CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)



New Study: COVID-19 Omicron Variant Is More Deadly Than the Seasonal Flu
By European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
April 14, 2023

During the 2021-2022 flu season, patients who were hospitalized with the flu had a 55% lower likelihood of dying within 30 days compared to those who were hospitalized with the COVID-19 Omicron variant.

According to new research being presented at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Copenhagen, Denmark, adults who are hospitalized with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant have a higher death rate compared to those hospitalized with seasonal influenza. This is despite the fact that the Omicron strain is considered less virulent, with lower case fatality rates compared to the delta and alpha strains.

According to the study by Dr. Alaa Atamna and his colleagues from the Rabin Medical Center at Belinison Hospital in Israel, adults (18 years or older) who were hospitalized with influenza during the 2021-2022 season were 55% less likely to die within 30 days compared to those hospitalized with the Omicron variant.

Influenza and COVID-19 are both respiratory diseases with similar modes of transmission. In December 2021, influenza re-emerged in Israel after it went undetected since March 2020. At the same time, the Omicron had substituted Delta as the predominant variant. But data directly comparing Omicron with seasonal influenza are scarce.

To find out more, researchers compared the clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (Omicron variant) and those hospitalized with influenza at a large academic hospital in Israel.

Consecutive patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (167 patients; average age 71 years, 58% male) and influenza infection (221 patients; average age 65 years, 41% male) during December 2021 and January 2022 were included in the study.

Overall, 63 patients died within 30 days—19 (9%) were admitted with influenza and 44 (26%) were hospitalized with Omicron.

Patients with Omicron tended to have higher overall comorbidity scores, needed more assistance performing activities of daily living (e.g., washing and dressing), and were more likely to have high blood pressure and diabetes, whereas asthma was more common in those hospitalized with influenza (see table 1 in notes to editors).

Respiratory complications and the need for oxygen support and mechanical ventilation were also more common in Omicron cases than in seasonal influenza.

“A possible reason for the higher Omicron death rate is that patients admitted with Omicron were older with additional major underlying illnesses such as diabetes and chronic kidney disease,” says Dr. Atamna. “The difference might also be due to an exaggerated immune response in COVID-19, and that vaccination against COVID-19 was far lower among patients with Omicron.”

He continues, “The double whammy of overlapping influenza and COVID-19 epidemics will increase the complexity of disease and the burden on health systems. There is one basic step people can take that may alter the trajectory of either epidemic, get the vaccines for flu and COVID-19, especially if you are older and have underlying illnesses.”

The authors point out that the study was observational so can’t prove causation, and it was conducted in one hospital in Israel so the results may not apply to other countries and populations. And they cannot rule out the possibility that other unmeasured factors such as influenza and COVID-19 vaccination status may have influenced the results. They also note that the excess mortality observed for Omicron could be the result of an influenza season that was less severe than usual. Finally, the study included only hospitalized patients, so could not estimate the proportion of hospitalized patients in the total number of infected patients.

Meeting: ECCMID 2023

This article is based on abstract 0314 at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) annual meeting. The material has been peer reviewed by the congress selection committee. There is no full paper available at this stage and, as this is an early release from ECCMID, the poster is not yet available. The work has been submitted to a medical journal for publication.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


What to know about Arcturus, a new coronavirus subvariant the WHO is tracking

Victoria Bisset - The Washington Post
Fri, April 14, 2023, 1:17 PM EDT

A new coronavirus subvariant, XBB. 1.16, has been designated as a "variant under monitoring" by the World Health Organization. The latest omicron offshoot is particularly prevalent in India, where it has sparked a rise in infections, and a return to mask mandates in parts of the country.

Here's what you need to know about the subvariant called Arcturus, which has been documented in 29 countries so far.

- - -

What is Arcturus, the new coronavirus subvariant?

Arcturus was first detected in a sample from January and has now been documented in 29 countries, according to the World Health Organization. It is a subvariant of the omicron variant, which emerged in late 2021 and replaced delta as the dominant variant around the world.

By late February, the Arcturus strain accounted for 0.21 percent of cases around the world. A month later, this had risen to 3.96 percent, according to WHO figures. In the United States, it is estimated to account for 7.2 percent of coronavirus infections for the week ending April 15, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The WHO designated XBB. 1.16 a "variant under monitoring" on March 22. This means the variant has "genetic changes" that could affect its characteristics as a virus, including a possible "growth advantage" over other variants, but the epidemiological impact is not clear. The WHO is monitoring seven variants, including the BA.2 version of omicron seen in many parts of the United States.

A "variant under monitoring" is considered to be of lesser concern than a "variant of interest," which is predicted or known to be more transmissible or virulent, or able to evade antibodies, according to the WHO. The XBB. 1.5 strain, currently the most prevalent subvariant globally, is described as a variant of interest.

- - -

Does the Arcturus mutation make it more dangerous?

According to the WHO, Arcturus is similar to the prevalent XBB. 1.5 variant, but has "one additional mutational mutation in the spike protein, which in lab studies shows increased infectivity, as well as potential increased pathogenicity."

While this may mean that it could spread more quickly, there is not any indication yet that it will lead to more severe cases.

"We've seen this in the past," Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia in Britain, said in an interview. "You look at the virus and it's got mutations that should make it more virulent, but then in reality you don't see that."

He explains that immunity in the body's T cells represents "one of the biggest protections," and yet "we're not seeing much evolution in the parts of the virus that T cells actually attack," meaning that the impact of the mutations may be limited. "There's no evidence that this is any more severe - and probably it's somewhat less severe than previous strains - but it's too early to be certain. And that's almost certainly because of immunity."

"It will probably become the dominant variant for a while in the U.S. and Europe and most countries around the world, but I don't see it driving up severe infections more than we've seen in recent waves," he said.

- - -

What's the situation in India? And where else has Arcturus been reported?

In India, the number of active coronavirus cases has been steadily rising in recent weeks, with almost 50,000 recorded on Friday, according to the country's Health Ministry - compared to 13,509 on March 30.

The country was devastated by a wave of infections involving the delta variant in 2021, which killed tens of thousands of people. Cases have been rising again recently, leading some states to reintroduce mask mandates. Last week, the federal health minister also asked states to increase genome testing and conduct mock drills in hospitals, according to Reuters news agency.

Arcturus has already replaced other variants in India, according to the WHO's March report. However, Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO's technical lead on covid-19, said in late March that "we haven't seen a change in severity in individuals or in populations," although the group would "remain vigilant."

According to the CoV-Spectrum website, which uses data from the GISAID Initiative to track coronavirus variants, XBB. 1.16 has been detected in sequenced samples from countries including the United States, Britain, Canada and Australia. The CDC variant tracker shows it circulating at very low levels in more than a dozen states, including California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Missouri, New York, North Carolina and Ohio.

"It does seem to be spreading more rapidly than any other variant right now, but this is always what happens: A new variant comes along, it spreads quite rapidly for a while, and then it peters out over a period of a few weeks, ultimately to be replaced by the next one," Hunter said.

He added that previous studies showed that many people are benefiting from the hybrid immunity that comes from a combination of previous infections and vaccination, which should offer them better protection against severe disease "for quite a bit longer, probably for a few years" - meaning that, even if they become infected with Arcturus or another variant, they are less likely to require hospital treatment.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Everything You Need to Know About Arcturus, the New COVID Variant
Madeleine Haase - Prevention
Sat, April 15, 2023, 8:30 AM EDT

Arcturus, or XBB.1.16, is a new Omicron subvariant that is being monitored by the World Health Organization.
The new subvariant is behind a recent COVID-19 surge in India and has been found in the U.S.
Experts explain how this new subvariant is different from previous variants of interest.

Infectious disease experts and public health officials alike are on alert since the World Health Organization (WHO) announced a new COVID-19 variant of interest, XBB.1.16, also known as Arcturus. WHO is monitoring the new subvariant of omicron that has been detected in over 20 countries—including the U.S.—and is contributing to a recent surge of COVID-19 cases in India.

While cases of this new variant are still low in the U.S., the rapid spread of new infections in India, as well as in some other countries, sparks some curiosity into how XBB.1.16, or Arcturus, is different from the long line of existing Omicron subvariants.

So, what’s the deal with XBB.1.16 and how can it potentially impact your risk of contracting COVID-19? Experts explain what you need to know to stay safe.

What is the Arcturus variant, or XBB.1.16?

The Arcturus variant, or the XBB.1.16, is a subvariant of Omicron and part of the new class of XBB subvariants. It’s spreading fast in India, but in the other countries, it hasn’t taken off in the same way, explains Willaim Schaffner, M.D., an infectious disease specialist and professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

According to WHO, XBB.1.16 is a recombinant of BA.2.10.1 and BA.2.75 and shares a mutation with XBB.1.5. The mutations of this new variant have been associated with signs of increased transmissibility and a higher degree of infection. As of 27 March, XBB.1.16 sequences have been reported from 21 countries. However, so far reports do not indicate a rise in hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or deaths due to XBB.1.16.

How contagious is Arcturus?

It does appear, because of its mutation in the spike protein, that the Arcturus variant is more infectious and so that accounts for some of its spread in India, says Dr. Schaffner. However, “It does not appear to produce more severe disease, so for the moment it is a variant of interest and not a variant of concern,” he explains.

This variant is also likely more able to avoid prior immunity from a previous infection, (again, since it shows a mutation in the spike protein) rendering it more contagious than prior variants, notes Amesh A. Adalja, M.D., a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

How can I distinguish Arcturus from other variants?

There is some data that is coming out that suggests that perhaps the spectrum of its symptoms may have some distinctive components, says Dr. Schaffner. XBB.1.16 “likes to produce more high fever, which is not always very prominent in COVID.” He adds that this variant also produces the usual kind of cough seen with previous COVID-19 variants.

But particularly in children, there seems to be a tell-tale symptom of this variant that hasn’t surfaced in its predecessors. “It seems to be producing more conjunctivitis, and inflammation of the insides of the eyelids, which can be very itchy and make the eye look red,” explains Dr. Schaffner.

Apart from some anecdotal reports of conjunctivitis and pink eye associated with Arcturus, this variant still presents very similarly to other Omicron variants, notes Dr. Adalja.

Arcturus symptoms

As mentioned above, there does seem to be a higher trend of the below XBB.1.16, or Arcturus, symptoms:
  • Higher fever in those infected
  • Some cases of conjunctivitis, particularly in children
However, for the most part, the symptoms of COVID-19 that you are familiar with are also symptoms of this Arcturus variant.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the most common symptoms of COVID-19, are still:
  • Fever or chills
  • Cough
  • Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
  • Fatigue
  • Muscle or body aches
  • Headache
  • New loss of taste or smell
  • Sore throat
  • Congestion or runny nose
  • Nausea or vomiting
  • Diarrhea
Is there a vaccine for Arcturus?

Whether you’re eligible for another booster yet or not, it’s common to question if the existing vaccines will defend against new variants. As it stands, it’s still too early to know just how protective the current vaccine formulations will be against XBB.1.16.

Researchers are currently making some distinctions between what’s in the vaccine and this variant, but that doesn’t always translate directly into protection, explains Dr. Schaffner. Still, getting your COVID-19 vaccine can decrease your risk for any severe infection. “The vaccine so far, in all of these other Omicron subvariants, has continued to provide pretty solid protection against severe disease,” says Dr. Schaffner.

As far as treating infections, the treatments that we have right now, such as Paxlovid, should work just fine with this new subvariant, says Dr. Schaffner.

Does Arcturus increase my risk for long COVID?

It’s much too early to say if this variant is more or less likely to lead to long COVID, says Dr. Schaffner.

That said, Omicron variants tend to cause less cases of long COVID, especially in vaccinated populations, notes Dr. Adalja. Also, repeat infections—and most people have had at least one infection by now—are less likely to cause long COVID as well, he adds.

The bottom line

Keeping track of all of the different subvariants these days can be overwhelming and at times, confusing. Dr. Adalja reminds us that these subvariants “are all versions of Omicron and don’t have the ability to heighten the risk of severe disease,” so there’s no need to worry too much over another subvariant yet.

This article is accurate as of press time. However, some of the information may have changed since it was last updated. While we aim to keep all of our stories up to date, please visit online resources provided by the CDC and WHO to stay informed on the latest news. Always talk to your doctor for professional medical advice.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


U.S. Medical News: XBB.1.16 Gaining Traction In America. 7.2 Percent Of All Sequencings Are Now XBB.1.16. Expected To Reach 50 Percent In About 4 Weeks
Thailand Medical News
Apr 15, 2023

Despite concerted efforts by the Biden administration to conceal the real impact of the COVID-19 crisis in the country, certain public figures that cannot be concealed or downplayed are indicating that the country should brace itself for another offensive onslaught by various new XBB sub-lineages including the XBB.1.16 and XBB.2.3 sub-lineages and their latest spawns.

While the US. CDC has publicly said that that they are not witnessing any seeing increases in cases, deaths, or hospitalizations, certain independent news networks are reporting radula increases in daily infections, hospitalizations and daily death rates have been hovering around the 375 to 500 levels. (That too based on data from about half of the States in the U.S.)

According to BNO News, based on data from 20 out of 50 states, there were 33,599 new COVID-19 infections in the last 24 hours and 388 COVID-19 deaths 1ith 16,358 individuals currently hospitalized due to COVID-19 and 2,186 Americans in ICU COVID-19. (The actual figures could be much much higher)

View: https://twitter.com/BNOFeed/status/1646742281418842113


View: https://twitter.com/BNOFeed/status/1646362114955640833


(Yes..COVID-19 is over, its now endemic and its causing ‘mild severity’, ‘mild hospitalizations’ and ‘mild deaths’...Lol. These Democrat buffoons can only fool their fans, the millennials and Gen Z and the Wokes that are more interested BLM or Trans issues)

We will never know the true impact of the COVID-19 situation nor the real excess deaths rates due to COVID or Long COVID in America as a lot of data is being suppressed as many Democrat states are not reporting figures.

However, the U.S. CDC did release data indicating that the XBB.1.16 sub-lineage now makes up 7.2% of US samples, up from 3.9% the previous week.


However, XBB.1.6 already makes up 21.3% of viruses in the south-central region of the country, which includes Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.

It was reported that three other subvariants that still make up a relatively small proportion also gained ground: XBB.1.9.1, XBB.1.9.2, and XBB.1.5.1. Nationally, the proportion of XBB.1.9.1 is at 6.5%, up from 5.1% the previous week.

The U.S. CDC said the newer lineages could displace XBB.1.5.

The U.S. CDC told the American public, "At this time, the best ways to protect yourself and other from COVID-19 remain the same, regardless of which lineage causes infection."

Falsely, the U.S CDC said in its weekly data summary the United States is averaging 14,491 new cases a day, down 17.3% from its previous 7-day average for new daily cases and that about 190 Americans die from COVID-19 each day, down 25.5% from the last 7-day average for new daily deaths. It also said that new daily hospitalizations for COVID declined 14.6% from the previous week.


These figures do not tally with reports from various independent news agencies or even data from just a few states that are reporting.

Various other U.S. Medical News and independent news outlets are reporting that excess deaths are rising exponentially in the Unites States since the start of 2023.




Meanwhile it was also reported that the U.S. CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) will meet on Apr 19, outside of its regularly scheduled meetings, to consider a potential recommendation for a second bivalent COVID booster.


It was reported earlier that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) within the next few weeks was expected to authorize second boosters for those at highest risk, including those 65 or older and people who have weakened immune systems.

Whether these boosters really work is a big question mark especially in terms of what is being seen in countries like Japan, Singapore, India and the United Kingdom. But those controlling the COVID-19 narratives are really going all the way out as almost every week we can see at least 3 to 4 studies by so called paid researchers and institutions coming up with garbage study findings extolling the ‘miraculous properties’ of these boosters while we are also witnessing people who have been ‘boostered’ dying from COVID especially those in the about 60s age group especially when it comes to the newer XBB and XBC sub-lineages.

It is also kinda strange that while so many virologists and experts are warning that these newer sub-lineages are more immune evasive and are causing breakthrough infections, health authorities are still peddling the same old boosters instead of spending efforts upgrading or coming up with better vaccines…if that is really possible that…considering that we are dealing with coronaviruses.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


The Biden administration will hang on to some Covid pandemic emergency powers

By Rachel Cohrs
April 14, 2023

WASHINGTON — Even though the Biden administration is ending its highest-profile Covid-19 emergency declaration next month, it’s still going to hold on to some pandemic-era powers.

The Department of Health and Human Services gave governors a heads-up on Friday that it is planning to keep pharmacists’ ability to administer Covid-19 and flu vaccines past the end of the public health emergency.

The legal definition of the Covid-19 emergency is a complex web of different laws that control different areas of the pandemic response. The White House and HHS are in the process of winding those powers down, but they all operate separately from another.

“While COVID-19 is not over, we are in a position to end the emergency phase of our response because of the Administration’s whole-of-government approach to combatting the virus,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra wrote in a letter to governors.

While the Covid-19 public health emergency will end on May 11, HHS is choosing to extend some powers related to a separate law called the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, which offers extra protections to companies and providers making, distributing, and administering medicines and vaccines in times of emergency.

The rules that let pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, and pharmacy interns give Covid-19 vaccines and tests and seasonal flu vaccines will stay in place through December 2024, the letter says. The White House’s “Test to Treat” program that allows pharmacists to test people for Covid-19 and prescribe the antiviral Paxlovid will also continue.

Normally, pharmacists have the ability to administer some vaccines, but the details of which products they can give patients vary from state to state. HHS’ declaration ensures that the policy will be uniform, at least for the next two years.

However, HHS is also letting some emergency flexibilities expire, since vaccines and treatments will soon be available through the normal health care system instead of being bought by the government directly.

Providers that are retired and medical students will no longer be able to administer vaccines, and pharmacists will have to be licensed in the states that they are administering the shots. There was a time that these providers may have been needed to staff mass vaccination sites during the height of the Biden administration’s vaccination push, but that time has largely passed, an administration official said.
Related: FDA offers radio silence on question of spring Covid boosters, as other countries push ahead

It’s unclear when the next wave of Covid-19 vaccinations will be recommended, as the Food and Drug Administration has not yet officially announced its plans for recommending another round of booster shots.

The HHS notice on Friday doesn’t have any bearing on emergency use authorizations for vaccines or treatments, the administration official said.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Contentious COVID-19 Drugs Are All Anti-Malarial: May Not Be A Coincidence
by Tyler Durden
Saturday, Apr 15, 2023 - 08:30 PM

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times


The COVID-19 recommendations hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and now artemisinin all have one thing in common: They are antimalarial drugs or have such properties.

Yet studies suggest that this may not be a mere coincidence; malaria and COVID-19 may be more similar than people may realize.

Malaria Versus COVID-19

From the outset, malaria and COVID-19 are very distinct diseases.

Malaria is a parasitic disease. An infection starts when an individual is bitten by a mosquito carrying a parasite from the Plasmodium genus. Upon infection, the parasite first goes to the liver and multiplies in liver cells. Then it migrates to the bloodstream, invades and proliferates in red blood cells, and causes these cells to expand and burst.

Common malaria symptoms such as fever, chills, and sweating occur during the blood-stage infection. Complications include anemia, and on rare occasions, cerebral malaria, liver failure, fluid buildup in the lungs, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.

COVID-19, on the other hand, is a viral disease. Infection occurs primarily through the inhalation of contaminated droplets. The virus invades the body through the nasal cavities, entering the upper and then lower respiratory tracts.

Inflammation of the lungs ensues as the body’s immune cells fight off the infection. The person’s oxygen levels start dropping as inflammation worsens in the advent of a cytokine storm, and the lungs become damaged. Some of the virus can also go into the bloodstream and invade other organs, causing systemic inflammation and damage.

Several Commonalities

While one mainly affects blood cells and the other primarily affects the lungs, both diseases are characterized by a strong inflammatory response early in the infection, according to a 2022 paper in Frontiers in Immunology.

Symptoms-wise, both infections from malaria and COVID-19 can lead to fever, fatigue, shortness of breath, diarrhea, and muscle pain.

If inflammation is prolonged, the body will experience a significant increase in cytokines, and individuals can become severely injured or even die.

The two diseases are also similar in that they both sequester iron, use the same receptors in their pathogenesis, and even share similar structures in their proteins.

Iron Storage

Both the Plasmodium parasite and the SARS-CoV-2 virus require iron to proliferate. Therefore, both the parasite and the virus need to store iron inside the ferritin protein within infected cells. High or increased levels of ferritin are therefore an indication of severe disease and inflammation.

Drugs that are capable of targeting iron storage or preventing proliferation may therefore be successful in treating both malaria and COVID-19.

Similar Receptors

The angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) receptor is involved in both malaria and COVID-19 infections.

In COVID-19, the virus binds to ACE-2 to invade cells. ACE-2 is ubiquitous within the human body, present within at the very least:
  • Lungs
  • Blood vessels
  • Muscles
  • The gut
  • Nerves
  • Stomach
  • Heart
  • Kidneys
  • Pancreas
  • Testes
  • Uterus
Organs that have a high number of ACE-2 receptors are therefore at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection.

The significance of ACE-2 in malaria is uncertain. However, one study, as well as the one published in Frontiers in Immunology, showed that people who have their ACE-2 receptors reduced due to genetic predispositions are more resistant to malaria.

According to the Frontiers in Immunology study, malaria parasites use the CD147 receptors on red blood cells to gain entry into the cell. The COVID-19 virus also uses CD147 in the absence of ACE-2 receptors. CD147 has also been linked to the formation of blood clots in COVID-19 infections.

Therapeutics that can target CD147 and ACE-2 may be successful in treating both malaria and COVID-19.

Similar Protein Structures

Additionally, both pathogens share a degree of overlap in their protein structures. The COVID-19 surface N protein has at least 40 percent structural similarity with important malarial proteins in charge of transport, attachment, and invasion.

This means that drugs that can target malarial proteins may also be able to target SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins.

Antimalarial Drugs Used in COVID-19

Early in the pandemic, many studies recommended antimalarial and anti-parasitic drugs such as hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, ivermectin, and artemisinin as potential treatment options for COVID-19. These recommendations, however, soon received backlash, with one reason being that malaria and COVID-19 seem to be very different diseases.

But many doctors and studies found these therapeutics helpful in treating acute COVID-19. Professor Jose Luis Abreu, whose specialty is in plant science at The State University of Nuevo León, used the proposition of “parallelism between malaria and COVID-19” as an explanation for why antimalarial drugs such as ivermectin, artemisinin, and hydroxychloroquine may be applied to COVID-19 in his protocol.

Block COVID-19 Receptors and Proteins

In simulation studies, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and artemisinin can bind to SARS-CoV-2 N proteins, which have structural similarities with malaria proteins. In treating malaria, hydroxychloroquine and artemisinin have been shown to block malarial proteins from replicating and proliferating.

All three drugs can also bind to CD147 and ACE-2 receptors, as previously reported by The Epoch Times. These drugs can also bind to COVID-19 spike proteins directly to prevent viral attachment to cell receptors and also prevent viral proliferation by blocking proteins that take part in viral replication.

Read more here...
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Disturbed sleep may partially explain long COVID breathlessness

by Mike Addelman, University of Manchester
April 15, 2023

A major UK study has discovered that the disturbed sleep patterns in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 was likely to be a driver of breathlessness.

The study of patients in 38 institutions across the UK was led by University of Manchester and Leicester, presented at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (Copenhagen, April 15-18) and published in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

The team discovered that 62% of participants who had been admitted to hospital for COVID-19 had sleep disruption, which was likely to persist for at least 12 months, and highlight for the first time the association between two post-COVID condition symptoms: breathlessness and sleep disruption.

On average, participants who had been hospitalized with COVID-19 slept for over an hour longer, but their sleep patterns were less regular (19% decrease on the sleep regularity scale), than matched participants who were hospitalized due to any cause.

The study researchers also found that participants with sleep disturbance were more likely to have anxiety and muscle weakness, common post-COVID-19 condition symptoms.

Statistical analysis identified that sleep disruption was likely to drive breathlessness directly, but that reduced muscle function and increased anxiety, both recognized causes of breathlessness, could partially mediate the association between sleep disturbance and breathlessness.

The study authors speculate that targeting sleep disruption by reducing anxiety and improving muscle strength in these patients could alleviate breathlessness, but further investigation is needed.

The study used extensive data from the hospitals taking part in the PHOSP-COVID study between March 2020 and October 2021. PHOSP-COVID is a consortium from across the UK, researching long-term health outcomes for patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

Sleep quality was assessed using subjective measures that were self-reported by 638 patients to researchers. It was also measured objectively in another 729 patients, who wore devices similar to smart watches that measured night-time activity levels.

Both measures consistently revealed a higher prevalence of sleep disturbance in people who had been hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with matched controls from the UK Biobank who had been hospitalized for any cause. The impact on sleep from hospitalization due to COVID-19 was irrespective of critical care admission.

One of the authors Dr. John Blaikley, a clinical scientist from The University of Manchester and respiratory doctor said, "This study has discovered that sleep disturbance could be an important driver of post-COVID-19 breathlessness—or dyspnea—because of its associations with reduced muscle function and anxiety."

"If this is the case, then interventions targeting poor sleep quality might be used to manage symptoms and convalescence following COVID-19 hospitalization, potentially improving patient outcomes."

First author and mathematician Mr. Callum Jackson from The University of Manchester said, "Understanding the causes of breathlessness is complex since it can arise from conditions that affect the respiratory, neurological, cardiovascular, and mental health systems."

"These same systems are also affected by sleep disturbance, another symptom that has been frequently reported after COVID-19."

"Our findings suggest that sleep disturbance is a common problem after hospitalization for COVID-19 and is associated with breathlessness."

"We also show this is likely to persist for at least 12 months as subjective sleep quality did not change between 5 and 12 month follow-up visits."

Professor Chris Brightling from the University of Leicester said, "The strengths of our study include its size, multicentre nature, and the use of different complementary assessment measures to evaluate sleep disturbance. Consistent clinical associations were also observed across each evaluation method."

"Future research should now assess whether interventions targeting sleep disturbance can improve not only sleep quality but also breathlessness through reducing anxiety and improving muscle strength."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


COVID-19 Strikes Again: Accelerating Dementia in the Most Vulnerable
By IOS Press
April 15, 2023

A study published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease Reports reveals that infection with SARS-CoV-2 significantly impacts cognitive function in patients with preexisting dementia, causing rapidly progressive dementia. Researchers investigated 14 patients with various types of dementia and found that following COVID-19 infection, the differences between dementia subtypes became blurred, and cognitive deterioration progressed rapidly. Cortical atrophy and inflammation-related white matter intensity changes in the brain were observed, indicating that compromised brains have limited defense against new insults like infections or dysregulated immune responses.

All subtypes of dementia, irrespective of patients’ previous dementia types, behaved like rapidly progressive dementia following COVID-19, according to the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease Reports

Infection with SARS-CoV-2 has a significant impact on cognitive function in patients with preexisting dementia, according to new research, published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease Reports. Patients with all subtypes of dementia included in the study experienced rapidly progressive dementia following infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Since the first wave of COVID-19, neurologists have noticed both acute and long-term neurological syndromes and neuropsychiatric sequelae of this infectious disease. Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on human cognition has so far remained unclear, with neurologists referring to “brain fog.” A group of researchers driven to gain a better understanding of and dissipate this fog investigated the effects of COVID-19 on cognitive impairment in 14 patients with preexisting dementia (four with Alzheimer’s disease [AD], five with vascular dementia, three with Parkinson’s disease dementia, and two with the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia), who had suffered further cognitive deterioration following COVID-19.

Fade-In-Memory-1536x1486.jpg

“Brain fog” is an ambiguous terminology without specific attribution to the spectrum of post-COVID-19 cognitive sequelae. Based on the progression of cognitive deficits and the association with white matter intensity changes, the authors propose a new term: “FADE-IN MEMORY.” Credit: Journal of Alzheimer Disease Reports

Lead investigators Souvik Dubey, MD, DM, from the Department of Neuromedicine, Bangur Institute of Neurosciences (BIN), Kolkata, West Bengal, India, and Julián Benito-León, MD, PhD, from the Department of Neurology, University Hospital “12 de Octubre,” Madrid, Spain, explained: “We speculated there must have been some deleterious effect of COVID-19 in patients with preexisting dementia extrapolating our understanding from the cognitive impact of this viral infection in patients without dementia. However, post-COVID-19 evaluation of cognitive impairments in patients with preexisting dementia is difficult due to multiple confounders and biases.”

In addition to finding that all subtypes of dementia, irrespective of patients’ previous dementia types, behaved like rapidly progressive dementia following COVID-19, the team of investigators found that the line of demarcation between different types of dementia became remarkably blurry post-COVID-19.

Co-investigator Ritwik Ghosh, MD, Department of General Medicine, Burdwan Medical College and Hospital, Burdwan, West Bengal, India, expressed his concern about dementia subtyping. “It is more difficult in the post-COVID-19 era, where the history of this viral infection plays the most important role. Few patients with a history of COVID-19 without preexisting dementia have phenotypically and imaging-wise similar brain changes mimicking other degenerative and vascular dementias.”

Researchers also found that the characteristics of a particular type of dementia changed following COVID-19, and both degenerative and vascular dementias started behaving like mixed dementia both clinically and radiologically. A rapidly and aggressively deteriorating course was observed in patients having insidious onset, slowly progressive dementia, and who were previously cognitively stable.

Cortical atrophy was also evident in the study’s subsequent follow-ups. Coagulopathy involving small vessels and inflammation, which were further correlated with white matter intensity changes in the brain, was considered the most important pathogenetic indicator.

The rapid progression of dementia, the addition of further impairments/deterioration of cognitive abilities, and the increase or new appearance of white matter lesions suggest that previously compromised brains have little defense to withstand a new insult (i.e., a “second hit” like infection/dysregulated immune response and inflammation).

According to Dr. Souvik Dubey and his co-investigators, “’Brain fog’ is an ambiguous terminology without specific attribution to the spectrum of post-COVID-19 cognitive sequelae. Based on the progression of cognitive deficits and the association with white matter intensity changes, we propose a new term: ‘FADE-IN MEMORY’ (i.e., Fatigue, decreased Fluency, Attention deficit, Depression, Executive dysfunction, slowed INformation processing speed, and subcortical MEMORY impairment).”

Co-investigator Mahua Jana Dubey, MD, Department of Psychiatry, Berhampur Mental Hospital, Berhampur, West Bengal, India, added, “Amidst various psychosocial impacts of COVID-19, cognitive deficits, when accompanied by depression and/or apathy and fatigue in patients with or without preexisting dementia, require meticulous evaluation because it imposes added stress and burden on caregivers, one of the most important but often forgotten issues that may have the potential to hamper treatment.”

“As the aging population and dementia are increasing globally, we believe pattern recognition of COVID-19-associated cognitive deficits is urgently needed to distinguish between COVID-19-associated cognitive impairments per se and other types of dementia. This understanding will have a definitive impact on future dementia research,” Dr. Souvik Dubey concluded.

“Increasing epidemiological evidence of the association of COVID-19 and AD is the heightened risk of AD with COVID-19, and of increased COVID-19 in patients with AD points to shared pathogenesis. Dubey et al further clarify this connection in demonstrating COVID-19 fundamentally alters the course of dementia no matter the cause,” remarked George Perry, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, and Semmes Distinguished University Chair in Neurobiology at The University of Texas at San Antonio.

Reference: “The Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Infection on the Cognitive Functioning of Patients with Pre-Existing Dementia” by Souvik Dubey, Shambaditya Das, Ritwik Ghosh, Mahua Jana Dubey, Arka Prava Chakraborty, Dipayan Roy, Gautam Das, Ajitava Dutta, Arindam Santra, Samya Sengupta and Juliàn Benito-León, 14 February 2023, Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease Reports.
DOI: 10.3233/ADR-220090
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


From Alpha to Omicron: Uncovering the Secrets of Natural COVID-19 Immunity
By The Lancet
April 15, 2023

COVID Coronavirus Immunity
A comprehensive review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet reveals that natural immunity against severe COVID-19 (hospitalization and death) is strong and long-lasting for all variants, including Omicron BA.1, in individuals previously infected. Protection against reinfection, symptomatic disease, and severe illness is at least equal to that provided by two doses of mRNA vaccines. However, past infection with pre-Omicron variants resulted in reduced natural immunity protection against reinfection with Omicron BA.1.


A Lancet study finds that natural immunity against severe COVID-19 is strong and long-lasting for all variants in previously infected individuals. However, protection against Omicron BA.1 reinfection is reduced for those with past pre-Omicron infections. Researchers stress that vaccination is still the safest way to acquire immunity.
  • Largest review and meta-analysis assessing the extent of protection following COVID-19 infection by variant and how durable that protection is against different variants, including 65 studies from 19 countries.
  • For people who have been infected with COVID-19 at least once before, natural immunity against severe disease (hospitalization and death) was strong and long-lasting for all variants (88% or greater at 10 months post-infection).
  • Past infection with pre-Omicron variants provided substantially reduced natural immunity protection against reinfection with Omicron BA.1 (36% at 10 months after infection).
  • The researchers say we should recognize the natural immunity in people who have recently been infected with COVID-19, but warn that their findings should not discourage vaccination because it is the safest way to acquire immunity.
For someone previously infected with COVID-19, their risk of hospitalization or death is 88% lower for at least 10 months compared to those who had not been previously infected, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis published in The Lancet.

The analysis also suggests that the level and duration of protection against reinfection, symptomatic disease, and severe illness is at least on a par with that provided by two doses of the mRNA vaccines (Moderna, Pfizer-BioNtech) for ancestral, Alpha, Delta, and Omicron BA.1 variants. The study did not include data on infection from Omicron XBB and its sublineages.

“Vaccination is the safest way to acquire immunity, whereas acquiring natural immunity must be weighed against the risks of severe illness and death associated with the initial infection,” says lead author Dr. Stephen Lim from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine, USA.

As IHME co-author Dr. Caroline Stein explains: “Vaccines continue to be important for everyone in order to protect high-risk populations such as those who are over 60 years of age and those with comorbidities. This also includes populations that have not previously been infected and unvaccinated groups, as well as those who were infected or received their last vaccine dose more than six months ago. Decision makers should take both natural immunity and vaccination status into consideration to obtain a full picture of an individual’s immunity profile.”

Since January 2021, several studies and reviews have reported the effectiveness of past COVID-19 infection in reducing the risk of reinfection and how immunity wanes over time. But none has comprehensively assessed how long the protection after natural infection will last and how durable that protection will be against different variants.

To provide more evidence, the researchers conducted a review and meta-analysis of all previous studies that compared the reduction in risk of COVID-19 among non-vaccinated individuals against a SARS-CoV-2 reinfection to non-vaccinated individuals without a previous infection up to September 2022.

It included 65 studies from 19 countries (Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Czechia, Denmark, France, India, Italy, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Qatar, Scotland, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA) and evaluates the effectiveness of past infection by outcome (infection, symptomatic disease, and severe disease), variant, and time since infection. Studies examining natural immunity in combination with vaccination (i.e., hybrid immunity) were excluded from the analyses.

Immunity fades over time

Analysis of data from 21 studies reporting on time since infection from a pre-Omicron variant estimated that protection against reinfection from a pre-Omicron variant was about 85% at one month—and this fell to about 79% at 10 months. Protection from a pre-Omicron variant infection against reinfection from the Omicron BA.1 variant was lower (74% at one month) and declined more rapidly to 36% at around 10 months.

Nevertheless, analysis of five studies reporting on severe disease (hospitalization and death) found that protection remained universally high for 10 months: 90% for ancestral, Alpha, and Delta, and 88% for Omicron BA.1.

Six studies evaluating protection against Omicron sub-lineages specifically (BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5) suggested significantly reduced protection when the prior infection was pre-Omicron variant. But when the past infection was Omicron, protection was maintained at a higher level.

“The weaker cross-variant immunity with the Omicron variant and its sub-lineages reflects the mutations they have that make them escape built-up immunity more easily than other variants,” says IHME co-author Dr. Hasan Nassereldine. “The limited data we have on natural immunity protection from the Omicron variant and its sub-lineages underscores the importance of continued assessment, particularly since they are estimated to have infected 46% of the global population between November 2021 and June 2022. Further research is also needed to assess the natural immunity of emerging variants and to examine the protection provided by combinations of vaccination and natural infection.”

The researchers note some limitations of their study, cautioning that the number of studies examining the Omicron BA.1 variant and its sub-lineages and the number from Africa was generally limited. In addition, only limited data were available beyond 10 months after the initial infection. They also note that some information, such as past infection status and hospital admissions, was measured differently or incomplete, and could bias the estimate of protection.

Writing in a linked Comment, Professor Cheryl Cohen, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, South Africa, who was not involved in the study, says, “The high and sustained levels of protection conferred by previous infection against severe disease have important implications for COVID-19 vaccine policy. By September 2021, global SARS CoV-2 seroprevalence was estimated at 59%, with substantial variation in the proportion of immunity induced by infection or vaccination in different settings. Seroprevalence in Africa was estimated at 87% in December 2021, largely as a result of infection. High levels of immunity are an important contributor to the lower levels of severity observed with infection caused by emerging Omicron subvariants. As SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology shifts to more stable circulation patterns in the context of high levels of immunity, studies of the burden and cost of SARS-CoV-2 infection and risk groups for severe disease are needed to guide rational vaccination policy and decisions around prioritization in relation to other vaccine-preventable diseases.”

Reference: “Past SARS-CoV-2 infection protection against re-infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis” by COVID-19 Forecasting Team, 16 February 2023, The Lancet.
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)02465-5

The study was funded by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, J. Stanton, T. Gillespie, and J. and E. Nordstrom. The study team included researchers from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine, USA.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Researchers sample bears, deer for COVID-19 to see how the virus spreads
Laura Schulte - USA Today
Sun, April 16, 2023, 6:05 AM EDT

CLAM LAKE, Wisconsin — Testing a black bear for COVID-19 doesn’t look much different from doing an at-home rapid test on yourself.

Prepare the testing solution in a tube. Unwrap a swab. Insert into your nose and swirl it around for a few seconds; repeat on the other side. Put the swab into the tube of the testing solution and prepare it for shipment to a United States Department of Agriculture lab in Colorado.

But, of course, there’s a big difference: researchers need to get close enough to a wild carnivore to actually take the swab, and keep them calm for the duration of the not-so-pleasant swabbing process.

But that's a challenge researchers undertook this winter in northern Wisconsin, in order to see if the virus may have spread into the black bear population and to get at the wider question of whether wildlife can harbor the SARS-CoV-2 virus in a way that leads to new vaccine-evasive mutations that could skip to humans.

Since the outbreak of COVID in humans in 2020, cases have popped up among animals, too.

A few tigers and gorillas in zoos. Some domestic dogs and cats. And in mink farms, the virus spread like wildfire, causing farmers to cull entire populations after the virus was proven to have jumped into at least one employee.

But slowly, cases of COVID have popped up in wild animals, too. White-tailed deer have spread the virus among their populations, as have mule deer.

But scientists are still trying to understand what species might be susceptible and why.

So in early March, a USDA biologist marched into the woods near Clam Lake with a team of researchers aimed at finding bear dens and gathering information about what lay inside. The sows were gently sedated, then pulled from the dens, weighed and given a GPS collar if necessary.

And while the den researchers worked, the bear could be swabbed for COVID by the USDA biologist, and a blood sample taken to test for antibodies, or proof of past infection. The cubs, too, were able to be swabbed, before being gently returned to their den, with their slumbering mother.

“This research is aimed at helping us better understand how COVID is spreading within and across wildlife populations,” said Jonathan Heale, a USDA staff wildlife biologist.

“Our biggest concern is that the animals will serve as reservoirs for the virus. It can hide out, mutate and reemerge with a new variant. So the work on carnivores is a snapshot of what’s going on across the country.”

Testing animals for COVID can help researchers learn more


Testing wild animals for COVID is an important way researchers are learning more about how the disease spreads and mutates.

Can it easily spread between members of the population? And if so, are there mutations? And could those mutations be passed to and sustained by humans?

The samples gathered in early March will help scientists understand if there's a risk the virus could mutate and then spread back to humans.

"It's really dynamic. We can expect that there will be mutations that pop up and a lot of them won't be very successful at being transmitted and maintained in populations of animals," Thomas Yuill, a professor emeritus of pathobiological science, forest and wildlife biology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

"But there's always the risk that one might pop up, that in fact can spread very readily. And if it turns out that in the mutation process, its virus structure is changed enough that use of the vaccines or previous exposure might not cover it. So suddenly, you might have people or animals getting infected more than once."

As for the USDA study on carnivores, the agency has sampled mink, raccoons, red foxes, coyotes and some other smaller meat-eaters. They may also conduct some sampling on wolves in Alaska, Heale said.

The testing should be looked at as a preliminary study, Heale said, just trying to see what’s out there and which species even have the biological ability to be infected with the virus that causes COVID.

“We’re testing the waters,” he said. “And if we see more COVID than we thought, we have the capability to conduct more samples.”

So far the testing of black bears hasnot produced any positive tests or findings of antibodies in their blood, though sampling results from March are not in yet.

The lack of COVID in bears may be due in part to a lack of interaction with humans, unlike deer that are commonly seen in neighborhoods or backyards, Yuill said.

“Animals that tend to be very isolated are unlikely to sustain transmission in a population,” he said. “Because the virus can’t find itself from one individual who is infected to the next one.”

Outside of wild animals, there have also been some cases of cats and dogs in Wisconsin getting sick.

In Wisconsin, white-tailed deer also under surveillance

So far, 28 states have had cases of SARS-CoV-2 in wildlife, according to USDA data. Wisconsin is one of them, with one white-tailed deer testing positive for the virus and having antibodies in the southeastern part of the state.

Wisconsin has received results for 143 deer, said Lindsey Long, a wildlife veterinarian with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

She said samples are being taken to track the spread of the virus in the population.

“Variants have been found in deer populations, and we want to know if it’s persisting, if it’s circulating still. Are we finding new variants?” Long said. “Could deer serve as a reservoir for new introductions?”

Long said they’re trying to also figure out how the virus got into deer to begin with.

“Research suggests multiple introductions into the population,” she said. “How are these introductions happening? And what can we do, how can we start mitigation strategies?”

The second round of sampling is underway in Wisconsin, on deer harvested by hunters, roadkill and deer that have been removed from areas like airports. More than 523 samples have been collected so far, Long said.

Other states are also looking at deer, and other species as well. And other countries, too.

In Canada, studies have found that white-tailed deer likely contracted SARS-CoV-2 from humans, and are now spreading the disease among themselves. According to the Canadian government, there has been at least one case where transmission from a deer to a human was suspected, but it was isolated.

As far as avoiding spreading or contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus from an animal, following the same guidelines of staying home when sick or wearing a mask apply. Also, make sure you’re throwing trash away properly, too, Heale said, and don’t feed bears or deer.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Long COVID and Post-Flu Syndrome: A Surprising Similarity in Severity

By European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
April 16, 2023

Comparison with influenza in the Australian state of Queensland during the Omicron wave in 2022 suggests Long COVID’s burden on health systems may not stem from severity, but from volume.

In the highly vaccinated population of Queensland exposed to the Omicron variant, long COVID appears to manifest as a post-viral syndrome of no greater incidence or severity than seasonal influenza, according to new research being presented at this year’s European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Copenhagen, Denmark (April 15-18).

The study by Queensland Health researchers suggests that despite the similarity of clinical outcomes after COVID-19 and influenza, long COVID’s impact on public health systems is likely to stem from the volume of those infected with SARS-CoV-2, rather than the severity of long COVID symptoms.

Long Covid is a complex, multi-system condition that develops during or after having COVID-19, and is used to describe symptoms that continue for 4-12 weeks and longer-term sequelae beyond 12 weeks known as post-COVID syndrome. Long COVID has the potential for a substantial impact on society, from increased healthcare costs to economic and productivity losses.

Between 5% and 10% of COVID-19 cases in Australia are thought to result in long Covid (symptoms persisting for more than 3 months),[1] and it affects people in different ways. Breathlessness, a cough, heart palpitations, headaches, and severe fatigue are among the most prevalent symptoms.

To understand more about long COVID’s potential impacts on the Australian state of Queensland, researchers surveyed adults (aged 18 years or older) with PCR-confirmed infection for COVID-19 and influenza in Queensland between 12 and 25 June, 2022.

Laboratory reporting for COVID-19 and influenza is recorded in the Queensland Department of Health’s Notifiable Conditions System (NoCS), so the study is a census of all individuals in Queensland who tested positive to COVID or influenza during that period.

At the time, more than 90% of the population of Queensland had been vaccinated against COVID-19 before the community first experienced widespread transmission of the Omicron variant in 2022.

During concurrent waves of Omicron and influenza that occurred in mid-2022, 2,195 adults diagnosed with COVID-19 and 951 adults diagnosed with influenza were followed for 12 weeks and asked about ongoing symptoms and functional impairment using a questionnaire delivered by SMS link to a survey.

Of those diagnosed with Omicron, a fifth (21%, 469) reported ongoing symptoms at 12 weeks and 4% (90) reported having moderate to severe functional limitations in everyday life.

Similarly, around a fifth (23%, 214) of adults diagnosed with influenza reported ongoing symptoms and 4% (42) reported moderate to severe functional limitations.

After controlling for influential factors including age, sex, First Nations status, vaccination status, and socio-economic profile (based on postcode), the analysis found no evidence to suggest that adults with Omicron were more likely to have ongoing symptoms or moderate to severe functional limitations at 12 weeks after their diagnosis than adults who had influenza.

Interestingly, the analyses suggest that younger age groups and non-indigenous populations were more likely to report moderate to severe functional limitations after influenza than Omicron.

“In our highly vaccinated population, the public health impact of Long COVID does not appear to result from any unique property of SARS-CoV-2. Rather, the impact results from the sheer number of people infected over a short period of time,” says Dr. John Gerrard, Queensland’s Chief Health Officer.

Despite the important findings, the study has several limitations including that it was observational and can’t prove causation and it can’t rule out the possibility that other unmeasured factors such as underlying illness and influenza vaccination status may have influenced the results. The researchers also note the growing evidence that the risk of long COVID has been lower during the Omicron wave compared with earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants, and because the vast majority of people in Queensland were vaccinated when the Omicron variant emerged, the lower severity of long COVID could be due to vaccination and/or the Omicron variant.


Notes

  1. Long COVID in Australia – a review of the literature, Summary – Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (aihw.gov.au)
Meeting: ECCMID 2023

This article is based on abstract LB092 at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) annual meeting. The material has been peer reviewed by the congress selection committee. There is no full paper available at this stage. The manuscript is currently under consideration by a peer reviewed journal.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

EMPHASIS IN ORIGINAL (not mine)


The Empty Downtown - A New Normal?
by Tyler Durden
Sunday, Apr 16, 2023 - 01:00 PM

Three years after the coronavirus pandemic began, the situation of North American downtowns remains fundamentally changed.

As Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports below, while most people's lives have returned to normal, the legacies of the lockdown era continue to affect formerly bustling city centers to a point that could cause a downwards spiral.

Data collected by the University of Toronto School of Cities shows that as of the fall of 2022, the downtowns of many major population centers in the U.S. and Canada were still recording much less activity than before the pandemic. Los Angeles had gained back around two thirds of its former life (as measured by cellphone activity), but other downtowns - like in Chicago, Vancouver in British Columbia, Seattle and San Francisco - are now at most half as active as they had been before the pandemic. The lull also affects boomtowns of former years like Denver, Atlanta and Houston.

Infographic: The Empty Downtown - a New Normal | Statista
You will find more infographics at Statista

According to reporting from the San Francisco Chronicle, at home in the most affected city in the analysis, it all started with workers that did not return to downtown offices after the pandemic ebbed, instead preferring (and convincing their employers) to work fully remote, either from a cheaper suburb or from outside of any urban center. This is causing vacant office blocks, decreasing ridership on public transport and less money spent on lunchtime or after-work activities, decreasing business revenue and in turn, the cities' tax income.

Arpit Gupta of the NYU Stern School of Business, who was interviewed by the Chronicle, said that this could make downtowns appear even more unattractive as city services might have to be cut, empty transit could be seen as more dangerous and ultimately, the number of downtown amenities like shops and restaurants could decrease, prompting even more workers to wave goodbye to a certain city. Hybrid work, however, has the power to keep tying workers to downtowns, but this normally requires high-quality office space. Another idea, according Gupta, is to draw people into city centers - as tenants or visitors - by focusing of livability factors and creating experiences that people crave.

The American West coast has been hit especially hard by the phenomenon as its numerous tech companies pivoted to fully remote work more aggressively. The University of Toronto data shows that apart from San Francisco, downtown activity has also stayed far below pre-pandemic levels in Portland, Ore. (37%), Seattle (44%) and Oakland, Calif (49%). Only four out of 62 analyzed downtowns surpassed their 2019 activity levels: Salt Lake City, Bakersfield and Fresno in California as well as El Paso, Texas.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Excess Deaths Back With a Vengeance in the UK and Germany
After a lull, excess mortality 21% in the UK, 11% in Germany

Igor Chudov
Apr 17, 2023

This is a quick update on excess mortality - the deaths occurring in heavily vaccinated countries at rates exceeding historical averages.

UK​

After a brief few weeks of near-zero excess mortality, excess deaths for the last week reported (ending March 31) were 21% in England.



I drew a blue horizontal line at the current mortality level. I drew yellow circles around previous periods during the pandemic where mortality exceeded the current death levels. You can see that the current level of mortality has very few past recent periods that exceeded it - so the UK has, sadly, much to worry about.

Germany​

Germany‘s mortality data is provided as a nice spreadsheet with daily registered deaths, which you can download here. The sheet titled “D_2016_2023_Tage” provides daily deaths for 2016-2023. I calculated the 7-day running average of deaths for each day of 2023 and compared it with the 7-day running average for the same days in 2016-2019. Here’s the chart of daily German excess mortality:



You can see that a brief two-week period of negative excess mortality has ended, and Germany’s excess mortality is again very positive at about 12%, and growing.

What causes those excess deaths?​

We seem to have a strange dialogue. Vaccine skeptics say, “It is the COVID vaccine.” Such an assertion is supported by country-level data, where excess mortality around the end of 2022 correlated positively with COVID vaccination rates. However, we are not yet sure what is the exact biological mechanism, and correlation is not proof of causation.

This is one of my analyses that made some waves, showing such a correlation:


I also wrote a Germany-specific post, showing that Covid boosters have similar health effects among German Bundeslands as they do among developed countries. Please check it out.

Below is the overview of my other excess mortality articles:


Vaccine advocates say, “It is definitely not the vaccine,” without offering viable alternatives. The health authorities refuse to investigate the situation as if they do not want the answers to be known. Without extensive autopsies, pathology research, and individual-level statistical exploration, we cannot know the exact mechanism that caused 21% more than normal deaths among Brits in the week ending on Mar 31, 2023, and that caused 11% more than normal deaths among Germans around the same time.

People are dying. We are groping in the dark. The health authorities and the press, complicit in the Covid vaccination campaign, insist that we must “move on from the pandemic” and forget the continuing unabated excess deaths.


https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/studies-covid-19-vaccination-doesnt-increase-risk-death-misleading-video-europe-excess-death-john-campbell/

As the people who died are buried or cremated, the hope of learning what killed them is fading. This is exactly what health authorities who force-injected us with unproven genetic treatments want — in hopes of avoiding prosecution.

And if we do not know what is killing people, we cannot save them.

Will they be able to cover up the cause of excess deaths?
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
This study that Thailand News is reporting on sounds like they agree with Geert. I think... ????


(fair use applies)

EMPHASIS MINE

"Vaccines Alone Can't Save Us" - Shocking New U.S. Study Reveals the Chilling Truth About COVID-19 Variants
Thailand Medical News
April 16, 2023

As the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic continues to wreak havoc worldwide, a groundbreaking new study by American researchers suggests that relying solely on vaccination efforts may not be enough to slow the rapid emergence of immune-evading SARS-CoV-2 variants. This bombshell report could turn the world's entire approach to managing the ongoing COVID-19 crisis on its head.

The research, conducted using sophisticated stochastic computational models of viral transmission and mutation, uncovered a terrifying truth: a vaccine-only public health strategy may not be sufficient to prevent the emergence of novel, immune-evading strains. While vaccination is crucial for reducing the risk of severe disease and hospitalization, it alone may not be able to halt the relentless evolution of the virus.

The global community has pinned its hopes on vaccines, as evident in daily COVID-19 News coverages with country leaders, health authorities across the world and medical ‘expert’s daily advocating people to get the vaccines especially the mRNA boosters, believing that they will protect against severe outcomes and reduce transmission. However, this latest study could shatter those hopes, showing that even if the entire population is vaccinated multiple times a year, it may not be enough to slow the pace of the virus's evolution.

The report uncovers a chilling reality, suggesting that the rate of viral evolution could render vaccines less useful in combating COVID-19. As each new variant appears, it brings with it a slew of unknowns regarding transmissibility, immune evasion, superspreading potential, and infection fatality rate.


Consequently, the world may be facing repeated waves of infection driven by the emergence of new variants, complicating public health strategies and undermining vaccine efficacy.

The study's authors highlight the need for a multi-faceted approach to slow SARS-CoV-2 evolution, emphasizing the importance of both behavioral and technical nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to support vaccines in slowing viral evolution. These NPIs include air quality improvement, testing-and-tracing, and masking, which can limit the transmission of novel vaccine-evading mutants.

The study also reveals the pressing need for better prophylaxis, including vaccines and antiviral prophylactics that prevent infection and transmission. Rapid viral evolution could continue to complicate public health responses, undermining new biomedical interventions as they become available and possibly leading to unpredictable outcomes if left unchecked.

At this critical juncture in the pandemic, a clear-eyed understanding of the limitations of our tools is crucial for formulating effective public health strategies.

This earth-shattering study forces us to confront the sobering reality that vaccines alone may not be enough to save us from the relentless march of SARS-CoV-2 evolution.

So, what does this mean for the future of the COVID-19 pandemic? One thing is clear: we can't afford to rely solely on vaccines. We must adopt a "stewardship" mindset, incorporating NPIs alongside vaccination efforts, to truly curb viral transmission and slow down the evolution of the virus. Only then can we hope to bring the pandemic under control and prevent further devastation.

This shocking report is a wake-up call for the world, reminding us that we must not be complacent in our fight against COVID-19. It's time to face the harsh truth: vaccines alone can't save us. We must employ a multi-pronged approach to tackle the pandemic and safeguard our future.

The study comprised of researchers from: Weill Cornell Medicine-New York, New York Genome Center, Fractal Therapeutics-Lexington, Boston University School of Public Health, Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research-Cambridge, Boston University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children’s Hospital and the Department of Biomedical Engineering-Boston University.

The Study Abstract:
The rapid emergence of immune-evading viral variants of SARS-CoV-2 calls into question the practicality of a vaccine-only public-health strategy for managing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. It has been suggested that widespread vaccination is necessary to prevent the emergence of future immune-evading mutants. Here, the study team examined that proposition using stochastic computational models of viral transmission and mutation. Specifically, the researchers looked at the likelihood of emergence of immune escape variants requiring multiple mutations and the impact of vaccination on this process. The study findings suggest that the transmission rate of intermediate SARS-CoV-2 mutants will impact the rate at which novel immune-evading variants appear. While vaccination can lower the rate at which new variants appear, other interventions that reduce transmission can also have the same effect. Crucially, relying solely on widespread and repeated vaccination (vaccinating the entire population multiple times a year) is not sufficient to prevent the emergence of novel immune-evading strains, if transmission rates remain high within the population. Thus, vaccines alone are incapable of slowing the pace of evolution of immune evasion, and vaccinal protection against severe and fatal outcomes for COVID-19 patients is therefore not assured.

The study findings were published in the peer reviewed journal: Vaccines
Vaccines Alone Cannot Slow the Evolution of SARS-CoV-2
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Neuroscientists Find Long COVID Smell Loss Linked to Changes in the Brain
By University College London
April 17, 2023

A recent study led by UCL researchers has found that people living with long COVID and experiencing anosmia (loss of smell) show different brain activity patterns compared to those who have recovered their sense of smell or never had COVID-19. The observational study used MRI scans and discovered reduced brain activity and impaired communication between the orbitofrontal cortex and the pre-frontal cortex in people with long COVID anosmia. This connection was not impaired in those who had regained their sense of smell after COVID. The findings suggest that long COVID anosmia may be linked to a change in the brain that prevents smells from being processed properly, but since it is clinically reversible, olfactory training might help the brain recover this sense. The study also found that the brains of people with long Covid anosmia may be compensating by boosting connections with other sensory regions.

People living with long COVID who suffer from loss of smell show different patterns of activity in certain regions of the brain, a new study led by University College London (UCL) researchers has found.

The research used MRI scanning to compare the brain activity of people with long COVID who lost their sense of smell, those whose smell had returned to normal after COVID infection, and people who had never tested positive for COVID-19.

Published in the journal eClinicalMedicine, the observational study found that people with long COVID smell loss had reduced brain activity and impaired communication between two parts of the brain that process important smell information: the orbitofrontal cortex and the pre-frontal cortex. This connection was not impaired in people who had regained their sense of smell after COVID.

The findings suggest smell loss, known as anosmia, caused by long COVID is linked to a change in the brain that stops smells from being processed properly. Because it’s clinically reversible, as shown in some subjects, it may be possible to retrain the brain to recover its sense of smell in people suffering the side effects of long COVID.

Dr. Jed Wingrove (UCL Department of Medicine) the lead author of the study, said: “Persistent loss of smell is just one way long COVID is still impacting people’s quality of life – smell is something we take for granted, but it guides us in lots of ways and is closely tied to our overall wellbeing. Our study gives reassurance that, for the majority of people whose sense of smell comes back, there are no permanent changes to brain activity.”

Joint senior author, Professor Claudia Wheeler-Kingshott (UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology), said: “Our findings highlight the impact COVID-19 is having on brain function. They raise the intriguing possibility that olfactory training – that is, retraining the brain to process different scents – could help the brain to recover lost pathways, and help people with long COVID recover their sense of smell.”

Researchers say their findings also suggest that the brains of people with long COVID smell loss might be compensating for this lost sense by boosting connections with other sensory regions: their brains had increased activity between the parts of the brain that process smell and areas that process sight (the visual cortex).

“This tells us that the neurons that would normally process smell are still there, but they’re just working in a different way,” said Dr. Wingrove.

Professor Rachel Batterham (UCL Division of Medicine), also joint senior author of the study said: “This is the first study to our knowledge that looks at how brain activity changes in people with long COVID smell loss. It builds on the work we undertook during the first wave of the pandemic, which was one of the first to describe the link between COVID-19 infection with both loss of smell and taste.”

Reference: “Aberrant olfactory network functional connectivity in people with olfactory dysfunction following COVID-19 infection: an exploratory, observational study” by Jed Wingrove, Janine Makaronidis, Ferran Prados, Baris Kanber, Marios C. Yiannakas, Cormac Magee, Gloria Castellazzi, Louis Grandjean, Xavier Golay, Carmen Tur, Olga Ciccarelli, Egidio D’Angelo, Claudia A.M. Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott and Rachel L. Batterham, 2 March 2023, eClinicalMedicine.
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101883

The study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Senate GOP report raises possibility of two lab leaks triggering COVID
By Steven Nelson
April 17, 2023 6:04pm Updated

WASHINGTON — The COVID-19 pandemic may have started with two separate leaks at Chinese labs doing risky “gain of function” research, a Republican senator said Monday.

A report released by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) raises the prospect that millions of lives could have been saved — including those of more than 1 million Americans — if not for a “coverup” by the Chinese government during a theorized initial outbreak.

“This report concludes most likely this was two leaks [including] a lab leak in the September-October [2019] timeframe, even as early as July or August,” the medical doctor turned senator told a small group of journalists ahead of the release of the 301-page document.

“We’ve concluded that [China] started vaccine development in November 2019. And then another lab leak seems to be most sensible explanation,” he said. “There are key data points that are being held back that could help us prove that.”

Dr. Robert Kadlec, a cofounder of the Operation Warp Speed program that rapidly developed US COVID-19 vaccines in 2020, drafted the report titled “Muddy Waters: The Origins of COVID-19” with about a dozen Republican aides on the Senate Health Committee and additional outside consultants.

The theory that there were two lab leaks, with the first one’s effect going unrecognized by the global community as the Chinese government raced ahead with early vaccine development, is unproven and Marshall says he welcomes debate and the exploration of other possibilities.

The theory rests on scientific conjecture about some previously reported details — including an assessment of the amount of work that would have had to predate a Feb. 24, 2020, vaccine patent filed by Dr. Zhou Yusen, a Chinese military scientist who later died under mysterious circumstances. Investigators concluded that the vaccine development would have had to start in November 2019, using Operation Warp Speed’s course as a benchmark.

A pre-November series of additional events adds weight to the theory, Marshall said, including the deaths of 11 Iranian athletes, publicly reported in 2020. Some of the athletes reportedly attended the Olympics-style World Military Games in held Wuhan, China, in October 2019.

There are additional scientific clues, according to the report.

“Epidemiological and genetic molecular analyses of the early published circulating Wuhan [COVID-19] strains supported the possibility of two spillover events two or more weeks apart,” the report says.

“This assessment was made based on minor genetic differences in early circulating strains suggesting that two lineages of the same virus may have emerged simultaneously and progressed on different paths or sequentially separated by some period of time. One lineage showing more mutations than the other implying it had been circulated longer than the other or had potentially passed through more individuals.”

The document goes on: “A recently published study analyzed data from existing WHO global influenza surveillance networks early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Their analysis could identify outliers in influenza-negative influenza-like illness (ILI) that served as potential early indicator of COVID-19 community
transmission.”

The report noted “[a] noticeable increase of Wuhan adult ILI cases during week 46 (November 11-17, 2019) corresponded to negative influenza testing that same week. This occurrence is similar to the epidemiological outlier identified in the published study. It occurs approximately 13 weeks before the recorded surge of COVID-19 cases in Wuhan in late January, early February 2020.”

Further fueling suspicions, the Wuhan Institute of Virology deleted an online database of coronavirus samples on Sept. 12, 2019, which Marshall said likely would have shown “cousins” of COVID-19 if it was indeed from nature.

“There are a lot of events around this timeline, then it gets a little quiet, and then — boom, something else happens,” Marshall said.

But Marshall concedes there may be alternative explanations for the outbreak, which Chinese authorities first publicly acknowledged on Dec. 31, 2019.

Pressed by The Post on whether the vaccine patent could have been quickly filed due to some other reason, the senator said, “I’m inviting that [challenge]. I think that’s the whole purpose of science, to shoot down [competing] theories.”

Marshall said he hopes the report will build momentum to establish a 9/11 Commission-style investigation of the origins of the virus to understand the reason for the devastating pandemic and to prevent a recurrence.

“I don’t think anyone can conclude that this is a ‘get [Dr. Anthony] Fauci’ paper,” said Marshall, who has clashed with the former top US infectious disease expert at hearings focused on American funding for the Wuhan lab that modified viruses to make them more contagious.

Marshall said that he believes Democratic colleagues are warming to an investigation of the pandemic’s origins and “I’ll be curious as to how the White House responds.”

The White House did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for comment.

President Biden on March 20 signed a bipartisan bill that mandates the declassification of records on the pandemic’s origins, though it’s unclear what material will be redacted.

Marshall said the US government hasn’t yet been very forthcoming so far — and that he hopes especially to further investigate the money trail flowing to Wuhan for research that modified coronavirus.

“Every time I pick on China, we should look in the mirror because our own federal government has kept data from us, they wouldn’t show us information. They wouldn’t let us talk to the right people. So much of it is redacted,” said Marshall, who took on leadership of the Health Committee’s GOP inquiry following the retirement in January of former Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC).

The senator also ridiculed an effort by what he called the “gain of function mafia” to push a theory that raccoon dogs farmed for their fur caused the pandemic, saying they would have been shipped around China — leading to outbreaks in geographically distinct areas, rather than concentrated in Wuhan, where no animal or animal handler responsible for its origin has been put forward by the Chinese government.

In addition to safety issues reported at Wuhan labs, documents published in late 2021 by The Intercept revealed that EcoHealth Alliance used US grants to fund Wuhan Institute of Virology experiments that modified three bat coronaviruses distinct from COVID-19. The research found the viruses became much more infectious among “humanized” mice when human-type receptors were added to them.

Kadlec, who led the investigation, was assistant secretary for preparedness and response at the Department of Health and Human Services from 2017-2021. He previously worked as deputy staff director for the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The “lab leak” theory has gradually gained acceptance since 2020, when it was derided as a conspiracy theory.

The Wall Street Journal in February revealed that the Energy Department, which operates the US National Laboratories, now believes the pandemic began with a Chinese lab leak.

FBI Director Christopher Wray confirmed the same month that the FBI also believes COVID-19 leaked from a lab.

“The FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan,” Wray said. “Here you are talking about a potential leak from a Chinese government-controlled lab.”

Under political pressure, Biden in May 2021 ordered a US intelligence community assessment of the origins of COVID-19, after previously saying the US would defer to the World Health Organization to get answers.

US spy agencies assessed in August 2021 that it was “plausible” that the virus came either from a lab release in Wuhan or from a natural origin via animal-to-human transmission.

At the time, a written statement attributed to Biden said: “The world deserves answers, and I will not rest until we get them.”

“Responsible nations do not shirk these kinds of responsibilities to the rest of the world,” the statement said. “Pandemics do not respect international borders, and we all must better understand how COVID-19 came to be in order to prevent further pandemics.”

But Biden, who campaigned heavily in 2020 on mourning pandemic deaths and slamming then-President Donald Trump’s management of the crisis, has hardly mentioned the origins question since then — even walking away from reporters on the White House lawn March 3 when asked about holding China accountable for the outbreak.
 

jward

passin' thru
trendingpoliticsnews.com


BREAKING: New U.S. Senate Report Concludes COVID-19 Virus Originated In Chinese Lab​


Kyle Becker​






A new report released by the U.S. Senate has concluded that the COVID-19 virus, known as SARS-CoV-2, originated in a Chinese laboratory, but was leaked unintentionally.

The 301-page report, produced by a team that included Dr. Robert Kadlec, a former government health official who played a key role in developing COVID-19 vaccines, and staffers on the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, was released on April 17 by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Ky.), a member of the Senate Health Committee, who chairs the Subcommittee on Primary Health and Retirement Security.

The report states that the “preponderance of information supports the plausibility of an unintentional research-related incident that likely resulted from failures of biosafety containment during SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-related research.”
The researchers conducting the report started with two hypotheses: one was that the virus originated in animals before spilling over to humans, known as a natural origin, and the other was a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), located in the same city where the first COVID-19 cases were detected in late 2019.

According to the report, Kadlec’s team of consultants spent approximately 18 months investigating the COVID-19 origins and concluded that the available evidence supports a lab leak. The report suggests that there may have been an aerosol leak that caused an infection of lab personnel or that the virus may have been released to the outside environment due to biocontainment failures. One theory mentioned in the report revolves around cleaning agents causing corrosion of welded seams in the lab, as mentioned in multiple 2019 documents on upgrading the lab.
The report also highlights concerns about biosafety at the WIV that have been raised by both domestic and foreign bodies for years. A 2018 U.S. State Department cable, for instance, reported that the then-newly opened biosafety level four lab at the facility had a “serious shortage” of trained technicians to safely operate the lab. Researchers at the lab, before the pandemic, reported experimenting on mice, bats, and palm civets to find coronaviruses that were more capable of infecting humans, and sometimes experimented at sub-biosafety level four conditions.
The report also points to Chinese reports, communications, and notices as support for the lab leak theory, including an attempt in November 2019 to procure an air incinerator at the lab, which suggested “some concern about the risk of an infectious aerosol escape.”

The report also noted that WIV staffers underwent a remedial biosafety training course that same month.
Furthermore, the report concludes that characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 suggest the virus was manmade, including the presence of a furin cleavage site at the same location that was proposed in a grant proposal by EcoHealth Alliance, an organization that funneled U.S. taxpayer money to scientists in Wuhan.
While the exact origin of the COVID-19 virus continues to be debated, this new Senate report adds to the growing body of evidence supporting the likely origin of SARS-CoV-2 as a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


FDA clears extra COVID booster for some high-risk Americans
By LAURAN NEERGAARD
yesterday

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. regulators on Tuesday cleared another booster dose of the Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for older Americans and people with weak immune systems.

The Food and Drug Administration also took steps to make coronavirus vaccinations simpler for everyone, saying that anyone getting a Pfizer or Moderna dose — whether it’s a booster or their first-ever vaccination — will get the newest formula, not the original shots.

The FDA said those 65 or older can opt to roll up their sleeves again for another booster as long as it’s been at least four months since their first dose of the so-called bivalent vaccine that targets omicron strains.

And most people who are immune-compromised also can choose that extra spring booster at least two months after their first, with additional doses in the future at the discretion of their physician, the agency said.

If the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention signs off, those spring boosters could begin within days. The CDC’s advisers are set to meet Wednesday.

“COVID-19 remains a very real risk for many people,” FDA vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks said.

It’s too soon to know if younger, healthy people will eventually be offered yet another shot but the extra dose for the most vulnerable is one of several steps FDA is taking to simplify COVID-19 vaccinations going forward.

Here are some things to know:

ONE FORMULA FOR PFIZER AND MODERNA SHOTS

COVID-19 vaccines have saved millions of lives but protection wanes over time and as new, more contagious variants have popped up. So last fall, Pfizer and Moderna rolled out updated “bivalent” boosters that added protection against omicron strains then circulating to the original vaccine recipe. Tuesday, the FDA said that updated formula will be used for anyone getting a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. For unvaccinated adults, that means one combo shot would replace having to get several doses of the original vaccine first.

WHO NEEDS A BOOSTER?

Anyone who’s gotten their original vaccinations but hasn’t had an updated booster yet can still get one. Only 42% of Americans 65 and older — and just 20% of all adults — have gotten one of those updated boosters since September. “Those individuals certainly could go out and get a bivalent booster now to improve their protection,” Marks said.

SOME PEOPLE ARE AT HIGHER RISK

For many Americans, COVID-19 has become less of a health fear and more of an inconvenience, and masking, routine testing and other precautions have largely fallen by the wayside. But at least 250 people in the U.S. a day still die from COVID-19, and high-risk Americans who last got a dose in the fall have anxiously wondered when they could get another.

Letting seniors and the immune-compromised get an extra booster dose puts the U.S. in line with Britain and Canada, which also are offering certain vulnerable populations a spring shot. It’s a reasonable choice, said Dr. Matthew Laurens of the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

“We do have vaccines that are available to protect against these severe consequences, so why not use them?” he said. “They don’t do any good just sitting on a shelf.”

WILL YOUNGER, HEALTHIER PEOPLE GET A FALL DOSE?

Stay tuned. The FDA will hold a public meeting in June to consider if the vaccine recipe needs more adjusting to better match the latest coronavirus strains — just like it adjusts flu vaccines every year. And part of that discussion will be whether younger, healthier people also need a booster.

The updated Pfizer and Moderna shots being used now target the BA.4 and BA.5 omicron versions, which have been replaced by an ever-changing list of omicron descendants. Still, while protection against mild infections is short-lived, those updated doses continue to do a good job fighting severe disease and death even against the newest variants, Marks said.

Whether the recipe gets adjusted again or not, Tuesday’s move “is essentially preparing to have a simpler, more straightforward way of going about vaccinating people,” he said. “It’s essentially a single dose of the appropriately strained vaccine as we move into the fall and winter months.”

TWEAKS TO CHILD SHOTS, TOO

Millions of U.S. children still haven’t gotten their initial COVID-19 vaccinations but Tuesday’s step means they, too, can get the most updated version of the shots. Tots ages 6 months through 5 years who are unvaccinated can choose two Moderna shots or three of the Pfizer-BioNTech version. Children who are 5 years old can get two Moderna doses or a single Pfizer shot.

Children already fully or partially vaccinated with the original Pfizer or Moderna shots may get a bivalent vaccine, but how many doses will depend on their vaccination history, the FDA said.

WHAT ABOUT THE NOVAVAX VACCINE?

Novavax makes a more traditional type of COVID-19 vaccine, and its original formula remains available for people who don’t want the Pfizer or Moderna option. Novavax said Tuesday it also is getting ready in case FDA urges a fall update, by manufacturing several additional formulas.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


New AI-Generated T-Cell Vaccine Showcases Long-Lasting Immunity Against COVID-19
By Penn State
April 18, 2023


Researchers have developed an AI-generated T-cell-based vaccine that demonstrates effectiveness against COVID-19 in mice, potentially offering long-lasting immunity against emerging variants. This approach, using the RAVEN platform, could also be used for developing improved vaccines for other seasonal viral diseases, such as influenza.


Artificial intelligence platform has the ability to efficiently design T-cell-based vaccines that offer broad protection. The platform could also be used to develop seasonal flu and other vaccines.

Researchers from Penn State have teamed up with Evaxion Biotech on a groundbreaking study that reveals the potential of an AI-generated vaccine in providing immunity against future COVID-19 variants. Unlike current COVID-19 vaccines, which target the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and are prone to losing efficacy due to mutations, this vaccine focuses on triggering a T-cell response. This could result in a more durable immunity and serve as a model for other seasonal viral diseases, such as the flu. This study marks the first time an AI-generated vaccine has been tested and shown to be effective in a live viral challenge model.

The study conducted by Penn State and Evaxion Biotech researchers tested the effectiveness of a T-cell-based vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in mice. The results showed a remarkable 87.5% survival rate among the vaccinated mice, compared to just 1 mouse from the control group. Furthermore, all the surviving mice that received the vaccine cleared the virus within two weeks after being challenged with a lethal dose of SARS-CoV-2.

The findings were recently published in the journal Frontiers in Immunology.

“To our knowledge, this study is the first to show in vivo [in a living organism] protection against severe COVID-19 by an AI-designed T-cell vaccine,” said Girish Kirimanjeswara, associate professor of veterinary and biomedical sciences, Penn State. “Our vaccine was extremely effective at preventing severe COVID-19 in mice, and it can be easily scaled up to start testing it in humans, as well. This research also paves the way for the potential rapid design of novel T-cell vaccines against emerging and seasonal viral diseases, like influenza.”

Why do we need a T-cell-based COVID-19 vaccine when the mRNA vaccines that are already in use are so effective?

According to Kirimanjeswara, the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is under heavy selection pressure, which can result in mutations that drive the emergence of new variants.

“This means that vaccine manufacturers will have to keep creating new vaccines that target new variants, and people have to keep getting these new vaccines,” he said.

Instead of targeting the constantly mutating spike protein, the team at Evaxion Biotech designed a vaccine that included 17 epitopes from various proteins of SARS-CoV-2 that are recognized by the immune system. These epitopes elicit an immune response from a broad selection of T cells, ensuring a sustained coverage of future variants.

“The virus would have to undergo too many mutations to be able to escape this T-cell-mediated immunity, so that is one advantage,” said Kirimanjeswara. “The second advantage is that T-cell-mediated immunity is usually long-lasting, so you don’t need repeated booster doses.”

If T cells are so great at remembering foreign agents, why were the first-generation COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit responses from antibodies?

“It’s harder and takes longer to produce a T-cell-based vaccine than an antibody-based one,” said Kirimanjeswara. “Given the urgency with which we needed a vaccine to address the COVID-19 pandemic, it makes sense that vaccine manufacturers created an antibody-based vaccine. Now that the urgency has passed, a second-generation T-cell-based vaccine could be more effective and last longer.”

According to co-author Anders Bundgaard Sørensen, project director, Evaxion Biotech, other biotechnology companies are developing T-cell-based vaccines, but this team’s vaccine uses multiple types of artificial intelligence in a platform called RAVEN (Rapidly Adaptive Viral rEspoNse) to predict ideal targets for vaccines.

“RAVEN is really adaptable,” Sørensen said. “We don’t have to wait for a new strain of a virus to arrive to develop a vaccine. Instead, we can predict what will be needed in advance. That’s not something that others are doing right now.”

Sørensen noted, “It’s much easier to get broad coverage with a T-cell vaccine, as we can include multiple epitopes targeting different proteins.”

He added that, in addition to producing better COVID-19 vaccines, the RAVEN platform could be used to develop better influenza vaccines.

“Oftentimes, the influenza vaccines that are designed work only 30-40% of the time, so a lot of people end up getting sick,” he said. “As the world becomes increasingly integrated, that problem will become larger and larger. Our platform uses AI to better predict what will be needed.”

Sørensen noted that Evaxion benefitted from partnering with Kirimanjeswara and his Penn State colleagues because of their deep expertise in animal models of infectious disease and because the university houses a BSL-3 laboratory in which they could safely study the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

He said, “Our results are a testament to the power of industry-university partnerships.”

Reference: “DNA immunization with in silico predicted T-cell epitopes protects against lethal SARS-CoV-2 infection in K18-hACE2 mice” by Gry Persson, Katherine H. Restori, Julie Hincheli Emdrup, Sophie Schussek, Michael Schantz Klausen, McKayla J. Nicol, Bhuvana Katkere, Birgitte Rønø, Girish Kirimanjeswara and Anders Bundgaard Sørensen, 11 April 2023, Frontiers in Immunology.
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1166546

Other Penn State authors on the paper include Katherine Restori, assistant research professor; McKayla Nicol, graduate student; and Bhuvana Katkere, assistant teaching professor. Other Evaxion Biotech authors on the paper include Gry Persson, project manager; Julie Hinchelli Emdrup, research associate; Sophie Schussek, competence manager; Michael Schantz Klausen, senior associate; and Birgitte Rønø, chief scientific officer.

Innovation Fund Denmark supported this research. The Huck Institutes of Life Sciences and the College of Agricultural Sciences provided support for studies performed at Penn State.

The Eva J. Pell Laboratory is an ABSL3 (animal biological safety level three) laboratory located on Penn State’s campus. It is a self-contained, standalone facility, which means that all materials, including waste products, are managed on site for increased safety. The lab is inspected by the National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and is approved to conduct research on infectious agents.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


The Great COVID-19 Vaccine Bribe
"COVID-19 Vaccine Provider Incentive Program"

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
Apr 12, 2023

By JOHN LEAKE

Many readers of this Substack have doubtless wondered why their “healthcare providers”—i.e., doctors, repeatedly exhorted them to get the COVID-19 vaccines and boosters. In my extended social circle, I heard many reports of doctors being downright pushy about it—as though getting the COVID-19 vaccine was the single most pressing matter of medicine and health.

Even patients who’d recently recovered from COVID-19 were urged by their doctors to get the shots, as were patients who had bad reactions to the first injection.

For a long time Dr. McCullough and I wondered if these doctors really were that brainwashed, or was there some other explanation for their zeal?

A few days ago, fellow Substack author, Tessa Lena (Tessa Fights Robots) published this document that was apparently circulated to doctors with patients insured by Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Medicaid in the state of Kentucky.



The document raises a number of intriguing questions. I wonder: How many members might be registered in a given practice—that is, how many of those $125 bonuses per vaccinated member could a busy and efficient doctor with a good support staff receive?

Secondly, how many of these “COVID-19 Vaccine Provider Incentive Programs” were operating in the United States during 2021?

As we awakened souls try to figure out what’s going on in our bizarre world, it’s always useful to follow the money. It almost always leads to the explanation for any strange state of affairs that puzzles us.

.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
I'd like to know how many of those who had this arrhythmia after severe illness ALSO were vaxxed. This article doesn't say. Here is a link to the press release on this study, it also doesn't report on vaxx status.



~~~~~~~~~~~


(fair use applies)


NEW THREAT Catching Covid can trigger killer new side effect MONTHS later, scientists discover

Joe Davies
Published: 16:01, 18 Apr 2023Updated: 16:54, 18 Apr 2023

COVID infections can trigger a killer condition within just months, a new study found.

Patients who suffered a severe bout of the virus were 16 times more likely to suffer ventricular tachycardia — a deadly type of abnormal heart rhythm — in six months.

Swedish researchers tracked rates of the condition and other arrhythmias in more than 31,400 adults.

Dr Marcus Stahlberg of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm said that while the overall risk was low, it was “much higher” in those who had severe Covid.

He said: “Covid patients who need mechanical ventilation often have other conditions and adding a heart rhythm disorder may lead to worsened health.

“These patients should seek medical attention if they develop palpitations or irregular heartbeats after hospital discharge so they can be evaluated for possible arrhythmias.”

Ventricular tachycardias are a type of arrhythmia — abnormal heart rhythms suffered by 2million Brits — that cause the organ to beat too fast and not pump enough blood around the body.

It usually happens in people who have already had significant problems with their heart, including a heart attack or heart disease.

Symptoms include palpitations, chest pain or discomfort, difficulty breathing and feeling sick.

Bouts of ventricular tachycardia can be deadly, causing the heart to stop in cardiac arrest.

Previous studies have linked Covid to a range of heart problems, including heart disease, heart attack, heart failure and deep vein thrombosis.

The latest research, presented at the European Heart Rhythm Association congress in Barcelona, looked at how Covid affected levels of ventricular tachycardia.

Scientists tracked rates in 3,023 patients who had severe Covid that were given mechanical ventilation and 28,463 individuals from the general population.

Some 15.4 out of 1,000 in the severe Covid group had suffered ventricular tachycardia, compared to 0.9 per 1,000 in the control group.


Researchers said coronavirus patients who suffered less severe infections could also be at greater risk of the condition.

Dr Stahlverg said: “An increased risk of arrhythmias following Covid has also been reported previously in the bulk of patients not requiring ICU treatment.

“Together with our new data, hospital systems should prepare for an increase in patients requiring management for new onset arrhythmias.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


An Unlikely Hero: How the Common Cold Shields Children From COVID-19
By Karolinska Institute
April 19, 2023

Researchers from Karolinska Institute found that children’s memory T cells generated by common colds can react to SARS-CoV-2, potentially explaining their milder COVID-19 symptoms. The memory T-cell response to coronaviruses was observed to develop as early as age two, with reactions being stronger earlier in life and weakening as individuals age.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, medical professionals and researchers observed that children and teenagers who contracted the virus exhibited milder symptoms compared to adults. This phenomenon may be attributed to the presence of memory T cells in children, which were generated as a result of previous exposure to common colds and provided a prior level of immunity to COVID-19.

Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden have now conducted a study using blood samples from children collected prior to the pandemic, and they have discovered memory T cells that respond to cells infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19.

Four coronaviruses cause common colds

A possible explanation for this immunity in children is that they already had colds caused by one of the four coronaviruses causing seasonal common cold symptoms. This could stimulate an immune response with T cells able to also react to cells infected with SARS-CoV-2.

This new study reinforces this hypothesis and shows that T cells previously activated by the OC43 virus can cross-react against SARS-CoV-2.

“These reactions are especially strong early in life and grow much weaker as we get older,” says the study’s corresponding author Annika Karlsson, research group leader at the Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet. “Our findings show how the T-cell response develops and changes over time and can guide the future monitoring and development of vaccines.”

Strong immunity at the age of two


The results indicate that the memory T-cell response to coronaviruses develops as early as the age of two. The study was based on 48 blood samples from two- and six-year-old children, and 94 samples from adults between the ages of 26 and 83. The analysis also included blood samples from 58 people who had recently recovered from COVID-19.

“Next, we’d like to do analogous studies of younger and older children, teenagers, and young adults to better track how the immune response to coronaviruses develops from childhood to adulthood,” says Marion Humbert, a postdoctoral researcher currently at the Department of Medicine Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, joint first author with Anna Olofsson, doctoral student at the Department of Laboratory Medicine.

Reference: “Functional SARS-CoV-2 cross-reactive CD4+ T cells established in early childhood decline with age” by Marion Humbert, Anna Olofsson, David Wullimann, Julia Niessl, Emma B. Hodcroft, Curtis Cai, Yu Gao, Ebba Sohlberg, Robert Dyrdak, Flora Mikaeloff, Ujjwal Neogi, Jan Albert, Karl-Johan Malmberg, Fridtjof Lund-Johansen, Soo Aleman, Linda Björkhem-Bergman, Maria C. Jenmalm, Hans-Gustaf Ljunggren, Marcus Buggert and Annika C. Karlsson, 14 March 2023, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2220320120

The paper is the result of a collaborative study among researchers at Karolinska Institutet, the universities of Bern (Switzerland), Oslo (Norway) and Linköping University (Sweden).

The study was financed by the Swedish Research Council, Region Stockholm (CIMED), Karolinska Institutet, the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, and the European Research Council. Karl-Johan Malmberg, Ebba Sohlberg, and Soo Aleman receive fees from companies and organizations outside this research project (see the paper for more details); all other researchers report no conflicts of interest.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEE5OfiVS7o

Spike protein in many organs
Dr. John Campbell
Apr 16, 2023
17 min 32 sec

German pathology, John's text book on pathophysiology and more, free download on this link, https://drjohncampbell.co.uk Post vaccine, post mortem blood clots Not blood clots Formed after death (incompatible with life) Blood from a living patient with acute peripheral circulation ischaemia, (after cooling the blood sample) Might be a consolidation of proteins previously dissolved in the blood Professor Arne Burkhardt (Walter Lang) https://twitter.com/ArneBurkhardt https://prabook.com/web/arne.burkhard... https://swprs.org/covid-vaccine-injur... Original German language presentation Link page to translated version http://docs.shortxxvids.com/burkhardt... 2nd conference on vaccine adverse events (English translation) https://odysee.com/@LongXXvids:c/Prof... Relatives turning to pathologists March 2022 onwards Suspecting deaths might be vaccine caused A disturbing and very complex histological picture 15 pathologic studies in the series so far Found patterns that can be attributed to vaccinations Methods Involved a range of other analytical specialists We have a toxicological problem before us Things have been overlooked in the past There is a poison at work which is produced in the body Which means we must look of it in the tissues Infection has been excluded Methodology test We have proved that spike protein in produced in the muscle it is injected into We are able now to prove that this can occur I almost all cells and organs the body Diffuse endothelialitis Endo thelial itis Active spike protein produced in adipose tissue Clustering around capillary endothelium (Biopsy from living patient, 8 months post vaccine) Left, swollen blood vessels with SP Right, brown stained SP with obliterative vasculitis Damage to vascular endothelium, thrombogenic exposure Foreign bodies in the lungs but not in the alveoli Also FBs found in the spleen, pancreas, heart Probably FBs are cholesterol ? Cholesterol released from atheromatous plaques Accumulation of protein, amyloid like deposits Found in tissues including the brain
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TaIsCX37vI


Circulating spike protein after vaccination, Boston research
Dr. John Campbell
Apr 17, 2023
18 min 30 sec

Circulating Spike Protein Detected in Post-COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Myocarditis https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36597... Background Cases of adolescents and young adults developing myocarditis, after vaccination with (SARS-CoV-2)-targeted mRNA vaccines, reported globally, underlying immunoprofiles of these individuals have not been described in detail. Methods January 2021 through February 2022 Prospectively collected blood, from 16 patients, (12 to 21 years) 13 male 12 after 2nd dose Onset 4 days post vaccination hospitalized at Massachusetts General for Children, or Boston Children's Hospital, for myocarditis Presentation Chest pain Elevated cardiac troponin T, after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We performed Extensive antibody profiling, including tests for SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral responses, and assessment for autoantibodies, or antibodies against the human-relevant virome, SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell analysis, and cytokine, and SARS-CoV-2 antigen profiling. Comparator group 45 healthy, asymptomatic, age-matched vaccinated control subjects. Results, things that were the same (Between the myocarditis group and non myocarditis group) Antibody profiling IgG and IgM the same T-cell responses the same (were essentially indistinguishable) Results, things that were different (Between the myocarditis group and non myocarditis group) In the myocarditis group Modest increase in cytokine production (reminiscent of the profile seen in MIS-C) Total leukocytes, specifically neutrophils, significantly increased Markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein, (33.9±22.4 pg/mL), unbound by antibodies, were detected in the plasma of individuals with postvaccine myocarditis, No free spike was detected in asymptomatic vaccinated control subjects (unpaired t test; P less than 0.0001). Why spike protein persisted? In postvaccine myocarditis, the spike protein appears to evade antibody recognition, because the anti-spike antibodies that are generated are produced in adequate quantities with normal functional and neutralization capacity. UK https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/covid-1...
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAdZ10TVNrc


An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Drbeen Medical Lectures
Streamed live on Apr 7, 2023
33 min 38 sec

An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Authors in this manuscript demonstrate a high rate of COVID-19 disease publication retractions. They also provide a few reasons and examples. What is interesting for me is that neglected the mainstream publications and lack of rigor for these as well. Neither are any decent examples of incorrect publications that got readily picked up by the mainstream. Quite a biased and poorly written manuscript. Had to buy it. Which seems to be a waste of money as well

URL list from Friday, Apr. 7 2023

Full article: An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.10... An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/... An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) - PubMed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32573... The risks of POTS after COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 infection: it’s worth a shot | Nature Cardiovascular Research https://www.nature.com/articles/s4416... RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis - The Lancet https://www.thelancet.com/journals/la... Apparent risks of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome diagnoses after COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-Cov-2 Infection | Nature Cardiovascular Research https://www.nature.com/articles/s4416... CIMB | Free Full-Text | Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73 Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line - PubMed https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35723... Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line - PMC https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti... What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing's ‘death penalty' | Science | AAAS https://www.science.org/content/artic...
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jST1mf6Cq0s


Persistent Omicron Lung Infection - Is this why some people are sick all the time?
Vejon Health - Dr. Philip McMillan
Premiered Apr 13, 2023
8 min 23 sec


Watch the full video on Substack. Click on link below: https://philipmcmillan.substack.com/p...

HKUMed finds Omicron SARS-CoV-2 can infect faster and better than Delta in human bronchus but with less severe infection in lung
https://www.med.hku.hk/en/news/press/... Yoon, Soon Ho, Jong Hyuk Lee, and Baek-Nam Kim.

"Chest CT findings in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2: delta versus Omicron variants." Radiology 306.1 (2023): 252-260.
https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/pdf/10.1148...
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


The XBB.1.16 COVID Symptoms Doctors Are Seeing The Most Right Now
Jillian Wilson - HuffPost
Thu, April 20, 2023, 5:45 AM EDT

COVID cases are rising quickly at alarming rates in countries like India and Nepal because of the contagious XBB.1.16 COVID variant — and now it's infecting people in the U.S., too.

XBB.1.16, also referred to as “arcturus,” is a new COVID-19 variant that’s infecting people across the globe. Like BA.5 and BQ.1 from 2022, it’s also an omicron subvariant.

It’s labeled by the World Health Organization as a “variant under monitoring,” according to Jodie Guest, professor of epidemiology at Emory University’s Rollins School of Public Health in Atlanta. (For reference, there are two levels of variants above this classification — variants of interest and variants of concern.)

“The thing we’re watching the most is how fast this is doubling in countries that it’s in,” Guest told HuffPost. It’s currently being tracked in 29 countries, including the United States.

“It started in India, and we’re seeing a 500% increase in the past month in the Southeast Asia region that includes India, Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka [and] The Maldives,” Guest said. “We’re seeing cases beginning a fairly steep uptick in the Eastern Mediterranean region as well.” In the U.S., XBB.1.16 is also contributing to a sizable jump in cases.

“In the United States, we’ve started to notice it increasing over the last month,” said Matthew Binnicker, the director of clinical virology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. “Four weeks ago, [XBB.1.16] represented about 1% of all the sequenced cases, the following week it increased to a little over 2%.” As of last week, it represented a little more than 7% of cases in the U.S. nationwide — though certain parts of the country are being hit with this variant harder than others.

“The CDC also looks by region in the country and it looks like the most prevalent of this variant is in the Southern part of the country in states like Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, where it represents about 20% of the cases that are sequenced in that region,” Binnicker added.

And, unfortunately, new variants are often more transmissible, and that is the case for XBB.1.16. “Our expectation is that this new variant — based on its doubling rate — we are anticipating that it is very transmissible,” Guest said.

The symptoms of this new variant are also a little different from what we’ve seen in the past. How can you spot them and how can you protect yourself? Here’s what to know:


Unlike other variants, red, itchy eyes are a symptom for some people.

Particularly in children, conjunctivitis — red, itchy eyes — has been a reported symptom, according to Binnicker.

Conjunctivitis is “somewhat common with viral illnesses, but it seems to be a new symptom associated with this particular COVID-19 variant that we haven’t observed in past waves caused by previous variants of the virus,” Binnicker said.

You might call this symptom pink eye or red eye, Guest added. And while this tends to be more common in pediatric COVID-19 cases, it can still happen in both adults and elderly people.

What makes this symptom a little confusing is it overlaps with a time when many folks experience red, itchy eyes due to seasonal allergies.

“Depending on where you live, if you’re in the United States, if you’re in a place that’s starting to see the pollination come out, a lot of these symptoms are really similar to what you would see with spring allergies,” Guest said. “And so that does bring up the need to make sure you’re doing COVID tests if you have any of these symptoms.”

Red, itchy eyes have been reported in children infected with XBB.1.16, but adults may experience the symptom as well.


Fevers are higher than in previous COVID variants.


While fevers have long been a sign of a COVID-19 infection, the fever associated with an XBB.1.16 infection is a little different. “We’re also seeing higher-grade fever,” Binnicker said.

A high-grade fever is typically defined as anything above 103 degrees Fahrenheit in adults, though the exact threshold can vary, according to Dr. Ali Khan, the chief medical officer at Oak Street Health.

“Patients should consult a doctor if it remains this high for greater than 24 hours,” Khan said. If you have this high of a fever you may notice chills, sweating and muscle aches, Khan said.

“And it’s easy to become dehydrated — so staying hydrated with water and other fluid replacement drinks is critical,” Khan noted.

Binnicker added that if you do develop a fever, it’s one way to differentiate your infection from allergies. “Allergies aren’t associated typically with a fever ... so, that would be a distinguishing feature of an infection,” Binnicker added.


Otherwise, the symptoms are largely the same as with previous variants.

In addition to higher fevers and red, itchy eyes, an XBB.1.16 infection still resembles an earlier COVID-19 diagnosis, according to the experts. That means issues like a cough, scratchy throat and runny nose are all part of current infections, too, Guest said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes that fatigue, body aches, headache and congestion are also signs of a COVID-19 infection.

Shortness of breath is prevalent in certain populations. “The older you get, you’re more likely to see some conditions with shortness of breath,” Guest said. And, as we know, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing has been a common COVID-19 symptom for the past few years.


Simple measures can help protect you from a COVID-19 infection.

The measures we’ve used for three-plus years to protect ourselves and loved ones from COVID-19 are still the way to protect yourself from an XBB.1.16 infection.

According to Guest, you should stay up-to-date with your vaccinations, wash your hands and take a COVID-19 test if you have any of the symptoms mentioned above. Additionally, mask-wearing remains a good way to control virus spread.

“These are the measures that will protect you and those you might be nearby,” Guest said.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Is it COVID XBB.1.16, allergies, cold or the flu? What you should know about each condition
A new coronavirus variant is spreading amid rising cold and flu cases, as well as seasonal allergies.

Chris Stoodley·Lifestyle and News Editor
Thu, April 20, 2023, 2:45 PM EDT

This article is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Contact a qualified medical professional before engaging in any physical activity, or making any changes to your diet, medication or lifestyle.

It's that time of year again: Sniffles, chills and stuffy noses are, unfortunately, back in style.

Cold and flu cases are currently rising across Canada, and allergy season is on its way despite a sluggish start.

On top of that, a new COVID-19 variant — XBB.1.16 or Arcturus — has emerged and is on the World Health Organization's radar.

Amid an increase in these conditions, overlapping symptoms between COVID-19, allergies and colds can make taking care of yourself confusing.

Read on to learn more about the new COVID-19 variant and how it differs from conditions like seasonal allergies and the common cold.


What is the new COVID-19 variant, XBB.1.16?


Health officials worldwide are keeping watch on a new COVID-19 variant called XBB.1.16, also known as Arcturus. It's an Omicron subvariant the WHO first warned about in March, labelling it a "variant of monitoring."

Believed to be more transmissible, Arcturus is the driving force behind a recent surge of COVID-19 cases in India. On Tuesday, the country's health ministry reported 61,233 COVID-19 cases — a notable jump from the 15,208 cases reported on March 31.

XBB.1.16 has also been detected in at least 29 countries, including the United States. Canada has not reported any cases of the variant.


Is XBB.1.16 dangerous?


Despite India seeing a rise in COVID-19 cases, the number of hospitalizations in the country has not increased.

In the variant's future, an infectious disease specialist and professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco said that should likely remain the case.

"I doubt it will lead to too many new hospitalizations or deaths," Dr. Monica Gandhi told Yahoo News. "I was just in India. ... There was an increase in cases but not an increase in hospitalizations."

Gandhi added that the coronavirus won't be entirely eradicated and it will continue to evolve. However, future variants won't necessarily become more dangerous. She also explained that most people have immunity against the virus, either from vaccines, infections or both.

"We're gonna have to live with this [virus] and we're going to see cases go up and down if we get a new subvariant that's more transmissible," she shared. "But hopefully, it will not lead to an increase in severe disease."


What are the symptoms of XBB.1.16?


Unlike previous coronavirus strains, some doctors believe Arcturus might cause conjunctivitis — often called pink eye — in children and adolescents.

Vipin M. Vashishtha, an Indian pediatrician and member of the WHO's Vaccine Safety Net program tweeted earlier this month that he started getting pediatric cases again after a six-month gap. He noted that infants had high fevers as well as colds and coughs, along with "itchy conjunctivitis with sticky eyes."

But pediatric infectious diseases expert Dr. Michael Chang told Yahoo News that pink eye cases might not necessarily be linked to a coronavirus infection and there's a lack of "context."

"Presumably, these kids are testing positive for COVID, but we don't know if they're testing positive for anything else either," he noted.

Chang added that conjunctivitis can be caused by other viruses that are circulating, such as adenovirus.

In children, pulmonologist Dr. Gurmeet Singh Chabbra told the Hindustan Times that Arcturus symptoms include sore throat, runny nose, blocked nose, fever, cough and difficulty swallowing.

For adults, he added that people with Arcturus could see those same symptoms, as well as a hoarse voice, shortness of breath, headache, body aches, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea and chest pain. While loss of taste and smell was more prevalent with previous coronavirus strains, Chabbra noted those symptoms are no longer as common.


How do those symptoms differ from allergies, colds and the flu?


While a lot of COVID-19 symptoms overlap with symptoms presented by other conditions, Ontario-based allergy specialist Dr. Anne Ellis told Yahoo Canada last summer it's important to rule out any confusion.

For allergic rhinitis or hay fever, some of those overlapping symptoms including nasal congestion, runny nose, cough and fatigue. But Ellis says an itchy nose and watery eyes are both a "hallmark of histamine release" connected to allergies.

"That does put you much more in the direction of 'it's probably allergies' as opposed to COVID-19, which again, does cause runny nose, sneezing and coughing, but not so much itchy nose or itchy watery eyes," she explained.

However, she noted that you likely have COVID-19 if you're also experiencing a "wicked sore throat."

According to Mayo Clinic, headache, fever, muscle aches, nausea and vomiting are often symptoms with COVID-19, but are rarely or never symptoms with allergies. Sneezing is also one symptom that's common with allergies but not with COVID-19.

The differences are also similar for colds, where headaches are rare and nausea and diarrhea typically never occur. However, cough, muscle aches, fever and sore throat are usually symptoms that come with a cold.

The lines blur between COVID-19 and a case of the flu, where almost all symptoms usually occur with either virus. While nausea and diarrhea sometimes occur with either illness, they're more common in children with the flu, according to Mayo Clinic.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), people with COVID-19 may take longer to present symptoms than people who have the flu. Moreover, they may be contagious for longer periods of time.

"You cannot tell the difference between flu and COVID-19 by the symptoms alone because they have some of the same signs and symptoms," according to the CDC. "Specific testing is needed to tell what the illness is and to confirm a diagnosis."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Arcturus: How many cases of new variant are in UK?
Eleanor Noyce - The Independent
Thu, April 20, 2023, 3:27 AM EDT

A new Covid strain dubbed Arcturus which is driving a surge of infections in India has been detected in the UK.

First identified in January, Arcturus - also known as Omicron subvariant XBB.1.16 - has been monitored by the World Health Organisation since 22 March.

It has been detected in 22 countries, including in the UK, US and India, and research suggests that the strain could be 1.2 times more infectious than the last major sub-variant.

The new strain is suspected to be behind a growing number of cases in India, with health authorities in Delhi recording 11,109 new Covid infections on Friday.

Although Arcturus has been detected in the UK, it is not spreading on the same scale - with the UKHSA saying that 66 cases have been recorded up to 11 April.

Comparatively, 57,842 overall Covid infections were recorded in the week up to Thursday, a 20 per cent drop from the previous seven days.

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) said it is not unexpected for new variants to emerge and emphasised the importance of vaccination.

"It is not unexpected to see new variants of SARS-CoV-2 emerge. UKHSA continues to analyse all available data relating to SARS-CoV-2 variants in the UK and abroad and is monitoring the situation closely”, a UKHSA spokesperson told The Independent.

"Vaccination remains our best defence against future Covid-19 waves, so it is still as important as ever that people come take up all the doses for which they are eligible as soon as possible."

One University of Warwick virologist told The Independent this week that the rise of the new variant shows that “we’re not yet out of the woods”.

“We have to keep an eye on it,” Professor Lawrence Young said. “When a new variant arises you have to find out if it’s more infectious, more disease-causing, is it more pathogenic? And what’s going to happen in terms of immune protection?

“These kinds of things highlight the importance of genomic surveillance but a lot of countries including our own have let our guards down a bit and we can’t be sure what variants are around and what level of infection they’re causing until we see a significant outbreak.”
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


The Spike
A growing number of scientists are sounding the alarm about the risks of both COVID and its cures

by Clayton Fox
April 20, 2023

Those raising evidence-based concerns about the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines are often labeled purveyors of misinformation, and derided as anti-scientific conspiracy theorists and paranoid kooks. Or worse. Bill Kristol tweeted in late 2021 that, “there is blood on the hands in 2021 of the unvaccinated and especially their enablers and encouragers who know better.” However, there are a number of prominent scientists, doctors, and independent researchers who are wary of both COVID infection and the vaccines. Many of these figures are worried about one particular piece of the SARS-CoV-2 virus: the spike protein, which allows the virus to enter your cells, and which was chosen to be the featured element used in the Moderna, Pfizer, J&J, and AstraZeneca vaccines. The available evidence shows that COVID, especially in light of new forms of treatment, is not as acutely deadly as once feared, and while mortality attributable to the COVID vaccines has not been definitively characterized, it is likely relatively rare. But some scientists are concerned by the potential effects of repeated exposure to the spike protein, and therefore the advisability of further boosters that contain it, given that we are going to be frequently reexposed to the circulating virus. Those voicing these concerns, however, have been subjected to censorship, ostracization, and damaging attacks on their reputations.

Take, for example, evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein. On his DarkHorse podcast on June 21, 2021, Weinstein sat down with mRNA pioneer Dr. Robert Malone (COVID-vaccinated) and Silicon Valley inventor turned COVID investigator Steve Kirsch (COVID-vaccinated) to discuss the potential dangers of the vaccines rapidly being distributed around the country and across the world. The focus? The spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which is produced when the mRNA from the vaccines enters your cells.

By June 21, 2021, Weinstein felt there was enough evidence to demonstrate that the spike was “cytotoxic” (toxic to cells) and asked for Malone’s take. Malone not only concurred but said he had already warned the FDA about that potential risk “months and months and months ago.” On June 3, 2021, according to an email provided to Tablet, Malone contacted Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, regarding his concerns about “circulating spike protein, and the associated implications.” Malone said on the podcast that his contacts inside the FDA ultimately felt that his evidence wasn’t strong enough to prove that the spike alone was “biologically active.” Dr. Marks has not responded to Tablet’s requests for comment.

Not one week after Weinstein’s podcast, as the concept of a toxic spike protein spread across the internet, the new fact-checking police leapt into action. Reuters wrote, “Posts are sharing the false statement that the spike protein in COVID-19 vaccines is cytotoxic, suggesting that it kills or damages cells. There is no evidence to support this,” and quoted a couple of experts. The fact check deemed Weinstein’s claim “false,” just as it had once done with the assertion that COVID-19 was likely created in a laboratory. As it turns out, the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is now considered extremely toxic to many human systems—a conclusion reached in paper after paper. Evidence to support this has also been found in tissue samples from deceased COVID patients, and those who were suspected to have died due to complications from vaccination, as well as those with post-vaccination myocarditis.

Every virus, like every organism, is made up of proteins, which are in turn made up of complex chains of amino acids. These are the microstructures of life itself. Coronaviruses like SARS-CoV-2 are composed of four main types of proteins: envelope, membrane, nucleocapsid, and spike. The spike protein’s primary role is to help the virus attach to cells, gain entry, and propagate itself. To begin with, the ruthless efficiency of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein makes it an extremely dangerous bit of biology. But also, this spike is itself a pathogen. This assessment is not breaking news; researchers who studied past human coronaviruses, especially SARS, noted that the spike protein can cause inflammation and increase disease severity. In fact, a 2005 study in the prestigious Nature Medicine journal proved that the spike protein of SARS, due to its effects on the now-famous ACE2 receptor, can “cause severe and often lethal lung failure.”

But the SARS-CoV-2 version makes those past spikes look simple by comparison. Dr. Paul Marik, the founder and chief scientific officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, and the second-most-published critical care physician in the world, told Tablet that the only substance he’s aware of as toxic as the SARS-CoV-2 spike is cyanide. “Cyanide kills you quickly, spike kills you over a prolonged period of time. It’s truly astonishing the things it does.” Marik thinks that spike is the primary driver of COVID’s virulence, which he saw firsthand while treating severely ill patients during the first wave of the pandemic. “It is the most vicious disease I have ever seen. People have said this is like the flu, and it’s no big deal. Let me tell you … It is an extremely evil disease. It’s difficult to treat. It responds poorly and it kills people slowly over time.”

Veteran viral pathologist Dr. Gerard Nuovo, a retired professor at Ohio State University and an active researcher of COVID-19, was similarly shocked after looking at tissue samples from people who died from the illness. “I said to myself, I have never seen a fatal viral infection with so much viral protein in the target organ, which as you know is the lung.”

Here are some of the things that the spike protein has been found to have the potential to do. In the cardiovascular system: One segment of spike can signal the cells of blood vessels in the lungs to grow, causing “thickened” vessel walls typical of pulmonary hypertension, a condition that makes it harder for the heart to pump blood into the lungs; that same fragment, S1, can damage the cells which line the inside of every blood vessel in the body including the lungs; can damage the cells in your heart which work in concert with those cells; can cause the heart to become fibrotic; and can, says this 2022 paper, even contribute to the development of myocarditis, an inflammatory condition of the heart muscle which weakens it, and can cause sudden death in recovered patients. The Cleveland Clinic estimates that the survival rate for myocarditis is 80% after one year and 50% after five.

In the blood: Spike can deform our clotting cells—or platelets—sometimes irreversibly activating them; it binds to blood clotting proteins and creates clots that are “structurally abnormal”; it can cause microclots from red blood cells clumping together that deplete blood oxygen levels. David Scheim, an independent researcher who co-authored a study published in December 2022 about those microclots with a team from France’s famed Méditerranée Infection Institute in Marseille, told Tablet that their experiment revealed the red blood cell clumping “is actually visible [to the naked eye], it forms a film so you don’t even need a microscope, you just add the spike to a suspension of red blood cells and you see this clumping.”

In the brain: The S1 fragment of spike has been shown to move straight across the blood brain barrier, the all-important gatekeeper of the brain, in humanized mice. Once it’s in, the spike can damage cells that line the walls of blood vessels in the brain, lead to memory loss, or disrupt the mitochondria of similar brain blood vessel cells, potentially triggering “a more severe form of stroke.” Perhaps more ominously, certain sequences on the S1 portion of the spike are able to bind to amyloid proteins that have been known to cause severe neurological disease. The proteins that spike is able to bind are related to the development of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and Creutzfeldt-Jacob, an irreversible, and fatal brain disease. Additionally, the spike itself may be considered an amyloid, a misfolded protein that can grow and form fibrous plaques. Think of the 1958 horror classic The Blob, but at a cellular level.

In short, spike can contribute to cardiovascular damage, brain damage, blood clots, autoimmunity, cell deformation, and cell-to-cell fusion. As Walter Chesnut, an independent researcher, has previously written, “It is a Swiss Army Knife of death.” Chesnut co-authored an article in 2021 with a group of scientists, doctors, and journalists that included Luc Montagnier (who won a Nobel Prize for his discovery of HIV) outlining what may tie together all of the spike’s nasty effects. They theorized that spike preys on our DNA, and that repeated exposure will prematurely age us, leading to earlier death by natural causes. “Spike is spike. The more the worse,” Chesnut told Tablet.

The Chesnut and Montagnier et al. hypothesis that spike protein can accelerate biological aging is still novel, and not widely accepted. Professor Masfique Mehedi, a microbiologist and virologist who has studied Ebola at the prestigious Rocky Mountain Laboratories, and whose work shows that COVID spike can enter the nucleus of our cells, told Tablet that their hypothesis may be “premature.” There is, however, mounting evidence that the larger idea that vaccine-induced spike could be harming people is worth taking seriously.

The spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is not precisely identical to the spike used in the vaccines, though they are very similar. First of all, at any given point in time, the wild-type spike is mutating (e.g., omicron) with unknown consequences, whereas the vaccine spikes are predetermined. But the design of the vaccine spike was deliberately altered from the original in at least two key ways: to increase stability, and to “lock” the protein in its “prefusion” shape, in the hopes that it would teach our immune system to recognize and neutralize the virus’s spike before it has a chance to bind to our cells.

One argument against the spike protein hypothesis of vaccine injury—meaning the notion that exposure to the spike protein is the main cause of the vaccine’s potentially severe side effects—is that due to the changes locking the spike in its prefusion shape, it can’t cause the damage alleged. However, many of the examples provided above of spike-related pathologies don’t require cell-binding, but rather just require exposure.

Because of how dangerous it is, some believe that it’s a secondary question where the spike is coming from, COVID or the treatments for COVID—all that really matters is that it’s coming into contact with your cells. “The more spike, the greater the risk. So if you have COVID and get vaccinated, you have a greater risk, if you are vaccinated and you get COVID, you have a greater risk,” Marik said. In February 2023, a group of researchers from the University of Colorado seemed to affirm Marik’s contention. After assessing a small group of patients with myocarditis, they concluded: “These observations suggest that myocardial injury during COVID-19 or after mRNA vaccination may be produced by the same Spike protein–based mechanism, which may be amenable to preventative or therapeutic strategies.”

A second argument against the hypothesis is that there simply isn’t enough spike released into the blood after vaccination to cause the kinds of issues we’ve seen in COVID patients. “The low doses of the spike protein in the vaccine, in our experiments anyway, didn’t cause any recognizable damage,” Dr. Nuovo told Tablet. Nonetheless, Nuovo abstained from getting his third vaccine dose because “the initial vaccine data showed that people who didn’t get the booster were still very well protected against severe COVID, and the second point was I didn’t see the point of introducing more spike protein into my body if there was no benefit to be coming from it … because the spike protein per se does have some toxicity associated with it.”

There is another way that the vaccines might be causing harm. Due to FOIA requests from Judicial Watch and others, we now know that the vaccine material travels beyond the upper arm muscle throughout the body, in spite of the CDC’s web page maintaining the 2020 narrative that it stays put. Because the vaccines were designed to express the full-length spike protein in our cells, some researchers like professor Mehedi worry that the vaccines could be inducing a major attack of the immune system against healthy cells throughout the body. “An unfortunate & unimaginable detrimental consequence … face[d] by everyone who took it due to a poor and unacceptable design by the low-grade researchers and opportunistic makers.”

That kind of candor is hard to come by when the price for expressing an idea or trying to test a theory can be the destruction of one’s career and social life, as happened to numerous researchers and scientists, including Marik. For his views on COVID treatment in the ICU, like not wanting to use the highly toxic antiviral drug remdesivir, and probably for his stated viewpoint on the spike protein and vaccines, Marik was suspended from his role as ICU director of Sentara General Hospital in Norfolk, Virginia, in late 2021. He resigned from his role as professor at East Virginia Medical School shortly after. Marik says his colleagues no longer talk to him. “Not a single one.”

Yet, the data has a way of piling up, even if many in science, media, and government have avoided acknowledging its implications: By October of last year there had been at least 1,250 studies published in medical journals documenting events as disparate as Bell’s palsy, multiple sclerosis, central venous thrombosis, encephalitis, inflammatory bowel disease, myocarditis, etc. after vaccination. For one awful example, take this recent case report from Tokushima University in Japan documenting the “fatal multi organ inflammation” of a 14-year-old girl after her booster. Then there are the adverse event-monitoring systems, the joint-run CDC/FDA VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) being the most notable. As of March 31, 2023, there have been over 1.5 million adverse events reported in the system, with nearly 200,000 involving hospitalization. While VAERS is a very imperfect system, with some critics claiming massive underreporting and others, overreporting, there is a clear signal that injuries are occurring. German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach said in a March 2023 interview that the rate of “serious vaccination damage” may be as high as 1 in 10,000.

Defining the ultimate numbers of how many people are being affected by various side effects is a difficult task, but looking at the original trial data does give some context. Last September, a team of researchers, including two from UCLA, one from Stanford, and one editor of the British Medical Journal, published a study in Vaccine titled, “Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults,” which reviewed the Pfizer and Moderna trial data. While the investigators note that their study was hampered by their lack of access to the raw data, which the companies have not made available, they concluded that, “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.”

It is too early to say definitively if these vaccine injuries are caused by the spike protein (or the proprietary lipid nanoparticles or the fragmented, low-quality mRNA or something else) but there is certainly enough evidence to consider this as a possibility. And yet the doctors and scientists who have been trying to raise significant questions have been often ignored, bullied, or silenced.

Bret Weinstein’s podcast was demonetized on YouTube. Walter Chesnut was removed from Twitter for half of 2022. A peer-reviewed paper, which concluded that the spike protein can actually damage our DNA’s ability to repair itself—not all that distant from what Chesnut is now proposing—was retracted by the journal Viruses, though the explanation seemed at least as political as purely scientific. Indeed, in working on this piece, Microsoft Word even prevented me from opening the link to Chesnut and Montagnier’s France Soir article about the aging hypothesis, stating in its pop-up warning, “conclusions related to vaccine safety are not validated and lacked experimental support.” The state of California passed a law last year that essentially muzzles doctors from offering a dissenting opinion on the “contemporary scientific consensus” on COVID. Professor Mehedi, who is more concerned about the vaccines turning the immune system against our cells than about spike, told Tablet that doubts he’s raised about the vaccine design and the subsequent potential for damage are simply ignored by his fellow scientists. “Nobody listen [S ] to me, even,” he said, adding: “We are not critical thinkers.”

The COVID epoch is still very young. SARS-CoV-2 most likely didn’t exist before 2019; mRNA tech has been in the works for 30 years, but it had never been deployed widely in humans until 2021. The Moderna vaccine was designed in two days, with the company’s CEO, Stepháne Bancel, telling The New York Times, “this is not a complicated virus.” The vaccine’s adverse events, meanwhile, have been studied for only about two years now, and have been downplayed by our public health apparatus and media. There are immunologists who believe that repeated exposure to SARS-CoV-2 could be extremely detrimental to our basic immune function over time, and others who believe the vaccine can cause similar devastation to our defenses, both potentially explaining the reemergence of rare latent viral syndromes and fungal infections now emerging around the world. We don’t know what we don’t know. In fact, we’re just starting to find out.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


The False Messaging on Vaccines Given to Pregnant Women
By David Bell
April 19, 2023

The mRNA vaccines were released globally in early 2021 with the slogan ‘safe and effective.’ Unusually for a new class of medicine, they were soon recommended by public health authorities for pregnant women.

By late 2021, working-age women, including those who were pregnant, were being thrown out of employment for not agreeing to be injected. Those who took the mRNA vaccines did so based on trust in health authorities – the assumption being that they would not have been approved if the evidence was not absolutely clear. The role of regulatory agencies was to protect the public and, therefore, if they were approved, the “vaccines” were safe.

Recently, a lengthy vaccine evaluation report sponsored by Pfizer and submitted to the Australian regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) dated January 2021 was released under a Freedom of Information request.

The report contains significant new information that had been suppressed by the TGA and by Pfizer itself. Much of this relates directly to the issue of safety in pregnancy, and impacts on the fertility of women of child-bearing age. The whole report is important, but four key data points stand out;
  • The rapid decline in antibody and T cells in monkeys following second dose,
  • Biodistribution studies (previously released in 2021 through an FOI request in Japan)
  • Data on the impact of fertility outcomes for rats.
  • Data on fetal abnormalities in rats.
We focus on the last three items as, for the first point, it is enough to quote the report itself “Antibodies and T cells in monkeys declined quickly over 5 weeks after the second dose of BNT162b2 (V9), raising concerns over long term immunity…”.

This point indicates that the regulators should have anticipated the rapid decline in efficacy and must have known at the outset that the initial two-dose “course” was unlikely to confer lasting immunity and would, therefore, require multiple repeat doses. This expectation of failure was recently highlighted by Dr Anthony Fauci, former director at the US NIH.

The three remaining items should be a major cause for alarm with the pharmaceutical regulatory system. The first, as revealed in 2021, involved biodistribution studies of the lipid nanoparticle carrier in rats, using a luciferase enzyme to substitute for the mRNA vaccine.

The study demonstrated that the vaccine will travel throughout the body after injection, and is found not only at the injection site, but in all organs tested, with high concentration in the ovaries, liver, adrenal glands, and spleen. Authorities who assured vaccinated people in early 2021 that the vaccine stays in the arm were, as we have known for two years, lying.

Lipid concentration per gram, recalculated as percentage of injection site.

chart.JPG

In terms of the impact on fertility and fetal abnormalities, the report includes a study of 44 rats and describes two main metrics, the pre-implantation loss rate and the number of abnormalities per fetus (also expressed per litter). In both cases the metrics were significantly higher for vaccinated rats than for unvaccinated rats.

Roughly speaking, the pre-implantation loss ratio compares the estimated number of fertilised ova and the ova implanted in the uterus. The table below is taken from the report itself and clearly shows the loss rate for vaccinated (BNT162b2) is more than double the unvaccinated control group.

unnamed-34.png


In a case control study, a doubling of pregnancy loss in the intervention group would represent a serious safety signal. Rather than take this seriously, the authors of the report then compared the outcomes to historical data on other rat populations; 27 studies of 568 rats, and ignored the outcome because other populations had recorded higher overall losses; this range is shown in the right hand column as 2.6 percent to 13.8 percent. This analysis is alarming as remaining below the highest previously recorded pregnancy loss levels in populations elsewhere is not a safe outcome when the intervention is also associated with double the harm of the control group.

A similar pattern is observed for fetal malformations with higher abnormality rate in each of the 12 categories studied. Of the 11 categories where Pfizer confirmed the data is correct, there are only 2 total abnormalities in the control group, versus 28 with the mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2). In the category which Pfizer labeled as unreliable (supernumerary lumbar ribs), there were 3 abnormalities in the control group and 12 in the vaccinated group.

As with the increased pregnancy losses, Pfizer simply ignored the trend and compared the results with historical data from other rat populations. This is very significant as it is seen across every malformation category. The case control nature of the study design is again ignored, in order to apparently hide the negative outcomes demonstrated.

These data indicate that there is NO basis for saying the vaccine is safe in pregnancy. Concentration of LNPs in ovaries, a doubled pregnancy loss rate, and raised fetal abnormality rate across all measured categories indicates that designating a safe-in-pregnancy label (B1 category in Australia) was contrary to available evidence. The data implies that not only was the Government’s “safe and effective” sloganeering not accurate, it was totally misleading with respect to the safety data available.

Known unknowns and missing data:

Despite the negative nature of these outcomes, the classification of this medicine as a vaccine appears to have precluded further animal trials. Historically, new medicines, especially in classes never used in humans before, would require a very rigorous assessment. Vaccines, however, have a lower burden of proof requirement than ordinary medicines. By classifying mRNA injections as “vaccines,” this ensured regulatory approval with significantly less stringent safety requirements, as the TGA itself notes.

In fact, mRNA gene therapies function more like medicines than vaccines in that they modify the internal functioning of cells, rather than stimulating an immune response to presence of an antigen. Labelling these gene therapy products as vaccines means that, as far as we are aware, even today no genotoxicity or carcinogenicity studies have been carried out.

This report, which was only released after a FOI request, is extremely disturbing as it shows that authorities knew of major risks with mRNA Covid-19 vaccination while simultaneously assuring populations that it was safe. The fact that mainstream media has (as far as we are aware) completely ignored the newly released data should reinforce the need for caution when listening to the advice of public health messaging regarding Covid-19 vaccination.

Firstly, it is clear that regulators, drug companies and the government would have known that vaccine-induced immunity tails off very rapidly with this being observed in real world data with efficacy against infection falling to zero. Accordingly, the single point in time figures of 95 percent and 62 percent efficacy against cases quoted for Pfizer and ChAdOx1 (AstraZeneca) respectively meant almost nothing since a rapid decline was to be expected.

Similarly, the concept of a two-dose “course” was inaccurate as endless boosters would likely have been required given the rapid decline in antibodies and T-cells observed in the monkeys.

Most importantly, the data does not in any way support the “safe” conclusion with respect to pregnancy; a conclusion of dangerous would be more accurate. The assurances of safety were, therefore, completely misleading given the data disclosures in the recent freedom of information release.

Regulatory authorities knew that animal studies showed major red flags regarding both pregnancy loss and fetal abnormalities, consistent with the systemic distribution of the mRNA they had been hiding from the public.

Even in March 2023, it is impossible to give these assurances, given the fact that important studies have not, to the best of our knowledge, been done.

Pfizer elected not to follow up the vast majority of pregnancies in the original human trials, despite high miscarriage rates in the minority they did follow. Given all of the problems with efficacy and safety, the administration of these products to women of childbearing age, and administration to healthy pregnant women is high-risk and not justified.

Assisting in co-authorship for this essay is Alex Kriel, a physicist and was one of the first people to highlight the flawed nature of the Imperial COVID model, and he is a founder of the Thinking Coalition which comprises a group of citizens who are concerned about Government overreach.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


You Might Want To Change How You're Doing At-Home COVID Tests
Julia Ries - Huff Post
Fri, April 21, 2023, 11:53 AM EDT

By now, you’ve probably read a million articles and instructions on the proper way to swab with an at-home COVID-19 test. You typically need to put the soft end of the swab about half an inch into your nose, swirl it around each nostril for roughly 15 seconds, mix it with some liquid, and let the sample sit in the kit for the exact right amount of time. Then, you want to redo that process every couple of days. (Repeat testing, data shows, significantly improves your chances of getting an accurate test result.)

Now, more recent evidence suggests that you can take your at-home tests to the next level by swabbing more sites than just your nose. Where you swab might matter just as much as when you swab.

A lot of virus needs to be present for rapid tests to produce a positive result, so their performance depends on swabbing where there’s a large amount of virus in your body, scientists say. Sometimes that’s in your nose, and other times it’s not. So the more places you swab, the more opportunities your test kit has to detect the virus.

Here’s why — and how — you might want to perform some additional swabbing the next time you test yourself for COVID-19.

What Experts Have Learned About Swabbing Multiple Sites

Although the Food and Drug Administration only authorizes at-home tests for nasal swabbing at this time, recent research has shown that also testing your throat and mouth (with some discretion) may be the ticket to getting a positive result.

For most people, the COVID-19 virus is detectable in oral samples (aka saliva from the mouth) days before it’s detectable via nasal swabs, according to Natasha Shelby, a study administrator for COVID-19 research at the California Institute of Technology.

In research she’s worked on, some people tested negative with nasal swabs for up to eight days while testing positive with a saliva sample, throat swab or nasal PCR lab test (which is much more sensitive, and therefore accurate, than the kits typically sold at pharmacies).

“In some cases, virus was seen at extremely high and presumably infectious levels in the throat while nasal swabs remained negative,” Shelby told HuffPost — with a small number of infected people never returning a positive result via nasal swabs, likely due to a low viral load in the nose.

“This finding clearly contradicts the popular belief that daily antigen testing is more effective than delayed but high-sensitivity PCR testing,” she said. Testing multiple sites is the way to go, especially early on in an infection since viral loads can vary between different sites, Shelby added.

There's a chance that swabbing multiple sites could help you get a more accurate at-home COVID-19 test.

Here’s How To Properly Swab Yourself

Though there appears to be a benefit to swabbing multiple sites, you don’t want to use the same swab on, say, your throat and nose, according to Rustem Ismagilov, a professor of chemistry and chemical engineering at Caltech and principal investigator for COVID-19 studies at the school. This could actually hurt the performance of tests specifically designed for the nose, he said, so you should use a separate swab for each location.

“When I had to test, I ran two separate tests: one on the throat swab and one on the nasal swab,” Ismagilov said.

Some people on social media report doing the same — receiving a negative result on a nasal swab but a positive result when dabbing their throat.

On the other hand, Dr. Sheldon Campbell, a lab testing expert at Yale Medicine and a professor of pathology at Yale School of Medicine, recommended sticking to the FDA-approved guidance until more data is available. Still, there are other ways to improve your chances of getting an accurate result.

Campbell said you don’t want to start testing yourself immediately after being around someone who has COVID-19 because the odds of testing positive then are slim, even if you’ve been infected. People’s viral loads are typically low at the start of an infection, so he recommended testing yourself every 48 hours — at two days, five days, and seven days after an exposure — or whenever you develop symptoms.

“You want to retest periodically because your chances of getting a positive in an infection improve,” Campbell said.

Another tip is to swab when you first wake up. Shelby’s research team found that taking a COVID-19 test in the morning was more effective than taking it at night.

“If you must use an antigen test, you could increase the effectiveness of that test by taking it first thing in the morning,” she said.

Finally, store-bought tests aren’t meant for older adults, people who are immunocompromised or others at high risk, said Campbell. If you’re potentially vulnerable to serious disease and may require treatment like Paxlovid medication, he recommended that you get a PCR lab test.

Ismagilov said he hopes the FDA will consider more than just nasal swabs for at-home tests in the future. (Canada, the U.K. and Israel have already approved throat-nasal kits.) The agency would have to conduct new studies to re-validate the tests for swabbing other sites, but Ismagilov and other scientists say that’d be worth it in case a new variant emerges that is most detectable in the mouth or throat.

“Knowing which tests work with throat swabs would at least leave us prepared to deal with a variant like that,” Ismagilov said.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Lockdowns: Excerpt from the Announcement Speech
By Brownstone InstituteBrownstone Institute
April 22, 2023

On April 19, 2023, Robert F. Kennedy announced his intention to challenge Biden in the Democratic primary for president. As part of his announcement speech in Boston, he spoke bluntly about Covid lockdowns. What follows is the relevant excerpt of that speech. You can read the full text here.


I want to move on to another topic that nobody’s going to want to talk about. But I’m going to talk about lockdowns. Nobody wants to talk about it. But we need to understand.

You know I grew up at a time that economists call the great prosperity. It’s when the American middle class between 1945 and 75. Grew to be the biggest economic engine on the face of the earth.

I mean we were the economy in the globe. We made everything and everybody looked to us not only for goods but for moral leadership and we became the most powerful country in the world. Unrivaled. It was because we had a stable democracy with institutions that people trusted the press that told us the truth.

Everybody knows it’s an economic and political economic rule. You cannot have democracy in a society where there is high concentrations of wealth and widespread poverty. You need a middle class or you don’t get democracy. That is a law. You cannot do it, you cannot do it unless you have a big middle class. We had that. But since the early 1980s there’s been a systematic attack on our middle class.

The coup de grace was a lockdown. Lockdown was the biggest shift in wealth in human history. I’m going to tell you about that in a second. I blame President Trump for the lockdown. President Trump gets blamed for a lot of things that he didn’t do and he gets blamed for some things that he did too. But the worst thing that he did to this country, to our civil rights, to our economy, and to the middle class in this country, was a lockdown.

In fairness let me just make this point. Trump will tell people, well the lockdown wasn’t my idea. It was my bureaucrats. They rolled me on it. I was saying we shouldn’t do it. But that’s not a good enough excuse. He was the president of the United States. As Harry Truman said, the buck stops here.

Six hundred doctors signed a letter to President Trump begging him not to do the lockdowns. They pointed out that at that time, all of the pandemic protocols anywhere in the world, the WHO, the CDC, everywhere, the European health agency, all said you never do mass lockdowns. It causes much worse havoc and deaths and injuries than if you do the standard protocol which is you lock down the sick, you protect the vulnerable, and you let everybody else go back to work.

Otherwise you are going to wreak havoc.

I wrote about it. On Instagram I was writing every day. I was citing these economic studies that showed every point in unemployment you get 37,000 excess deaths from heart attack, suicides, plus imprisonments.

I was writing about this and they dumped me from the platform. They said that’s misinformation. But it was not. People were saying it. People knew it. It wasn’t just me. We now know of course that it’s true. Now study after study and every comparison between the states and nations that locked down compared to those who didn’t has shown the ones who locked down had worse Covid death.

Numbers came out this week for Sweden, which was the only country in Europe that didn’t lock down. It had the lowest excess deaths in Europe, which is very predictable.

The nation that led lockdowns was the US and we had the highest body count of Covid on Earth. We have 4.2 percent of the world’s population yet 16 percent of the Covid deaths. At some point, even the media is going to have to stop saying that this was a success story.

The health issues were almost dwarfed by the economic cataclysm that befell our country. The IMF and Harvard study by Larry Summers showed that the cost of the lockdown to the United States was $16 trillion. $16 trillion for nothing!

We shifted $4 trillion from the middle class in this country to the super-rich. We created 500 new billionaires. The existing billionaires increased their wealth, according to the Oxfam study that came out three days ago, by 30 percent. This was a gift to the rich. And guess what? The ones who got rich were social media companies like Amazon and Facebook and Microsoft that were conspiring with President Trump’s White House to censor people like me.

So the very people who were profiting on those lockdowns were the ones who were strip-mining the wealth from the middle class in this country. Amazon got to close down all of its competitors. 3.3 million businesses shut down.

I’m in a lawsuit involving Amazon for censoring one of my books. They were censoring people who criticized the lockdowns while they were raking in the money from the lockdowns. And unfortunately, President Trump’s White House was colluding with them.

41 percent of black businesses shut down, most of them permanently.

I want to introduce you to somebody. This is Anthony Caldwell. Can you stand Anthony and Yvette? Just wave to people. Anthony Caldwell is from Boston. He was a chef, and a very very successful chef, in this town for 19 years. He saved every penny he had to build their dream, which was that he would have his own restaurant by the time he was 50 years old. It’s called 50 Kitchen.

It was the hottest spot in Dorchester, which is the town that my grandfather and grandmother lived. They were turning away crowds. Boston magazine called them a culinary genius.

It was a mix of Asian fusion food with soul food. Then the lockdowns came. Anthony told me his customers were gone. He was looking out the window staring out all day with this with the chairs stacked in his dining room and no customers.

The federal government gave him $17,000. They told him he had to spend it all within eight weeks or he had to pay it back. He said to me, how do I spend $17,000 with no customers? He had to let go of seven of his servers.

Finally he kept it open for a year without paying for himself. Then he closed it down and went bankrupt. He now owes $250,000.

That story can be told thousands upon thousands upon thousands of times in black communities all over this country. These lockdowns were a war on the poor and they were a war on American children. According to a Brown University study, children in this country, toddlers, lost 22 IQ points. One-third of children, throughout their school careers, are going to need remedial education.

Children all over the country miss their milestones. What is the CDC’s response? The CDC five months ago revised its milestones. Now a child no longer is expected to walk at one year. Now they have 18 months. And now a child does not have to have 50 words in 24 months. It’s 30 months. Instead of fixing the problem they are trying to cover it up.

The only indicia of social decline that actually improved during the pandemic was child abuse. It dropped but it was just an artifact of data gathering. Why? Because child abuse is reported by the schools. And the schools were closed. The kids were locked at home with their abusers. 55 percent of teenagers report being abused during the lockdowns, 13 percent physically abused.

It was also the schools were the places where people had hot lunches, where kids stayed at home watching screens or eating potato chips. We gained on average 29 pounds. And it was the obesity that killed you from Covid. We did the inverse of what you want to do.

Public Health authorities went to every black neighborhood and locked down the basketball courts so people couldn’t exercise. They could not even get in the sunlight. If they couldn’t lock down the courts, they removed the basketball hoops.

All of us suffered from it but the black communities, the minority communities, suffered the worst. 25 percent of teenagers reported going hungry. 20 percent had suicide ideation. 9 percent tried to commit suicide. Suicide is now the largest cause of death among black children.

These are just some of the horrifying data. And I could go on and on. But I’m not going to.

I want to talk about another issue which is the closing down of our rights. Not only did we start censoring people at the very very beginning. Hamilton and Adams said they put freedom of expression as the First Amendment because all the other rights depend on that. If you give a government license to silence its critics, it now has license for any atrocity.

So as soon as they knew they could censor us, they went after every other part of the First Amendment, including the freedom of worship. They closed every Church in this country without any scientific citation for a year.

They did it without any notice or comment. Rule-making democracy was simply abolished. Then they went after freedom of assembly. They told us we had to social distance. They went after our property rights in the Fifth Amendment. They closed 3.3 million businesses with no due process and no just compensation.

They got rid of Seventh Amendment jury trials. They said that if you’re involved with the countermeasure, no matter how egregious the injury you cause, no matter how negligent you are, no matter how reckless, you cannot be sued.

Here’s what the Seventh Amendment says. It says that no American shall be deprived the right of a trial before a jury of his peers in cases or controversies exceeding 25 dollars.

There’s no pandemic exception.

And by the way, the Framers knew all about pandemics. There were two epidemics during the Revolutionary War. One was a malaria epidemic in Virginia that decimated General Washington’s troops. There was a smallpox epidemic that disabled the armies of New England at the very moment they conquered Quebec. They had to withdraw. Otherwise today Canada would be part of the United States.

Between the end of the Revolution and the ratification of the Constitution, over nine years, there were epidemics in every city that killed tens of thousands of people. There were cholera epidemics, malaria epidemics, and smallpox epidemics, in Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and so on.

They knew all about them. But they didn’t put that in the Constitution. The Constitution was built for Hard Times. It wasn’t built for the easy times. During the Civil War, there were 659 000 soldiers who died. That’s the equivalent of 7,200,000 today.

Our country was this close from falling apart. It was a much worse crisis than this pandemic. Yet when Lincoln tried to prohibit habeas corpus, the court said you don’t. You can’t do that. You cannot do it. It doesn’t matter how bad the crisis is. You cannot do it. It’s in the Constitution. It’s the heart and soul of our country.

President Trump said well these bureaucrats came at him from every side. They were all telling him what he had to do. He had the right instincts. He knew that he shouldn’t close down the country. But he did it. He got rolled by his bureaucracy.

I’m going to tell you a quick story. During the Cuban Missile Crisis the ex-com committee – which was all the intelligence officials and military officials, and my father was on there, and so was Bob McNamara but so those are the exceptions – but all of the the doyens and the gurus, the old gray men…and the generals from the Joint Chiefs, all said we got to go in and bomb the the missile sites in Cuba.

My uncle said to them: well wait a minute. What’s going to happen? Who is on those gun crews? Are those Cubans or are they Russians? They said we don’t know. And he said, well if they’re Russians and we kill Russians, isn’t Russia then going to have to go into Berlin? They said, we don’t think they’ll do that.

My uncle said I want to see the aerial photographs.He looked at the aerial photographs and he said who is on the Cuban side? Who gives permission to fire? Does it come from Russia or does it come from Fidel? From the individual gun crews? Because if it comes from Fidel, he is going to fire. If it comes from the individual gun crews, then you’re putting the fate of the world in the hands of those commanders, 64 men.

They didn’t know. He said we’re not doing it. And he did something else.

All I’m saying is you need a president at this time in history who can stand up to his bureaucracy. The bureaucracies are owned by the industries. I’m talking about the NIH and EPA and CDC and FDA and DOC and USDA…..

Our food is terrible because the food companies and the pesticide companies own USDA. We’re in constant wars because the military industrial complex, the big contractors own CIA.

Now, I want to make this clear. I do not. Believe that everybody at the CIA is a bad person. My daughter in law, Amaryllis, who is one of the top officers on this campaign and her entire career is a clandestine agent for the CIA as a spy in the weapons of mass destruction programs in some of the most dangerous parts of the earth. And I have never met anybody with such courage. And that’s how most of the 22,000 people at CIA. They’re people who are patriots or people who are good public servants. And they’re people of enormous courage and idealism, as the same with most of our agencies.

The problem is the people who end up rising in those agencies generally are people who are in the tank with industry. And that’s how they get corrupted. And one of the things that I can do, I think better than any other political candidate, is I know how to fix something because I’ve spent so much time litigating and studying these agencies.

Very quickly, I want to just talk about the chronic disease epidemic, because to me, arguably, this is the worst attack on the middle class in this country. We have the worst health care system in the United States of America. What do I mean by that? I mean that we more on health care by far than any other country, and we have the worst health outcomes. We spend $4.3 trillion annually on health, 4.3 trillion, and about 84% of that goes to treating chronic disease.

And why is that? Because America has the highest chronic disease burden in the world. And we didn’t, we didn’t always in 1950’s and 60’s we had a really healthy population. We had only 6% of our people, of our citizens or children, had chronic disease. In 1988, that became 12.8%. So it doubled. Today, by 2006 it was 54%.

We have the sickest generation in American history. We have the sickest children on earth in this country. And by chronic disease, what do I mean? I mean obesity, but more importantly, neurological diseases, neurodevelopmental, A.D.D., ADHD, speech, language ticks, Tourette’s syndrome, ASD, and autism. Autism went from one in every 10,000 people in my generation to one in every 34 kids today.

Now, one of the talking points that the industry and their crooked legislative regulators will say is, oh, well, we just started noticing it for the first time. Missing autism is like missing a train wreck. So, it’s an absurd—but more importantly. There is study after study after study that shows that this epidemic is real. It is not the result of changing diagnostic criteria. It is not the result of better recognition.

It is an epidemic. And it’s common sense because if it was changing diagnostic criteria, you’d see people my age with full blown autism, 69 years old. I have never seen somebody my age with full blown autism. I mean, stimming, toe walking, head banging, nonverbal, non-toilet trained.

And I’ve been around at the spear tip of people with intellectual disabilities my whole life. My aunt founded Special Olympics. I worked in it from when I was a kid. My cousin, my dear cousin, Anthony Shriver, is the founder of Best Buddies. This has been in the DNA. I spent 200 hours working at (inaudible) home for the retarded in Hudson Valley when I was a teenager. I just I haven’t seen it somebody my age who looks like that and yet my kids’ schools—There are many, many children who look like that.

And why aren’t we asking the question: What happened? And by the way there was a report that came out a couple of weeks ago that shows that the cost of autism alone in the American economy will be—just of caring for people. As this group now ages, it will be $1,000,000,000,000 a year by 2040. The Congress said to EPA, tell us what year the autism epidemic began, and the EPA is a captive agency, but it’s captive by the oil, coal and pesticide industry, not by pharma.

So it actually came out with an honest study. And EPA said it’s a red line, 1989. Oh, something happened in 1989. And we know that it is an environmental insult because genes don’t cause epidemics. And the only thing is we just have to figure out what it is. There’s a limited number of culprits, of chemical toxins that became ubiquitous around 1989. And so, you know, that’s something that NIH is a $42 billion budget.

And by the way, it wasn’t just those neurological disorders that started then, it was all these autoimmune diseases. If you’re my age, you never saw anybody with rheumatoid arthritis or juvenile diabetes when you were younger. You know, the allergic diseases, food allergies, peanut allergies and eczema, anaphylaxis, which are ubiquitous, are at 27% of our school budgets are now going to special education.

This is crippling to the middle class in this country. And we need to figure out what it is. Let me tell you this when I am the President of the United States, I am going to end the chronic disease epidemic in this country. And if I have not significantly dropped the level of chronic disease in our children by the end of my first term, I do not want to get reelected.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Coronavirus-HIV Mutants Were Discussed in NIH-funded Work that Led to COVID-19
Are you okay with "Airborne AIDS" Mutants, and Can we "Trust the Science"?

Igor Chudov
Apr 22, 2023


SUMMARY: In my previous posts, I discussed HIV genes present in Sars-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and showed how using HIV genes in recombinant viruses was the bread and butter of modern virology.

This post will introduce new evidence (published two days ago) of HIV/Sars mutant coronavirus chimeras discussed in NIH-funded research projects that led to the COVID pandemic. The research project discussed in this post was funded by NIH grant 1R01AI110964 and was titled "Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence." Grant 1R01AI110964 was given for research conducted by EcoHealth Alliance in cooperation with Dr. Ralph Baric of UNC and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

In the last section, I will answer the question, “Can we trust science?”

NIH Grant 1R01AI110964

Two days ago, 554 pages of previously secret documents related to certain NIH grants to the EcoHealth Alliance were released under FOIA to Judicial Watch



The monetary grant, dispensing $3,748,715, funded the work of EcoHealth Alliance, Wuhan Institute of Virology, and Ralph Baric lab, towards the following (page 16):
  • Assess CoV spillover potential
  • Develop predictive models of bat CoV emergence risk and host range
  • Test predictions of CoV inter-species transmission
Take a look at page 127:



The above page describes “receptor mutants and pseudoviruses,” specifically a mutant of HIV backbone with SARS-like “spike proteins.” These NIH-funded researchers created these HIV-SARS mutants to see how well they would infect human lungs and experimented on “humanized mice” whose lung cells resembled human cells.

These mutant viruses are, in a way, the opposite of Sars-Cov-2. They represent an HIV backbone with SARS-like spike protein.

Sars-Cov-2, on the contrary, is a coronavirus backbone with spike-protein including HIV genes. (Such a chimera is described in the DEFUSE proposal submitted by Peter Daszak to another government agency)

And yet, despite the dissimilarity, these mutants show how prevalent the lab work is that involves combining HIV and coronavirus genomes.

Airborne HIV?​

HIV is an exceptionally cunning virus: it integrates into the human DNA after infection. Such integration is called “reverse transcription,” whereby RNA from the virus becomes part of the DNA of human cells. HIV essentially edits the human genome and inserts its code into it. After that, human cells produce new HIV viral particles, as this NIH page explains.



However, HIV is not very contagious. It cannot target cellular receptors found in human lungs, for example. One cannot get HIV via the airborne route: HIV infections require blood-to-blood transmission, and HIV-carrying aerosols cannot infect human respiratory systems.

A pseudovirus that can infect human ACE2 cells, which are present in our lungs, is one step closer to airborne transmission: an aerosol carrying ACE-2-binding HIV mutant could infect someone upon being breathed in.

Is the research that creates ACE-2-infecting HIV mutants, which may be contagious via the respiratory route, safe? What if these recombinants escape the laboratory?

That does not seem safe to me!

And yet, in search of grant money, fame, and discoveries, virologists funded by the NIH conducted such experiments involving ACE2-infecting HIV chimeras with minimal oversight.

Their work gave us Sars-CoV-2 and the Covid pandemic. Again, Sars-Cov-2, a recombinant chimera carrying HIV genes on a coronavirus backbone, is NOT the same as the pseudovirus described above; it is something else but related.

The above shows that work on HIV/SARS coronavirus recombinants, funded by the NIH, was conducted by the same people whose cooperation with the Wuhan Institute of Virology gave us the Covid pandemic.

Almost every human was infected with the HIV-gene-carrying COVID virus. Every COVID-vaccinated human was injected with spike-protein-producing mRNA, which encoded the same HIV genes. We are now living through the consequences, with excess mortality continuing among the vaccinated countries.

Fact-Checkers Tried to Distract Us​

Numerous fact-checking articles attempted to deny the link between HIV and Sars-Cov-2.





Those assurances are false.

The document I highlighted shows evidence that the same people who gave us Sars-Cov-2 also worked on HIV/SARS chimeras. Therefore, there is a “plausible route” by which the Covid pandemic virus could carry HIV genes. This belies the fact-checkers’ hollow claims.

Can We “Trust the Science” Ever Again?​

During the pandemic, we were asked to “trust the science.”

And yet, the pandemic itself was caused by “the science,” when the leading virologists who, unbeknownst to us, were involved in creating Sars-Cov-2 (or funded its development) lied to us about the origins of the pandemic.

In the past, science gave us antibiotics, electricity, air travel, computers, the Internet, and all the perks of the civilization we enjoy. For example, when we plug in a vacuum cleaner into an electrical outlet, we “trust the science” that the electricity will make the vacuum cleaner run safely. Even though electricity may be a mystery to many of us, we know it works safely and effectively in our homes.

On the one hand, we have incredible advances in science in many areas, and we benefit daily from the fruits of the scientific process.

On the other hand, we have
  • a manmade pandemic that killed millions,
  • scientists who lied about its origins, and
  • a non-working and dangerous Covid vaccine, which many people received against their will under false assurances.
So, we can ask… Can we ever trust science again?

In my opinion, asking whether “we should trust science” is a wrong question.

Science is not a person whose trustworthiness we can gauge. Science is a collection of human beings called “scientists,” who have all sorts of motivations and incentives. Some are honest, and some are not. Some can resist groupthink and peer pressure, but many cannot. Science is complicated, fascinating, and often wrong on matters of crucial importance.

So, trusting science in all instances is not wise. At the same time, we cannot decide on every scientific matter. We cannot be the top experts on electromagnetism that gave us home electricity while at the same time outsmarting the best virologists, biologists, and so on. We have lives to live.

Most of the time, trusting science is okay. Electricity works, planes mostly do not fall from the sky, allergy pills stop sneezing, and so on.

However, there are some crucial moments when “trusting science” does not work. These periods involve nonsensical stories (natural origin of Sars-Cov-2), censorship, media manipulation, or the use of science in party politics. During these moments, blind trust is NOT warranted and is best avoided.

That’s my answer, anyway. What do you think? Do you trust science?

https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F35e282ee-3496-4404-b711-c5ac04cbaf27_1196x770.jpeg
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Italy Discloses 28.5 Percent Increase In COVID-19 Infections And A Staggering 48 Percent Rise In Deaths In Just One Week
Thailand Medical News
April 23, 2023

As Italy faces a harrowing surge in COVID-19 cases and fatalities, the nation is gripped by fear and uncertainty. New data released by the Italian Ministry of Health reveals a shocking 28.5% increase in cases and a staggering 48% rise in deaths in just one week. This dramatic development has set alarm bells ringing as Italy struggles to contain the SARS-CoV-2 virus's relentless spread.


Between April 14th and April 20th, 2023, the country recorded 27,982 new cases - a substantial increase from the previous week's 21,779. The death toll has also skyrocketed, with 191 fatalities reported, marking a 48.1% increase from the previous week's 129. Amidst the chaos, the number of tests administered has also grown - 398,788 tests conducted, representing a 26.0% increase from the week prior (316,436).

The positivity rate, a crucial indicator of the virus's prevalence, has seen a slight uptick as well. Currently standing at 7.0%, it has inched up by 0.1% compared to the preceding week (6.9%). With each passing day, the situation grows increasingly dire.

The Italian National Institute of Health's latest report highlights the alarming rise in the weekly incidence of COVID-19 cases in Italy. As of April 20th, the rate has surged to 48 per 100,000 residents, up from 37 in the previous report. However, there is a small glimmer of hope - the average Rt value, calculated based on symptomatic cases, has dipped slightly to 0.93 (range 0.87-1.19) in the period between March 29th and April 11th, 2023. This drop indicates a minor decline in transmission rates.

Unfortunately, the transmission index based on hospitalization rates tells a different story, revealing an increase above the epidemic threshold. As of April 11th, the Rt value has climbed to 1.07 (1.02-1.13), a significant jump from April 4th's value of 0.91 (0.86-0.97).

The healthcare system is beginning to feel the strain as well. The occupancy rate in intensive care units has risen slightly to 1.0% (as of April 20th) compared to 0.8% (as of April 13th). The occupancy rate in medical areas at the national level has also experienced a marginal increase, standing at 4.5% (as of April 20th) versus 4.2% (as of April 13th).

According to local Italian COVID-19 News coverages, the situation in Italy's regions is far from uniform. Ten regions are classified as high risk, primarily due to multiple resilience alerts. Eleven regions are considered moderately at risk, while none have been categorized as low risk. Each region has reported at least one resilience alert, with ten regions issuing multiple alerts.

This explosive new data has plunged Italy into a state of crisis. With the virus s preading like wildfire and the healthcare system stretched to its limits, the Italian population finds itself in a state of trepidation, desperately hoping for a turnaround.

‘Garbage’ politicians and ‘ignorant and stupid’ health authorities and ‘paid’ medical experts around the world with the constant narratives claiming that SARS-CoV-2 infections are now mild, or that the boosters are offering protection or that the virus is now endemic and that we have to learn to live with should be dealt with… both form a legal perspective and also by vigilantes and citizens ousting them out of power, office or medical practice.


Variety Of XBB Sub-Lineages Driving New Onslaught In Italy

A variety of more transmissible and immune evasive XX sub-lineages are driving the new COVID-19 onslaught In Italy similarly to what is occurring in many geolocations around the world.

Among these sub-lineages are XBB.1.16, XBB.1.9.1, XBB.1.9.2, XBB.1.6, XBB.2.3, XBB.2.6 etc.


Attention should also be paid to the newer sub-lineages being spawned by the XBB.2.3 and XBB.2.6 variants as there is some unverified and unconfirmed speculations that they are more destructive towards the various T Cells.

It is coming to light that most of the infections are breakthrough infections and that so-called herd immunity or combined immunity or immunity from simply previous infections alone or vaccine-induced immunity alone is no longer providing any protection from these new strains. The narratives that the boosters provide protection from disease severity and from risk of mortality does not seem to be holding true anymore especially for those in the vulnerable groups ie the aged, the obese, the young, those with existing comorbidities, the immunocompromised and also those with certain genetic makeups.

Furthermore, preliminary data is indicating that while these new emerging XBB sub-lineages are very good at disarming human host immune responses and hence producing less symptoms initially during infections, they have evolved for better viral persistence and there is indications that we can expect more serious health and medical complications and also increase fatal outcomes in the mid and long term “Post COVID” phases including increased organ failures including heart failures, strokes, sepsis etc.

There is an urgent and dire need to bring back NPIs including masking, social distancing, improving indoor air quality via filtration and disinfection in schools, offices, malls, public transport etc

As predicted by Thailand Medical News at the beginning of the year, the second half of 2023 will see an extremely catastrophic global health crisis as not only will SARS-CoV-2 strike back with a vengeance but we will also be simultaneously be dealing a few viral pandemics including newer SARS-CoV-2 sub-lineages, the emergence of SARS-CoV-3,emergence of reassortant coronavirus strains, H5N1, Marburg virus, a new measles strain, a new dengue strain, new adenovirus strains and also new strep A strains.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


VSS Scientific Updates During Pandemic Times #55
By Geert Vanden Bossche

April 22, 2023


1. Cancer and heart disease vaccines ‘ready by end of the decade’?

Burton said: “We will have that vaccine and it will be highly effective, and it will save many hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives. I think we will be able to offer personalized cancer vaccines against multiple different tumor types to people around the world.”


From Geert: “Yes, you all understood the title correctly: Vaccines causing heart disease and cancer (and even auto-immune disease as highlighted in the article) will be ‘ready by end of the decade’.

In fact, some of those are already up and running. ‘Yes’, not kidding, I am talking about the mRNA-based Covid-19 vaccines.

As a seasoned vaccinologist, I could never understand how one could possibly administer a vaccine delivering an antigen that you don’t control at all: neither in terms of its dosage or duration of expression, nor in terms of its distribution. Complete lack of control of these critical criteria should almost by definition make mRNA vaccines a complete NO GO from a vaccinology viewpoint. But as if these shortcomings weren’t already problematic enough, mRNA vaccines are highly likely to induce steric immune refocusing (SIR). In my new book: ‘The Inescapable Immune Escape Pandemic’ (drgeert.com), I describe this phenomenon and how mRNA vaccines are highly likely to trigger it. Unless the opposite can be proven, mRNA vaccines would therefore promote immune escape and sideline protection mechanisms conferred by cell-based innate immunity.

Whereas upon natural infection other viral proteins downregulate immune recognition of surface proteins responsible for viral infection (e.g., S protein in the case of SARS-CoV-2) at an early stage of infection, this is not the case when these proteins are expressed as a result of vaccine-mediated mRNA-transfection of target host cells! Hence, poorly functional immune responses are induced that basically hide immunodominant epitopes even before the latter can be recognized by the immune system of the vaccinee.

As we ‘ve seen too often in the past, human megalomania can never overcome the laws of biology. It seems like mankind got addicted to experimentation and empiricism even if that inevitably implies ‘learning the hard way’.

I am not saying we can never successfully intervene in pathogen-host interactions; however, as a general rule, one should always be very skeptical if people want to make you believe they have figured out an extremely smart approach to trick pathogenic agents. Ask them whether they fully understand the immune pathogenesis of the disease. If the answer is ‘No’, you know that what you’re going to get will be reminiscent of so many miserable HIV vaccine failures. It’s easy to spend millions of dollars and do more harm than good!


2. Startling Evidence Suggests BioNTech and Pfizer Falsified Key Data: Part 1

“Evidence has emerged casting serious doubt over the authenticity of tests carried out by BioNTech (Marketing Authorisation Holder) and Pfizer to prove the fidelity of their product by demonstrating that only the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 is expressed in cells by the nucleoside-modified mRNA Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162b2).”



3. Part 2: Startling Evidence Suggests BioNTech/Pfizer Falsified Key Data & Further Scandals

“This then begs the question: did BioNTech/Pfizer conduct a wilful cover-up of their ‘Western blot’ results by presenting manipulated versions (of automated Westerns) to the regulators? Perhaps, a copy and paste job for the FDA and manipulation of the saturation levels for the EMA? And more importantly: how did the regulators accept these ‘Western blots’ as the primary evidence for proving the fidelity and consistency of BioNTech and Pfizer’s product?”



4. Strategies for the Management of Spike Protein-Related Pathology

“In the wake of the Covid-19 crisis, a need has arisen to prevent and treat two related conditions, Covid vaccine injury and long Covid, both of which have a significant vascular component. Therefore, the management of these conditions require the development of strategies to prevent or dissolve blood clots and restore circulatory health. This review summarizes the evidence on strategies that can be applied to treat both long and vaccine injuries based on similar mechanisms of action.”



5. Pfizer Entering the 'Most Important' 18-month Stretch in Company History, CEO Says

"Moving forward, Bourla expects Pfizer’s COVID business to continue generating significant sales, noting that the virus won’t go away anytime soon. COVID-19 infection “creates very short-lasting immunity,” the CEO said Monday, noting that people can “get the same strain after 6 months.” With this considered, Bourla said Pfizer’s scientists expect the disease to be around “for the years to come.”



6. The WHO Pandemic Treaty: Our fundamental freedoms at risk

If you think your individual freedom and that of your (grand)children is important, you may want to watch this.

 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
Here is the article from the Guardian Geert refers to in his point 1.


(fair use applies)

Cancer and heart disease vaccines ‘ready by end of the decade’
Exclusive: Pharmaceutical firm says groundbreaking jabs could save millions of lives

Linda Geddes
Sat 8 Apr 2023 06.37 EDT First published on Fri 7 Apr 2023 14.00 EDT

Millions of lives could be saved by a groundbreaking set of new vaccines for a range of conditions including cancer, experts have said. A leading pharmaceutical firm said it is confident that jabs for cancer, cardiovascular and autoimmune diseases, and other conditions will be ready by 2030.

Studies into these vaccinations are also showing “tremendous promise”, with some researchers saying 15 years’ worth of progress has been “unspooled” in 12 to 18 months thanks to the success of the Covid jab.

Dr Paul Burton, the chief medical officer of pharmaceutical company Moderna, said he believes the firm will be able to offer such treatments for “all sorts of disease areas” in as little as five years.

The firm, which created a leading coronavirus vaccine, is developing cancer vaccines that target different tumour types.

Burton said: “We will have that vaccine and it will be highly effective, and it will save many hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives. I think we will be able to offer personalised cancer vaccines against multiple different tumour types to people around the world.”

1.JPG

He also said that multiple respiratory infections could be covered by a single injection – allowing vulnerable people to be protected against Covid, flu and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) – while mRNA therapies could be available for rare diseases for which there are currently no drugs. Therapies based on mRNA work by teaching cells how to make a protein that triggers the body’s immune response against disease.

Burton said :“I think we will have mRNA-based therapies for rare diseases that were previously undruggable, and I think that 10 years from now, we will be approaching a world where you truly can identify the genetic cause of a disease and, with relative simplicity, go and edit that out and repair it using mRNA-based technology.”

But scientists warn that the accelerated progress, which has surged “by an order of magnitude” in the past three years, will be wasted if a high level of investment is not maintained.

The mRNA molecule instructs cells to make proteins. By injecting a synthetic form, cells can pump out proteins we want our immune system to strike. An mRNA-based cancer vaccine would alert the immune system to a cancer that is already growing in a patient’s body, so it can attack and destroy it, without destroying healthy cells.

This involves identifying protein fragments on the surface of cancer cells that are not present on healthy cells – and which are most likely to trigger an immune response – and then creating pieces of mRNA that will instruct the body on how to manufacture them.

First, doctors take a biopsy of a patient’s tumour and send it to a lab, where its genetic material is sequenced to identify mutations that aren’t present in healthy cells.

A machine learning algorithm then identifies which of these mutations are responsible for driving the cancer’s growth. Over time, it also learns which parts of the abnormal proteins these mutations encode are most likely to trigger an immune response. Then, mRNAs for the most promising antigens are manufactured and packaged into a personalised vaccine.

Burton said: “I think what we have learned in recent months is that if you ever thought that mRNA was just for infectious diseases, or just for Covid, the evidence now is that that’s absolutely not the case.

“It can be applied to all sorts of disease areas; we are in cancer, infectious disease, cardiovascular disease, autoimmune diseases, rare disease. We have studies in all of those areas and they have all shown tremendous promise.”

In January, Moderna announced results from a late-stage trial of its experimental mRNA vaccine for RSV, suggesting it was 83.7% effective at preventing at least two symptoms, such as cough and fever, in adults aged 60 and older. Based on this data, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted the vaccine breakthrough therapy designation, meaning its regulatory review will be expedited.

In February, the FDA granted the same designation to Moderna’s personalised cancer vaccine, based on recent results in patients with the skin cancer melanoma.

Burton said: “I think it was an order of magnitude, that the pandemic sped [this technology] up by. It has also allowed us to scale up manufacturing, so we’ve got extremely good at making large amounts of vaccine very quickly.”

Pfizer has also begun recruitment for a late-stage clinical trial of an mRNA-based influenza vaccine, and has its sights set on other infectious diseases, including shingles, in collaboration with BioNTech. A spokesperson for Pfizer said: “The learnings from the Covid-19 vaccine development process have informed our overall approach to mRNA research and development, and how Pfizer conducts R&D (research and development) more broadly. We gained a decade’s worth of scientific knowledge in just one year.”

Other vaccine technologies have also benefited from the pandemic, including next-generation protein-based vaccines, such as the Covid jab made by US-based biotechnology company Novavax. The jab helps the immune system thinking it is encountering a virus, so it mounts a stronger response.

Dr Filip Dubovsky, president of research and development at Novavax, said: “There has been a massive acceleration, not just of traditional vaccine technologies, but also novel ones that hadn’t previously been taken through licensure. Certainly, mRNA falls into that category, as does our vaccine.”

Dr Richard Hackett, CEO of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovations (Cepi) said the biggest impact of the pandemic had been the shortening of development timelines for many previously unvalidated vaccine platforms. He explained: “It meant that things that might have unspooled over the next decade or even 15 years, were compressed down into a year or a year and a half …”

Prof Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group and chair of the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), said: “There’s no doubt there’s a lot more interest in vaccines. The really big question is, what happens from here?”

With the looming threat of wider conflict in Europe, there is a risk that this focus on vaccines is lost, without capitalising on the momentum and technological insights that have been gained during the pandemic. Pollard, for one, believes this would be a mistake.

He said: “If you take a step back to think about what we are prepared to invest in during peacetime, like having a substantial military for most countries … Pandemics are as much a threat, if not more, than a military threat because we know they are going to happen as a certainty from where we are today. But we’re not investing even the amount that it would cost to build one nuclear submarine.”
 
Top