed in the USA.
I hope to post other excerpts from this article.
______________________________



05/24/22

How COVID Became the Most Manipulated Disease Event in History

Russell L. Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeon, outlines why he believes that throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the media and public health officials have fed the public an unending series of lies, distortions and disinformation.



By Russell L. Blaylock

Excerpt of this comprehensive article.

"The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream led by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media and international agencies.

We have witnessed a long list of unprecedented intrusions into medical practice, including attacks on medical experts, destruction of medical careers among doctors refusing to participate in killing their patients and a massive regimentation of health care, led by non-qualified individuals with enormous wealth, power and influence.

For the first time in American history a president, governors, mayors, hospital administrators and federal bureaucrats are determining medical treatments based not on accurate scientifically based or even experience-based information, but rather to force the acceptance of special forms of care and “prevention” — including remdesivir, use of respirators and ultimately a series of essentially untested messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines.

For the first time in history, medical treatment protocols are not being formulated based on the experience of the physicians treating the largest number of patients successfully, but rather individuals and bureaucracies that have never treated a single patient — including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, EcoHealth Alliance, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), World Health Organization (WHO), state public health officers and hospital administrators.

The media (TV, newspapers, magazines, etc.), medical societies, state medical boards and the owners of social media have appointed themselves to be the sole source of information concerning this so-called “pandemic.”

Websites have been removed, highly credentialed and experienced clinical doctors and scientific experts in the field of infectious diseases have been demonized, careers have been destroyed and all dissenting information has been labeled “misinformation” and “dangerous lies,” even when sourced from top experts in the fields of virology, infectious diseases, pulmonary critical care and epidemiology.

These blackouts of truth occur even when this information is backed by extensive scientific citations from some of the most qualified medical specialists in the world.

Incredibly, even individuals such as Dr. Michael Yeadon, a retired ex-chief scientist and vice-president for the science division of Pfizer Pharmaceutical company in the U.K., who charged the company with making an extremely dangerous vaccine, is ignored and demonized. Further, he, along with other highly qualified scientists have stated that no one should take this vaccine.

Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the most cited experts in his field, who has successfully treated over 2000 COVID patients by using a protocol of early treatment (which the so-called experts completely ignored), has been the victim of a particularly vicious assault by those benefiting financially from the vaccines.

He has published his results in peer-reviewed journals, reporting an 80% reduction in hospitalizations and a 75% reduction in deaths by using early treatment. Despite this, he is under an unrelenting series of attacks by the information controllers, none of which have treated a single patient.

Neither Fauci, the CDC, WHO nor any medical governmental establishment has ever offered any early treatment other than Tylenol, hydration and call an ambulance once you have difficulty breathing. This is unprecedented in the entire history of medical care as early treatment of infections is critical to saving lives and preventing severe complications.

Not only have these medical organizations and federal lapdogs not even suggested early treatment, they attacked anyone who attempted to initiate such treatment with all the weapons at their disposal — loss of license, removal of hospital privileges, shaming, destruction of reputations and even arrest.

A good example of this outrage against freedom of speech and providing informed consent information is the recent suspension by the medical board in Maine of Dr. Meryl Nass’ medical license and the ordering of her to undergo a psychiatric evaluation for prescribing Ivermectin and sharing her expertise in this field.

I know Dr. Nass personally and can vouch for her integrity, brilliance and dedication to truth. Her scientific credentials are impeccable. This behavior by a medical licensing board is reminiscent of the methodology of the Soviet KGB during the period when dissidents were incarcerated in psychiatric gulags to silence their dissent."

SNIP

...
"In addition, it has been proven that the vaccinated asymptomatic person has a nasopharyngeal titer of the virus as high as an infected unvaccinated person.

If the purpose of the vaccine mandate is to prevent viral spread among the hospital staff and patients, then it is the vaccinated who present the greatest risk of transmission, not the unvaccinated. The difference is that a sick unvaccinated person would not go to work, the asymptomatic vaccinated spreader will."

[Dachsie]

Excerpt of article by Dr. Russell Blaylock


"Within a few minutes of putting on the mask, a number of pathogenic bacteria can be cultured from the masks, putting the immune suppressed person at a high risk of bacterial pneumonia and children at a higher risk of meningitis. A study by researchers at the University of Florida cultured over 11 pathogenic bacteria from the inside of the masks worn by children in schools.

It was also known that children were at essentially no risk of either getting sick from the virus or transmitting it.

In addition, it was also known that wearing a mask for over 4 hours (as occurs in all schools) results in significant hypoxia (low blood oxygen levels) and hypercapnia (high CO2 levels), which have a number of deleterious effects on health, including impairing the development of the child’s brain.

We have known that brain development continues long after the grade school years. A recent study found that children born during the “pandemic” have significantly lower IQs — yet school boards, school principals and other educational bureaucrats are obviously unconcerned."
"

[Dachsie]

CNN Health

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/20/healt...ity/index.html



The quest for longer-lasting Covid-19 vaccines

By Brenda Goodman, Jacqueline Howard and Michael Nedelman, CNN

Updated 6:18 AM ET, Fri May 20, 2022

(CNN)As waves of new coronavirus variants circulate the globe, one thing has become clear: human immunity against the virus fades over time.
To maintain durable protection against the virus that causes Covid-19, scientists are working around the clock to develop next-generation vaccines. But some of the nuances around why and how immunity against Covid-19 fades remain a mystery.

The steepest drops in immunity -- which come about four to five months after vaccination and up to eight months after infection, but can vary -- are against Covid-19 symptoms, getting infected and getting sick. Protection against severe outcomes, hospitalization and death remains much higher for a longer period of time, but even this decays to some degree, especially for the elderly and those with compromised immune function.

Since the early days of the pandemic, scientists have known that the coronavirus carries a structure called the spike protein, and it uses this crown of spikes to get into the cells it attacks. Our Covid-19 vaccines create antibodies to these spike proteins that bind to the docking sites on the virus, blocking them from infecting our cells.

Yet our safety net against the virus is wearing thin, in part because the virus is changing like a fugitive donning a disguise -- picking up mutations that change the shape of its spikes in ways that make it less recognizable to our immune system.

But there's another piece of the immunity puzzle that scientists are urgently trying to solve, and that is whether some of this drop off in our protection may be a result of the mRNA technology used to build some Covid-19 vaccines, such as those developed by Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech, which were the first in the world to use this platform.

Here's how mutations could help the coronavirus evade vaccines

Here's how mutations could help the coronavirus evade vaccines

"Some vaccine platforms give a very high degree of protection but the durability isn't very long," said Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in an interview with CNN.

Fauci said that the mRNA platform may be one of those.

In clinical trials, the new mRNA vaccines have proven to be astonishingly good at protecting people against illness, hospitalizations and deaths, at least in the short term. Fauci said mRNA vaccines have other advantages, too. It's relatively fast and easy to redesign them to better protect against new variants, for example.
"We got a really great platform with mRNA," Fauci said. "But let's try to be better.

Because our experience, maybe it's peculiar to coronavirus, but I doubt it, is that the durability of the response you can be better on."

'We've got to get better platforms'

To be fair, Fauci said we won't know how long immunity induced by these kinds of vaccines may last until mRNA is used to make vaccines against a different type of pathogen, perhaps one that doesn't change as much as SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19.

Definitive answers may be years away.

In the meantime, he said, we can't wait. We need to improve the vaccines if we're going to keep Covid-19 at bay.

"We have very good vaccines, but we've got to get better platforms and immunogens, maybe with adjuvants that allow us to have a greater durability of protection," Fauci said. Adjuvants are extra ingredients in vaccines that help them work better.

Other experts agree.

Deepta Bhattacharya heads a lab at the University of Arizona where he studies the lifespan of plasma cells, a type of long-lasting cell that makes protective antibodies. He's also interested in how various vaccine technologies influence the persistence of these cells in our bodies.

What we can tell after more than a year of experience with the mRNA vaccines is that their protection starts high but seems to fade more quickly than the immunity that remains after a Covid-19 infection, according to Bhattacharya.

How much protection does a previous Covid-19 infection provide?

How much protection does a previous Covid-19 infection provide? 03:48

"There have been a few side-by-side studies that have compared the mRNA vaccines to infection-induced immunity, and it seems like it slips a little bit faster than that," Bhattacharya said.

Though he cautioned that protection after an infection varies greatly from person to person just because everyone's immune system is a little different. There's no good way to know, right now, how well any particular person's immune system responds to a vaccine, which is why it's important to be vaccinated, even if you've already had Covid-19.

He added that when comparing the performance of the mRNA vaccines to adenoviral vector vaccines, such as those developed by AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, people initially make a lot more antibodies after vaccination with an mRNA vaccine, but these levels seem to fall pretty steeply by around the six-month mark. Adenovirus vaccines use another virus as a Trojan horse to sneak instructions for making the spike proteins into cells.

With the adenoviral vector vaccines, antibody levels don't seem to climb as high initially as they do with mRNA vaccines, but they do seem to persist for longer periods at these lower levels, pointing to some difference in the body's response to them that we don't fully understand.


Hybrid immunity offers increased protection that is longer-lasting against Covid-19 reinfection, studies show

In a large study of more than 35,000 health care workers in the United Kingdom, compared to those who were unvaccinated, those who had two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA vaccine were about 85% less likely to get a Covid-19 infection, through about two and a half months after their second dose. But by six and a half months, that protection against infection had fallen to about 51%.

The follow up period for the study was between December 7, 2020, when the vaccines were first given to healthcare workers in the UK to Sept. 21, 2021, so it doesn't include Omicron infections.

Health care workers with two doses of the Astrazeneca adenoviral vector vaccine were about 58% less likely to get a Covid-19 infection compared to those who were unvaccinated, through about two and a half months after vaccination, but the effectiveness of that vaccine appeared to increase over time, cutting the risk of infection by more than 70% about seven months after a second dose.

Health care workers who caught a Covid-19 infection, most of them happening in March 2020, before the era of vaccines, were initially about 86% less likely to be reinfected, and that protection lasted up to a year. After a year, it dropped to about 69% in workers who were unvaccinated, which was still better than the protection from mRNA vaccines alone.

Workers who had caught Covid-19 and went on to be vaccinated had the best protection of all, more than a 90% lower risk of getting Covid-19 again, and that combined protection stayed high for the duration of the study, which was more than 9 months.

This evidence and other studies, said Bhattachayra, suggests our immunity against Covid can be tweaked to make it last longer.

"I do think it's fair to ask more of our vaccines and that they sort of maintain that protection for longer," Bhattachayra said.

"I think there's still very clearly room for improvement because there are certain vaccines that do better" in terms of their durability, he said. "There's no question about that."

Other vaccines have needed improvements to help them last longer

Starting at two months of age, doctors recommend that babies get a vaccine against Haemophilus influenzae, or Hib, a common bacteria that can cause serious infections if it invades the lungs, blood or brain. These bacteria are coated with chains of sugars, or polysaccharides, that help mask them to our immune systems.

In the 1980s, scientists figured out that you could use those sugar chains to build a vaccine to protect children from serious infections.

"The initial Hib vaccine was a polysaccharide vaccine, but it did not induce long-lived antibody levels, so we don't even use it now," said Dr. Gregory Poland, an infectious disease expert who studies how the immune system responds to vaccines at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota.

Today's Hib vaccine still contains the sugar chains, but they are linked to protein pieces that stimulate a different part of the immune system to better remember the bacteria. It's called a protein conjugate vaccine.

Another example of a vaccine that didn't ultimately provide long-lasting immunity was the pneumococcal vaccine for pneumonia. It, too, started life as a polysaccharide vaccine, but was changed to a protein conjugate after researchers determined that change could extend its protection.

Some vaccines use extra ingredients, called adjuvants, to hyperstimulate the immune system, which increases the strength of the protection people get from them. These kinds of vaccines are often used for older adults and others whose immune systems need an extra kick in the pants, so to speak, to work.

Certain vaccines inherently do this, just because of the way they are designed, Fauci said, and the nanoparticles being built into some experimental vaccines are an example of this.

Fauci added that he's not sure why the immune response triggered by mRNA vaccines may not be longer lasting. He has some theories, though.

How vaccines stop the spread of viruses

How vaccines stop the spread of viruses 01:26

One of the early failures in developing the mRNA technology was that when the chains of molecules called nucleic acids were injected into animals, they triggered an immune response too quickly. The animals got sick and their immune systems destroyed these chains -- or instructions -- before cells could read them and build the proteins they coded for.

One breakthrough in turning these instructions into vaccines was that the scientists who developed them figured out how to make a chemical change to the mRNA to hide it from the immune system until it could get inside cells, thus, reducing the risk of getting sick.

"They modified the molecule to remove the inflammatory aspect of it, to allow it to be used as a vaccine, that possibly--and I underlined 15 times, possibly--could be reason why," Fauci said.

"Maybe if we use this mRNA, but add a different adjuvant with it, you might get a really good response, the best of both worlds, you might get the real advantage of an mRNA together with a bit more durability, if you add to it an adjuvant as opposed to having the molecule itself be inherently adjuvant."


Now proven against coronavirus, mRNA can do so much more

Bhattachyra has another theory about why the mRNA platform may not be lasting as long.

He said these vaccines instruct cells to build spike proteins from the virus and then display them on their surfaces, where they can be seen by the immune system.

But cells are giant compared to viruses -- about 100 times larger, he said, and viruses pack about 25 spike protein trimers onto their smaller surface, making them pretty densely packed. A trimer is a type of chemical compound or molecule that has three pieces.

"I don't know what the density of spike proteins is on a cell; it may not be as high as what it is on a virus, for instance," Bhattachyra said. No one really knows what the spike-expressing cells look like and how closely they resemble the virus they're targeting.

"It could be that the spacing is pretty infrequent and you're just not getting the level of activation that you would want," he said, adding "that's pure speculation."

Planning for the future

The United States is at a point in the pandemic now where health officials are grappling with the fact that to maintain immunity against Covid-19 in the community, the nation will either need to administer booster shots on a regular -- or possibly annual -- basis, or will need to rollout an entirely new vaccine altogether.


FDA officials say annual Covid-19 shots may be needed in the future

​​All vaccines have strengths and weaknesses -- but some of the nation's leading vaccine experts argue that more research is needed into the durability of the currently used Covid-19 vaccines as a potential weakness, as vaccine-induced immunity can decline within four to six months.

For instance, during the recent Omicron wave in the United States, the protection that vaccine boosters provide fell more than four months later from more than 90% to around 66% for protection against emergency room visits for Covid-19 and 78% against hospitalizations, Dr. Peter Hotez, CNN medical analyst and virologist and co-director of Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development, told CNN.

"The big unknown is this: How much of that decline is due to something quirky because of the Omicron variant? Or, is this a weakness in the technology and it's not holding up? And it's very hard to sort out," Hotez said. "All vaccines have strengths and weaknesses, and it may be that for mRNA that it does not produce durable protection. It could be that you go in, use mRNA vaccines to rapidly immunize a population, stabilize it, but then over time, you're going to have to come in with a heterologous boost that's a different technology."

Hotez, whose lab has developed a Covid-19 vaccine called Corbevax, said that the White House should convene vaccine experts in a special meeting to "pin down" whether the technology has that weakness and what it means for future strategies.

A universal vaccine could be the future of the coronavirus fight

In an effort to find the answer to maintaining durable protection against Covid-19, several research groups are working to develop so-called "next-generation vaccines" that aim to induce longer-lasting protection and even "pan-coronavirus" vaccines, ones that offer protection against multiple variants of the coronavirus that causes Covid-19.

"How do you make the Covid responses induced by vaccines more long-lasting? How do you make this process of inducing long-lived plasma cells more efficient? That's the name of the game right now," said Dr. Barton Haynes, director of the Duke Human Vaccine Institute.

"There are a number of groups working on mRNAs for the next generation vaccines full well aware that, for those vaccines to be more long-lasting, breakthroughs need to be made," he said.

Haynes is also working on a different type of vaccine — a nanoparticle containing fragments of the coronavirus' spike protein. This vaccine also includes an ingredient that enhances the immune response, known as an adjuvant.

A key long-term goal is to create a more universal vaccine that can work against new variants of this coronavirus, plus others that cause common colds and even ones we haven't identified yet. The protein-based vaccine is one of several that target conserved sites on the spike protein -- ones that don't mutate, lest they hinder their ability to infect human cells.

And Haynes said research in monkeys appears to show it does a better job than mRNA vaccines at generating those kinds of antibodies that provide broader coverage, as well. This may be due to a combination of how well the adjuvant works to stimulate the immune system, and perhaps the design of the nanoparticle itself, which almost looks like a virus, he added.

Regardless of the vaccine platform, "we're all going after formulations that will induce durable, long-lasting antibody and other types of T-cell immunity."

How antibodies protect us from viruses

How antibodies protect us from viruses 01:37

So far during the coronavirus pandemic, vaccine protection has been measured by the presence of antibodies in the blood. Antibodies are proteins made by the immune system to help fight infections. But there is more to the human immune system than just antibodies.

The immune system involves a host of players, including B cells, which produce antibodies, and T cells, which target infected cells during an infection -- and T cells are often part of emerging discussions around vaccine durability.

A study published in the journal Cell in January showed just how much of a role the other parts of the immune system play in the durability of protection following Covid-19 vaccination.

The study found that, among 96 vaccinated adults, even though antibody levels decreased against coronavirus variants, the T cells induced by various types of Covid-19 vaccines -- the Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, Johnson & Johnson and Novavax vaccines -- were able to recognize coronavirus variants, including Omicron, even though the vaccines were developed based on the original coronavirus.

"The important thing for our study was we collected all those samples at the same place with the same techniques and ran all the experiments head-to-head so it was really a fair head-to-head test," said Shane Crotty, virologist and professor at La Jolla Institute for Immunology, who was an author of the study.

Plus, those vaccines were developed using different technologies. Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech are mRNA vaccines. Johnson & Johnson is a viral vector vaccine. Novavax, which is not yet authorized for emergency use in the United States, is a protein-based vaccine.

Dr. Sanjay Gupta breaks down how mRNA vaccines work

sanjay gupta mrna vaccine pkg vpx_00025522

Dr. Sanjay Gupta breaks down how mRNA vaccines work 04:00

"The mRNA vaccines, both Moderna and Pfizer, generated these four categories: antibodies, memory B cells, helper T cells and killer T cells. Overall, the mRNA vaccines generated the best of all four of those," Crotty said, adding that among people who were vaccinated with Johnson & Johnson, generally there appeared to be less of all four and Novavax appeared to generate somewhat less memory B cells and significantly less killer T cells.

"So, there were some different mixes there," Crotty said. "Our immunological data are generally consistent with the vaccine efficacy data that's out there from the clinical trials and real-world studies that in general, the mRNA vaccines are better than J&J in terms of protection from infection but also protection from hospitalization, with Novavax being somewhere in between, but doing quite well."
Many experts seem to agree that discussions around future Covid-19 vaccination strategies should hinge on what exactly the goal of the vaccines are -- to prevent the spread of the coronavirus or to keep people out of the hospital.

FDA vaccine advisers say a plan for updating Covid-19 shots is needed

"So if your goal is to prevent any new infections in our society, then yeah, we're going to have to keep boosting, because our antibody levels are going to decline -- no matter what kind of vaccine we get," Jen Gommerman, professor and acting chair in the Department of Immunology at the University of Toronto, told CNN.

She added that, among the vaccines authorized for emergency use in the United States, the rate of decline for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is a bit lower than for Moderna's and Pfizer/BioNTech's mRNA vaccines. However, the peak level of protection that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine providers is lower than the peak for the mRNA vaccines.

"So, the raw amount of antibody in our serum is going down to a level where you will be susceptible to infection and the only way to get those antibodies back up quickly, is to either get infected or get boosted," Gommerman said.

"However, if we consider efficacy against hospitalization and severe disease, the data coming out show that three doses of the mRNA vaccine confirm excellent protection against hospitalization, ventilation and death," she said. "For me, personally, I would get a fourth dose if I knew it would serve public health reasons. But for me personally, I don't feel I need a fourth dose to protect myself against severe disease, hospitalization or death."

'Many more questions still need answers'

There are still many questions left to answer about Covid-19 vaccines and immunology, John Wherry, director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, wrote in an email to CNN.

Those questions include: How long do memory B cells and memory T cells last? How do the vaccines containing the original coronavirus, identified in Wuhan, China, induce effective immune memory against all the variants so far? What immune mechanisms provide protection from infection versus protection from severe disease, hospitalization and death? Why do different people respond differently to these vaccines?

"These and many more questions still need answers if we are going to use this platform most effectively," Wherry wrote. Such questions also need answers in the context of vaccine durability, especially as the durability of protection and the durability of immune responses themselves are related -- but not the same, according to Wherry.

For the mRNA vaccines, "durability of protection is on par with other vaccine types from the analyses we have seen on the adenoviral platforms versus mRNA. Durability of immune responses -- it's been difficult to do really precise comparative studies longitudinally over a time frame relevant to answer this question," Wherry wrote in his email.

After all, the vaccines have only been around for about a year and a half, and answering questions around durability precisely can be founded by the introduction of booster shots and the incidence of breakthrough infections.

"This later point is relevant because it dramatically influences the durability to immune responses over time," Wherry wrote about breakthrough infections. "The bottom line is that the data so far look very promising for durability of immune responses and protection from severe disease. Protection from mild disease is much more difficult for this virus and might only be achieved transiently when antibody levels are extremely high."

[Dachsie]

https://trib247.com/articles/virgini...ign=Newsletter

Virginia doctors refused to treat 8-year-old girl after severe adverse reaction to vaccine

by: WorldTribune.com 05/23/2022 Source: WorldTribune.com



by WorldTribune Staff, May 23, 2022

Doctors at Virginia Commonwealth University Health System (VCU) refused to treat an 8-year-old girl experiencing severe adverse events after receiving the Pfizer vaccine.

When the parents inquired about treatment with hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, or monoclonal antibodies, VCU pediatrician Grace Mueller, MD called Child Protective services.

In an interview with John Davidson, Ryleigh Jones and her parents, Jennifer and Ryan, described the shocking mistreatment they received at VCU after their previously healthy young daughter received a Covid-19 vaccine injection. Shortly thereafter Ryleigh experienced severe adverse reactions that have been increasingly linked to the vaccine and discussed by the FDA and CDC as early as October of 2020.

Her adverse events, many of which are ongoing include:

Wheelchair bound due to complete loss of feeling in her legs, walking only with great difficulty using a cane
Feeling like her heart was being ripped out of her chest with a knife
Loss of ability to control urination
Sensitivity of the skin making it painful for Ryleigh to be touched or lie down
Suicidal ideation
Blackouts
Rage episodes
Episodes where she is unable to recognize a parent
Episodes where she is unable to talk

Onset of symptoms started 8 days after she received the vaccine on January 6, 2022, and two days after Ryleigh subsequently contracted Covid-19.

However, instead of treating Ryleigh, doctors at VCU Health Systems attempted to convince the family that her symptoms were all in Ryleigh’s head, Mrs. Jones says.
“All you have to do is just say is was the vaccine, and just help me treat it,” Ryleigh says of the VCU doctors. “That’s all you have to do. But no, you want to protect your fricking job rather than save somebody’s life.”

“We had a nurse laugh at us. We had a doctor laugh at us. We had a doctor tell us we were crazy. We had a nurse laugh at my mom,” Ryleigh said, recounting their experience at VCU.

“Why are you treating human beings like this?” Ryleigh asks. “It makes me very upset that nobody will believe me and just treat it.”

This pattern of diagnosis and personal attack against those reporting vaccine injury is similar to other cases, such as that of 13-year-old Stephanie de Garay and her family, reported on previously by World Tribune, who has experienced many of the symptoms Ryleigh reports, such as her symptoms of skin hypersensitivity, severe cutting pain in her chest, inability to walk or control urination, and neurological issues.
Related: Mom: Pfizer, FDA, CDC concealed adverse reactions ahead of vaccine trials May 8, 2022


A prominent New York doctor did diagnose a physical syndrome: chronic acquired demyelinating polyneuropathy, and small fiber neuropathy after anesthesia and Covid Pfizer vaccination.

That doctor was later professionally attacked for his diagnosis.

“Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy” and “other acute demyelinating diseases” are, in fact, found in the FDA and CDC’s “Working list of possible adverse outcomes” to Covid-19 vaccines presented in two sessions at a joint FDA-CDC conference on Oct. 22, 2020.

After experience the knife-like chest pain, the family returned to VCU Health Systems, where a physician for pneumonia found on a third X-ray, after other physicians there refused to treat her for chest issues.

A member of the emergency room staff tried to help further, saying, “You’ve been here eleven times. This little girl is sick. I know something is wrong, and we are not going to let her leave here until we know what is wrong,” Ryleigh’s mother recounts.

However, when they attempted to escalate Ryleigh’s case, staff seeking a physical diagnosis were shut down by higher ups.

Ryleigh was then given a diagnosis of Functional Neurological Disorder (FND), which appears to be a vague catch-all for a portion of her symptoms and for which there is no treatment. It means the condition is in her head, a mysterious brain disorder.

Dr. Grace Mueller, MD, a pediatrician, then went even further, attempting to professionally discredit the New York doctor who diagnosed demyelinating polyneuropathy linked with the vaccine.

When Ryleigh’s parents asked whether their daughter might receive hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to treat her symptoms, since they arose after she contracted Covid-19, Dr. Mueller then contacted Child Protective Services.

That Friday, the Jones family received a visit from a CPS worker who attempted to get Ryliegh’s mother to sign a contract stating she would not administer hydroxychloroquin or ivermectin to their daughter.

Ironically, hydroxychloroquine, also known as the brand Plaquenil, and ivermectin both have anti-inflammatory properties relevant to Ryleigh’s symptoms of inflammation.

Related: Researchers: Covid jab deadlier than Covid infection for anyone under the age of 80 May 6, 2022

Inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy and other demyelinating diseases feature prominently, as do cardiac issues, convulsions, and even death, in presentations from an FDA-CDC joint conference, the FDA’s 161st meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, which met on October 22, 2020.
The slides from this meeting are shown below, with the names of their presenters. These precede the December 2020 rollout of the vaccine for adults, and clinical trials for children, by more than a month.


Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, Deputy Director of the Immunization Safety Office, CDC:

[monty]

David Avocado Wolfe, [5/24/22 12:03 PM][ Photo ]

[Dachsie]

Oh, that was a good one, Monty!