CORONA Main Coronavirus thread

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


UK Lab Report discovers Graphene in the Covid-19 Vaccines; & Scientists believe the Vaccinated are transmitting it to the Unvaccinated
By The Exposé
September 10, 2022

The Covid-19 vaccines have been forensically examined in the United Kingdom and a laboratory report confirms they contain graphene nanomaterials that can penetrate the body’s natural barriers and damage the central nervous system, and Graphene Oxide which can damage internal organs, destroy blood health, trigger cancer, and cause changes in gene function among a host of other ill effects.

Unfortunately, further analysis by Dr Phillipe van Welbergen has concluded that the graphene is being transmitted from the vaccinated to the unvaccinated, destroying red blood cells and causing dangerous blood clots.


Following her own experience with patients who had suffered apparent vaccine injury and adverse reactions, a British Medical Practitioner came forward in December 2021 offering to assist in an investigation to ascertain whether the results discovered by Dr’s Noack and Campra could be replicated in the UK and also to examine the COVID-19 injection vials for the discovery of toxins or unexpected contents.

The medical practitioner seized an injection vial from the fridge housed in the surgery in which she works and handed it to an independent investigator assisting in investigating cases relating to an injury sustained as a result of injections given as part of the rollout.

Further vials have since been obtained which cover the three main manufacturers in the UK: Pfizer,
Moderna and AstraZeneca.

The contents of the injection vials have been forensically examined and a laboratory report has now been officially published.

The report titled “Qualitative Evaluation of Inclusions In Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines” has been presented to the Police involved in the UK Criminal Case, 6029679/21, which is said to provide them with more than enough reasonable suspicion that serious indictable offences have been committed regarding the administration of experimental treatments.

The report contains the toxicology reports of injection vials that have been forensically examined, with findings that provide “more than enough grounds” for the Police to apply for the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Warrant and seize injection vials for themselves.

The Police will then be able to submit them to a Home Office Laboratory with a view to replicate the findings and will enable them to possess their own hard evidence to support serious indictable offences.

Additionally, the police, in line with the duty of care to the public, have been asked to request the immediate cessation of the experimental treatment rollout.

The Report: Qualitative Evaluation of Inclusions In Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines – by UNIT

Four vaccine vials were the subject of the investigation.

Two Moderna samples, and 1 AstraZeneca, and 1 Pfizer sample were collected for examination in order to analyse the contents and identify if undeclared components were present in them.

Here is the list of declared ingredients in each vaccine by the manufacturers –

image-263.png



The inclusions that are not declared by the manufacturers were the focus for this particular analysis, primarily graphene and carbon-related nanostructures in form of carbon or graphene composites, graphene in association with polyethylene glycol, graphene oxide, iron oxide compounds, and calcite.

The Four Vials

The analysis of all four vial contents identified objects that are similar and have been defined and illustrated within the report individually.

The Identified inclusions were:
  1. Graphene nano ribbons coated with Polyethylene Glycol
  2. Graphene Composite Form 1.
  3. Graphene Composite Form 2.
  4. Microcrystalline Calcite with Carbonaceous inclusions.
  5. Graphene Nano Form with and without fluorescence
  6. Graphene nano objects
  7. Graphene nano scrolls

Moderna 01

The first sample that was evaluated was the Moderna 01 which was examined by Raman spectroscopy. The investigation clearly showed that all the inclusions within the vaccine have a strong carbon signal with confirmed graphene compositions of some representative forms.

image-264.png



Two clear signals were obtained from two objects. The flat ribbon-like inclusions exhibited clear graphene spectra integrated with the spectrum of glycol and other minor compounds. The other clear signal was obtained from a calcite microcrystalline form and Carbon composite forms also had a clear graphene signal.

It is important to point out that some nano amorphous carbon forms showed a clear Graphene signal, however, these forms also exhibited fluorescence which masked the Graphene peak.

Moderna 02

Particles that carry the mRNA load were clearly seen and Graphene composite 01 was prominently present even at low resolution and Graphene Nano objects were present in “great abundance.” within the vial sample.

image-265.png

AstraZeneca

AstraZeneca was the third vaccine that was evaluated for its inclusion, and as it was almost transparent it made “spotting of inherent colours slightly easier”. Under wet microscopic observation, the solution exhibited instantaneous movement of nanoscopic particulate material which when observed closely seemed to be driven by convection current.

When dry, the particles exhibited traction movement. In figure, 3.21. the microscopic form is clearly visible as it is lying on top of the solid film while the nanoparticles are still in motion in the background as can be seen by the shifting position of the shadow. A clear output of this mechanism was that as the medium solidified, it became more difficult for the nanoparticles to navigate through the viscous material.

image-266.png


Confirmed inclusions within AstraZeneca were of the presence of Graphene in all the identified representative forms. The carbon composites are of two forms as they are in the Moderna vaccines. These two forms showed distinct graphene signatures. Also, besides Graphene the spectrum is dominated by iron oxide and other forms of carbon associations.

Pfizer

Pfizer was the fourth vaccine vial that was evaluated for its inclusions. The pipette specimen showed some extremely interesting inclusions. As the material was sucked into the pipette, distinct translucent to transparent sheets were seen floating about as seen in figure 3.28.

image-267.png


Three of these samples showed carbon composite signatures with possible graphene in. The signals of amorphous carbon-like materials were extremely complex with carbon along with iron oxide and several other compounds in them.

Ribbon forms of nearly transparent microforms are found in fair numbers in the slide. These are often half embedded in the solution with one end projecting outside the material. The carbon composites of both form 1 and 2 also are present in great numbers. Form 1 settles on top of the material while form 2 is found at mid-levels of the solidified medium. Graphene nanoforms are present in fair numbers within the slide material along with some scrolls. Figure 3.32. Representative inclusions found within Pfizer vaccine.

The signals of amorphous carbon-like materials were extremely complex with carbon along with iron oxide and several other compounds in them. The graphene complex 1 is graphene with polyethylene glycol signal forming the bulk of the spectrum. Though, for initial assessments, this study can confirm the presence of graphene in Pfizer.

Notably, one of the samples that was shot, displayed a fair influence of fluorescence.

To Conclude

All three vaccines commonly employ the self-assembling lipid nanoparticles as drug delivery mechanisms. Where the central find of this project has been the confirmation of the presence of graphene in all four samples, it is important to evaluate this find in the context of the subject itself.

It is also important to mention, that the source of fluorescence within the samples was unknown while the investigations were underway, and due to tight timescales were not able to be investigated at the time.

image-268.png


An Open Access review highlighting the toxicity of the graphene family nanoparticles can be viewed here.


image-259.png

Source


In conclusion, it can be stated that the four samples of vaccines (Moderna 1, Modern 2, AstraZeneca, Pfizer) all contain significant amounts of carbon composites, graphene compounds, and iron oxide.

These ingredients were undeclared by the manufacturers and are absent from the list of ingredients for the vaccines. However, studies show how dangerous the Graphene family is, yet individuals have not been made aware that they are being injected with the deadly substance.

The lab report can be read in full here.

Another analysis of blood samples conducted by Dr Philippe van Welbergendemonstrated that the graphene being injected into people is organising and growing into larger fibres and structures, gaining magnetic properties or an electrical charge and the fibres are showing indications of more complex structures with striations.

He also, unfortunately, demonstrated that “shards” of graphene are being transmitted from “vaccinated” to vaccine-free or unvaccinated people destroying their red blood cells and causing blood clots in the unvaccinated.

The full report on graphene “shedding” can be read in full here.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Alzheimer’s Disease Risk 50–80% Higher in Older Adults Who Caught COVID-19
By Case Western Reserve University
September 15, 2022

Older people who had a COVID-19 infection show a considerably higher risk—as much as 50% to 80% higher than a control group—of developing Alzheimer’s disease within a year. This is according to a new research study of more than 6 million patients aged 65 and older.

Researchers report that people 65 and older who contracted COVID-19 were substantially more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease in the year following their COVID diagnosis. Furthermore, the highest risk was observed in women at least 85 years old. The study was published on September 13, 2022, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease,

According to the findings, the risk for developing Alzheimer’s disease in older people nearly doubled (0.35% to 0.68%) over a one-year period following COVID infection. It is unclear whether COVID-19 triggers new development of Alzheimer’s disease or accelerates its emergence, the researchers said.

“The factors that play into the development of Alzheimer’s disease have been poorly understood, but two pieces considered important are prior infections, especially viral infections, and inflammation,” said Pamela Davis, the study’s coauthor. She is a Distinguished University Professor and The Arline H. and Curtis F. Garvin Research Professor at the Case Western Reserve School of Medicine.

“Since infection with SARS-CoV2 has been associated with central nervous system abnormalities including inflammation, we wanted to test whether, even in the short term, COVID could lead to increased diagnoses,” she said.

For the study, the research team analyzed the anonymous electronic health records of 6.2 million adults 65 and older in the United States with no prior diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease who received medical treatment between February 2020 and May 2021.

They then divided this population into two groups. One was composed of people who contracted COVID-19 during that period, and the other group contained people who had no documented cases of COVID-19. More than 400,000 people were enrolled in the COVID study group, while 5.8 million were in the non-infected group.

“If this increase in new diagnoses of Alzheimer’s disease is sustained, the wave of patients with a disease currently without a cure will be substantial, and could further strain our long-term care resources,” Davis said. “Alzheimer’s disease is a serious and challenging disease, and we thought we had turned some of the tide on it by reducing general risk factors such as hypertension, heart disease, obesity and a sedentary lifestyle. Now, so many people in the U.S. have had COVID and the long-term consequences of COVID are still emerging. It is important to continue to monitor the impact of this disease on future disability.”

Rong Xu, the study’s corresponding author is professor of Biomedical Informatics at the School of Medicine and director of the Center for AI in Drug Discovery. She said the research team plans to continue studying the effects of COVID-19 on Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative disorders—especially which subpopulations may be more vulnerable—and the potential to repurpose FDA-approved drugs to treat COVID’s long-term effects.

Previous COVID-related research led by CWRU have found that people with dementia are twice as likely to contract COVID; those with substance abuse disorder orders are more likely to contract COVID; and that 5% of people who took Paxlovid for treatment of COVID symptoms experienced rebound infections within a month.

Reference: “Association of COVID-19 with New-Onset Alzheimer’s Disease” by Lindsey Wang, Pamela B. Davis, Nora D. Volkow, Nathan A. Berger, David C. Kaelber, Rong Xu, 13 September 2022, Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-220717
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


COVID-19: One in three infected, unvaccinated people no longer have detectable antibodies one year after infection
by Barcelona Institute for Global Health
September 15, 2022

A prospective seroprevalence study in the Catalan population underlines the need to get vaccinated despite having been infected, and confirms that hybrid immunity (vaccination plus infection) is more robust and long-lasting. The study has been published in BMC Medicine.

Both infection and vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 contribute to building a population's immunity to the virus—an important factor for deciding when and to whom booster shots should be offered. Although immunity against a pathogen is more than antibodies, the easiest strategy for assessing population immunity is to perform seroepidemiological studies (i.e., quantifying virus-specific antibodies in a given population group).

"Most of the serological studies performed after COVID-19 vaccination focused on specific groups such as healthcare workers, did not distinguish between people with or without previous infection, or did not have clinical and immunological data of the infection," explains Manolis Kogevinas, ISGlobal researcher and senior co-author of the study together with Carlota Dobaño, also researcher at ISGlobal.

In this study, the research team performed a second measurement in a population-based cohort from Catalonia (COVICAT study—GCAT cohort) six months after the start of the vaccination campaign (the first one was just after the first confinement), to monitor the level and type of antibodies against five viral antigens (the whole Spike [S ] protein, the RBD receptor binding domain, the S2 fragment, the full nucleocaspid [N] protein, or the N-terminal fragment). They also used information from a questionnaire and health records to identify potential factors that determine the magnitude and duration of the antibody response in unvaccinated, vaccinated, or vaccinated and infected persons. In total, 1,076 people, aged 43 to 72 years, were included in the analysis.

The results yielded three main conclusions: First, that in 36% of infected but unvaccinated persons, antibodies were no longer detectable almost a year after the infection, particularly in those older than 60 years and who were smokers.

Second, that vaccination induced significantly higher antibody levels in people who had had a prior infection, as compared to those without prior infection; and that these levels were strongly associated with the magnitude of the response during the infection. "Our data underscore the importance of vaccinating people even if they have been previously infected, and confirm that hybrid immunity is superior and more durable. This means that people who have been vaccinated but have not been infected would need a booster earlier than those who have," points out Marianna Karachaliou, first author of the study together with Gemma Moncunill.

Third, the factor most strongly associated with the level of antibodies is the type of vaccine—Moderna's Spikevax generated the highest levels of antibodies. Other factors also appear to play a role: People older than 60 or with mental illness had lower antibody levels post-vaccination. "The association between mental health and antibody responses requires further investigation, but it is known that people with disorders such as depression, chronic stress or schizophrenia have a lower response to vaccination in general," explains Dobaño.

Among those vaccinated, only 2.1% had no antibodies at the time of testing and approximately 1% had a breakthrough infection. "However, it should be noted that this study was done before the omicron variant became dominant," warns Kogevinas.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Vaccine that targets both spike and nucleocapsid proteins in SARS-CoV-2 virus found effective in test animals

by Bob Yirka , Medical Xpress
September 15, 2022

vaccine-that-targets-b.jpg

mRNA-N vaccination induced protection against SARS-CoV-2 challenge in mice and hamsters. (A) Mouse experimental design and timeline. Two groups of BALB/c mice (n = 8) were intramuscularly vaccinated with PBS (mock) or mRNA-N vaccine (1 µg) at weeks 0 and 3. Two weeks after booster vaccination (week 5), mice were intranasally challenged with mouse-adapted (MA) SARS-CoV-2 (2 × 104 pfu). Two days post infection (DPI), viral loads in the lungs were analyzed to evaluate vaccine-induced protection. (B) Comparison of viral RNA copies in the mouse lungs between mock and vaccine groups are shown. Viral RNA copies were quantified by RT-PCR and expressed as log10 copies per milligram of lung tissue. (C) Comparison of viral titers in the mouse lungs between mock and vaccine group are shown. Viral titers were quantified by plaque assay and expressed as log10 FFU per gram of lung tissue. (D) Hamster experimental design and timeline. Three groups of hamsters were investigated. The first two groups (n = 12 per group) were intramuscularly vaccinated with mock or mRNA-N (2 µg) at weeks 0 and 3, followed by SARS-CoV-2 Delta challenge at week 5 and viral load analysis on 2 (n = 6) and 4 (n = 6) DPI. The third group (n = 6) received the same mRNA-N vaccine and subsequent viral challenge, except that these hamsters were intraperitoneally injected with two doses of antibodies for CD8+ T cell depletion at 6 and 3 days before viral challenge. Viral loads were analyzed on 2 DPI (n = 6). (E) Comparison of viral RNA copies in hamster lungs (log10 viral copies per milligram) between mock and vaccine group are shown for samples collected on 2 and 4 DPI. (F) Comparisons of viral titers in the hamster lungs (log10 FFU per gram) between mock and vaccine group are shown for samples collected on 2 and 4 DPI. (G) Comparison of hamster body weight loss is shown for the mock and vaccine group from days 0 to 4 DPI. (H) A comparison of viral RNA copies in the lung of hamsters (log10 viral copies per milligram) among the three groups is shown for samples collected on 2 DPI. The dashed line in (F) indicates the limit of detection. Data are presented as median and IQR where appropriate. Mann-Whitney (B, C, and G) or Kruskal-Wallis (E, F, and H) test was used for statistical analysis. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, and ***P < 0.001. Credit: Science Translational Medicine (2022). DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.abq1945

A large team of researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch, working with two colleagues from the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine and two with the Mayo Clinic, has developed a vaccine for COVID-19 that targets both the spike and nucleocapsid proteins in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In their paper published in the journal Science Translational Medicine, the group explains their approach to developing the new vaccine and describes how well it worked in test mice and hamsters.

As the pandemic has worn on, medical scientists have come to learn a lot about the virus behind COVID-19 infections. To that end, they have developed vaccines that target spike proteins on the virus that play a major role in allowing entry to host cells. Unfortunately, such spike proteins are easily changed by the virus, which results in the development of variants and the need for updated vaccines. In this new effort, the researchers focused on another protein in the virus, one that is less adaptable.

Just as the spike protein in the virus has been shortened to "S," the protein drawing the focus of the researchers on this new effort is shortened to "N"—for nucleocapsid protein. It is located in the core of the virus and helps it to replicate. Due to its function and location, it is much less likely to change, which means variants with different N proteins are not likely to develop very quickly.

The researchers created an mRNA-type vaccine that targets the N protein and tried it out on test mice. They found, as expected, that it did not do much to prevent new infections. But it did incite a strong T-cell response, which is good, because such cells help to clear the virus from the body.

The researchers then created an mRNA-type vaccine that focused on both the S and N proteins and then injected it into test mice. They observed both a very strong immune response and a quick recovery period. They also found the virus was less able to damage the lungs. And the bivalent vaccine worked better than a strictly S-based vaccine in a control group. The team ran similar tests with hamsters and found similar results.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


WHO strongly advises against antibody treatments for COVID-19 patients
by British Medical Journal
September 15, 2022

The antibody drugs sotrovimab and casirivimab-imdevimab are not recommended for patients with COVID-19, says a WHO Guideline Development Group of international experts in The BMJ today.

These drugs work by binding to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, neutralizing the virus's ability to infect cells.

Today's strong recommendation replaces previous conditional recommendations for their use and is based on emerging evidence from laboratory studies that these drugs are not likely to work against currently circulating variants, such as omicron.

After weighing up all the evidence, the panel judged that almost all well-informed patients would not choose to receive sotrovimab or casirivimab-imdevimab.

In the same guideline update, WHO makes a conditional recommendation for the use of the antiviral drug remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19, and a conditional recommendation against its use in patients with critical COVID-19.

These recommendations are based on results from five randomized trials involving 7,643 patients, showing 13 fewer deaths per 1,000 patients with severe COVID-19 taking remdesivir, but 34 more deaths per 1,000 patients with critical COVID-19 taking the drug.

These new trial data provided sufficiently trustworthy evidence to demonstrate benefits in patients with severe COVID-19, but not critical COVID-19. The panel considered the benefits of remdesivir to be modest and of moderate certainty for key outcomes such as mortality and mechanical ventilation, resulting in a conditional recommendation.

WHO also advises that three drugs used to treat arthritis—the IL-6 receptor blockers tocilizumab or sarilumab and the JAK inhibitor baricitinib—may now be combined, in addition to corticosteroids, in patients with severe or critical COVID-19.

This advice is based on new high-certainty trial evidence confirming a survival benefit for baricitinib with little or no serious adverse events when given in combination with corticosteroids and IL-6 receptor blockers.

However, the panel acknowledges some cost and resource implications associated with these drugs, which they say could exacerbate health inequities.

Today's recommendations are part of a living guideline, developed by the World Health Organization with the methodological support of MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation, to provide up to date, trustworthy guidance on the management of COVID-19 and help doctors make better decisions with their patients.

Living guidelines are useful in fast moving research areas like COVID-19 because they allow researchers to update previously vetted and peer reviewed evidence summaries as new information becomes available.

Previously, WHO has made a strong recommendation for use of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, and a conditional recommendation for molnupiravir for high-risk patients with non-severe COVID-19. WHO advises against the use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19 regardless of disease severity.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Team develops method to identify future SARS-CoV-2 mutations that could affect rapid antigen test performance
by National Institutes of Health
September 15, 2022


team-develops-method-t-1.jpg

Graphical abstract. Credit: Cell (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.08.010

A research team has shown that commercially available rapid antigen tests can detect past and present variants of concern and has identified potential mutations that may impact test performance in the future. As new variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus continue to emerge, concerns have been raised about the performance of rapid antigen tests.

The team developed a method to evaluate how mutations to SARS-CoV-2 can affect recognition by antibodies used in rapid antigen tests. Since most rapid antigen tests detect the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein, or N protein, the team directly measured how mutations to the N protein impacted diagnostic antibodies' ability to recognize their target.

"Rapid antigen tests remain an important COVID-19 mitigation tool, and it is essential to ensure that these tests can detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus as it continues to evolve," said Bruce J. Tromberg, Ph.D., director of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) and lead for the RADx Tech program at the NIH. "Considering the endless cycle of new variants, the data from this study will be useful for years to come."

The study, published in Cell, used a method called deep mutational scanning to simultaneously evaluate how any single amino acid substitution in the N protein could affect diagnostic antibody binding. The researchers generated an exhaustive library of N protein variations, which includes nearly 8,000 single amino acid substitutions—representing more than 99.5% of all possible mutations—and evaluated their interaction with 17 different diagnostic antibodies used in 11 commercially available rapid antigen tests. Rapid antigen tests often employ two different diagnostic antibodies for the detection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

For each diagnostic antibody evaluated, the researchers documented which mutations to the N protein affected antibody recognition. From this information, they created an "escape mutation profile" for each antibody, which lists the specific mutations to the N protein that have an effect on the antibody's ability to bind to its target. While several diagnostic antibodies recognized the same region of the N protein, the researchers found that each antibody had a unique escape mutation profile. As the SARS-CoV-2 virus continues to develop mutations, this data can be used to flag specific antibodies whose diagnostic performance may need to be re-assessed.

"Based on our findings, none of the major past and present SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern contain N protein mutations that would affect recognition by antibodies used in current rapid antigen tests," said first study author Filipp Frank, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the department of biochemistry at Emory University, Atlanta. "Further, this data could inform test design by identifying which diagnostic antibodies should be paired to identify the maximum amount of potential N protein variations."

"Accurate and efficient identification of infected individuals remains a critically important strategy for COVID-19 mitigation, and our study provides information about future SARS-CoV-2 mutations that may interfere with detection," said senior study author Eric Ortlund, Ph.D., a professor in the department of biochemistry at Emory University. "The results outlined here can allow us to quickly adapt to the virus as new variants continue to emerge, representing an immediate clinical and public health impact."

While many variants of concern contain multiple mutations to the N protein, the study authors note that their method does not evaluate how multiple mutations could affect diagnostic antibody recognition, representing a limitation of the study.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Moral values explain differences in COVID-19 vaccination rates across US counties
by Paul McQuiston, University of Southern California
September 15, 2022

Even though COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective and widely available in the United States, many Americans are still hesitant to get vaccinated. Indeed, there are stark disparities in COVID-19 vaccination rates across the United States: In some counties, almost all residents are vaccinated while, in other counties, only a minority of residents are vaccinated. A new study from USC researchers sheds light on the beliefs that underlie these consequential disparities in vaccination rates.

The study, published Wednesday in American Psychologist, found that, in line with what we already know about vaccination behavior, structural barriers such as access to health care, historic undervaccination and political barriers explained why residents of some counties were less likely to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Beyond that, however, the researchers showed that we need to consider Americans' moral values to understand the stark disparities in COVID-19 vaccination rates.

"If you look at a map of the proportion of vaccinations across U.S. counties, you find very stark differences across counties, across regions and across states," said Nils Karl Reimer, study co-author and postdoctoral researcher at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. "Our goal is to interrogate why these differences in political ideology coincide with differences in vaccination rates. We know already that, especially in the United States, conservatives and liberals endorse different values.

"The goal of our research was to understand how regional differences can help us explain differences in vaccination rates beyond the structural barriers, and indeed that's what we found. Moral values help explain these differences, above and beyond the well-known variables of political ideology and structural barriers."

Fairness, loyalty and purity most impactful values in determining COVID vaccination acceptance

The study rests on moral foundations theory, which argues there are five basic moral foundations: care, fairness, loyalty, authority and purity. Relying on data collected from the crowd-sourced website yourmorals.org—an online platform which collects an array of psychological data—the researchers estimated county-level moral values and county-level conservatism. This data was integrated with county-level vaccination rates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. COVID-19 Vaccine Coverage Index and presidential election data to control for variables not included in the study.

The researchers' analysis found moral concerns about fairness, loyalty and purity influenced county-level vaccination rates, but not care or authority. Counties with residents who prioritized purity were 0.8 times less likely to be vaccinated. The researchers pointed to previous research which shows that "conservatives care more about contamination and things they find disgusting."

"We found that some values that are traditionally associated with conservatism were associated with lower vaccination rates, the biggest of which was a desire for bodily and spiritual purity," Reimer said. "Endorsing these beliefs is related to all kinds of opinions such as being opposed to non-mainstream sexual practices or immigration."

On the other hand, counties with higher loyalty were 1.14 times more likely to have higher rates of vaccination. Or, if loyalty increased while other values remained the same, the vaccination rate could be expected to rise 3% countywide. Placing a high value on fairness was associated with a 2% increase in vaccination rates in similar conditions.

To test the accuracy of the model, the researchers compared it against two other models: one, which included only structural and demographic predictor variables, and another in which partisanship was an additional predictor variable. Both models failed to predict county-level vaccination rates as accurately as the third model, which also included county-level endorsement of moral concerns.

Anti-vaccination tied to higher valuation of purity, regardless of political party

The researchers said that while their hypotheses were largely borne out by the study, a few surprising trends emerged. The authors noted that loyalty is typically associated with conservative values, which in turn are associated with vaccine skepticism. However, the study found that loyalty is associated with higher vaccination rates—but only when controlling for the four other moral foundations.

"The loyalty finding is quite surprising because there is a lot of rhetoric about anti-vaccination among conservatives. However, what we're showing is that typical conservatives do not tend to be anti-vaxxers," said co-author Morteza Dehghani, associate professor of psychology and computer science at USC Dornsife. "The anti-vaxxers tend to be not high on loyalty, but high on purity. These include conservatives who are low on loyalty, and also liberals who tend to prioritize purity concerns, most likely focusing on bodily aspects of purity contamination ('My body is a temple and it should not be contaminated')."

"It is a sentiment you might find on both sides of the aisle," Reimer added, "and I think that's the great value of our approach because it gives a more fine-grained analysis. Conservatism is a constellation of different beliefs that don't always belong together logically."

Findings could help better target health communications to improve COVID vaccination rates


While these new findings support the claim that county-level moral values predict COVID-19 vaccination rates, the researchers stressed that policymakers should exercise caution when utilizing these insights. For instance, the results from the county level cannot be extrapolated to smaller (cities, neighborhoods, individuals) or larger (states) groupings.

The findings present policymakers and public health communicators with data by which to better reframe their public health communications related to the pandemic. The researchers suggest appealing to loyalty concerns by framing vaccination as a patriotic duty to fellow citizens. In regions high in purity, they suggest communications emphasizing the vaccine's ability to protect from contaminating disease to better appeal to vaccine skeptics.

"I think a lot of people who are skeptical of vaccination might think of it as a foreign chemical introduced into your body," Reimer said. "This sounds very scary, like something you wouldn't necessarily want to put in your body, but I think framing it in terms of the natural immune system response could resonate with some skeptics. These things are, importantly, mere speculation before further experiments, but our findings could point toward public health messaging that could be tested."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
I THINK THIS IS GEERT'S RESPONSE TO ROBERT MALONE'S COMMENT A FEW MONTHS BACK ON THAT VIDEO WITH DEL BIGTREE. !!!!!

ETA: Yes it is!!!

see post 64,347

Geert Vanden Bossche @GVDBossche
9:00 AM · Jul 22, 2022

... I have now been repeatedly contacted regarding a statement R. Malone made in a recent interview on the Highwire. In that interview, R. Malone stated that I have been wrong in concluding the mass vaccination program has been responsible for driving the dominant circulation of naturally selected SC-2 immune escape variants, and that this phenomenon was simply due to chronic infection of immunosuppressed individuals. ...





(fair use applies)


Q&A #22 : about the origin of dominant immune escape SARS-CoV-2 variants
By Geert Vanden Bossche
September 15, 2022

Question:

How could I be so wrong as to pretend that mass vaccination is responsible for immune escape of more infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants? Isn’t it rather the immunosuppressed people who enable the virus to escape the vaccine-induced immune response? This would also explain why the vaccinees are responsible for breeding immune escape variants: SARS-CoV-2 has now become a chronic infection in vaccinees and -like the situation with HIV- chronic infection leads to immune suppression and causes immune evasion of SARS-CoV-2 because the suboptimal immune response can easily be overcome by viral mutants. All of this is the result of antigenic imprinting/sin, which results in enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and the development of chronic infection.


Answer:

This reasoning is completely wrong. First, it is critical to understand that the enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 does not imply chronicity of infection. The enhanced susceptibility to infection directly results from the recall of potentially neutralizing, vaccine-induced antibodies (Abs), which largely fail to neutralize Omicron variants. Diminished neutralizing capacity may enable the host immune system to recognize the enhancing antigenic site on S(pike)-NTD (N-terminal domain) and thereby elicit infection-enhancing Abs. Fantini et al. (Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination? - PubMed) have shown, indeed, that diminished neutralizing capacity of anti-S Abs leads to Ab-dependent enhancement of infection. However, there is no evidence that enhancement of infection in vaccinees leads to chronic infection. On the contrary, enhanced viral clearance by cytolytic T cells would even explain why the amount of virus shed by vaccinees is lower than in the unvaccinated (| medRxiv C-19 mass vaccination triggers a chain reaction of new pandemics and epidemics | Voice for Science and Solidarity). There can also be no doubt that the infection-enhancing effect results from increasing resistance of SARS-CoV-2 to the vaccine-induced neutralizing Abs and that viral resistance results from natural selection and dominant propagation of SARS-CoV-2 immune escape variants, a phenomenon that can only be explained by mass C-19 vaccination.

If enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 would lead to chronic infection and immune suppression, one would not expect that vaccinees continue being protected against severe C-19 disease and, more recently, are even less prone to developing C-19 disease all together. The combination of enhanced susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe disease in vaccinees can only be explained by immune dysregulation, and not by immune suppression (like in HIV patients) following repetitive re-infection (still followed by viral clearance). Immune dysregulation involves inhibition of trans infection of susceptible alveolar cells by SARS-CoV-2 tethered to dendritic cells as well as accelerated clearance of virus-infected cells and antigen-presenting cells at an early stage of infection or antigen upregulation and presentation on MHC molecules, respectively. Consequently, the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is anything but immune suppressed. As already mentioned, this explains why (at least for now!) high viral infectiousness and intrinsic virulence of Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 variants can still be kept in check by the host and prevent severe C-19 disease.

I am therefore not buying the concept that repetitive SARS-CoV-2 infection in C-19 vaccinees leads to immune suppression and that this is why and how antigenic imprinting/sin causes enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and promotes immune escape. Dominant propagation of immune escape variants is the consequence of mass vaccination and causes immune dysregulation in vaccinees, thereby leading to their enhanced susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe C-19 disease, not the other way around!

In addition, I am not aware of any conclusive evidence showing that immunosuppressed individuals are responsible for the emergence of dominant immune escape variants in the population. Here are three publications dealing with the topic:




Alle of these publications clearly illustrate that in order for immune escape to occur in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, the latter should be in a pre-existing immunocompromised state and treated with convalescent plasma or monoclonal Abs. None of this is the case in the overwhelming majority of vaccinees. In addition, there is no evidence that escape mutants that emerge in such immunocompromised patients are transmitted, or that the types of mutations are comparable to those induced in the vaccinees.

It can, therefore, be unambiguously concluded that immune dysregulation[1] in C-19 vaccinees indirectly results from immune escape driven by mass C-19 vaccination, and not the other way around. This clearly implies that there is no rationale whatsoever to suspect immune suppressed individuals, even if unvaccinated, of breeding immune escape variants that expand in prevalence such as to become the dominant circulating lineage in the population.


[1] Even if immune ‘dysregulation’ were to be considered a form of immune ‘suppression’, the evidence cited in the text would disprove the hypothesis postulated in the opening question.
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


VSS Scientific Updates During Pandemic Times #37
By Geert Vanden Bossche
September 15, 2022

1. Yet Another Curveball in the COVID Mutation Nightmare?

From Geert: This is the best piece of ‘scientific’ propaganda I’ve seen to make people believe that the dramatic evolution of the virus is not driven by population-level S-directed immune pressure caused by mass vaccination with S-based vaccines!


2. “Anger” at Plans to Roll Back Covid Vaccines to Under-11s in England

“Subject to further clarification, on-going eligibility in 2022/23, after the one off-programme, is expected to be for children in the academic years where children are aged 11 or 12 years.”


3. A First: Avian Influenza Detected in American Dolphin

From Geert: I predict that the cases in mammalian species (including humans) will grow over winter. In addition, I am not sure whether spill-over cases of avian flu (or enzootic flu in general) always cause disease. I recently posted an article on my website postulating that the immune response in highly vaccinated populations could render monkeypox virus, but also enzootic flu, largely asymptomatic. In that case, symptomatic cases in humans and other mammalian species would only point to the tip of the iceberg. I must say, though, that I don't feel very reassured by the statement made in this press release:

"The virus has some features that make further study and follow-up on mammalian cases important, but the virus does not currently contain the features we know are required for transmission between humans and likely other mammalian hosts." "In addition, the recent discovery of HPAIV in a porpoise in Sweden almost certainly suggests that the Florida dolphin finding isn't a one-off, unique event".
How can we say that the virus has some 'features' that prevent transmission between humans and other mammalian species if we have no clue about potential asymptomatic transmission. It has recently been reported that the rapid and widespread dissemination of Monkeypox virus (in highly vaccinated countries!) was also rooted in asymptomatic transmission....


4. Second Person in the U.S. Dies After Contracting Monkeypox

From Geert: I am very worried about the monkeypox (MP) vaccination strategy. Vaccination of substantial cohorts is only going to increase the rate of asymptomatic infections. As explained in a previous contribution of mine (on my website), this is likely to result in natural selection of more infectious immune escape variants in vaccinees (this particularly applies to non-replicating vaccines, which are the ones currently used). Higher infection rates lead to higher morbidity rates, which simply increase the part of the population that exerts immune pressure on viral infectiousness (and therefore promotes immune escape).

So, we may end up with circulating MP virus that no longer matches the vaccinal antibodies very well. This implies an increased risk for vaccinees to contract antibody-dependent enhancement of disease. It’s not just a theoretical assumption (see link attached): " Significant mutation in the monkeypox virus that resulted in at least three infected Californians who were initially given "false negative results". That's why I am strongly advising against getting yourself vaccinated against MP?


5. Breakthrough Antibody Discovery Could Mean End to Covid Vaccines

From Geert: This is not taking into account the type of mutations one can reasonably expect to occur in the next generation of 'more virulent' variants. I have been predicting that the latter will primarily use changes in their glycosylation to overcome population-level immune pressure currently exerted on viral virulence. It's highly unlikely that the miraculous monoclonals will even be able to reach the critical neutralizing sites within spike protein. The keyword is 'steric hindrance'. One of the key roles of glycans grafted on viral proteins is to hide/ mask vulnerable domains!


6. Governor Declares NY Polio Emergency After Tests Show Virus in Long Island Wastewater

“The governor’s emergency order aims to bolster the state’s vaccination effort by making it easier for parents to get children vaccinated without needing to see a doctor. Now, pharmacists, paramedics and midwives will be able to dispense the vaccine, too.”

 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


POLITICO: How Bill Gates Took Over the Covid Pandemic
Bill Gates took over Covid just like he took over Operating Systems

Igor Chudov
18 hr ago

An amazing article from the least expected, mainstream source: The Politico.

The title of the article was apparently edited in a hurry post-publication because Google News still lists it as “How Bill Gates and his partners took over the global Covid response”. Here’s the archive link to the original article with “Bill Gates” in the title — proving it was later edited in a hurry.



Even the article URL lists Bill Gates:


The article would be fascinating to read for people who were not previously aware of what most of us knew already — that the so-called “pandemic response” and global health are taken over by unaccountable private interest groups serving Bill Gates.

I highly recommend that you take a look!

The story given by the article is incomplete but very interesting.

It mentions that the pandemic response was taken over by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, CEPI, and the Wellcome Trust. All four organizations pretend to be independent, but all were financed by Bill Gates.

They participated in Event 201, planning out the pandemic, in October 2019.

“What makes Bill Gates qualified to be giving advice and advising the U.S. government on where they should be putting the tremendous resources?” asked Kate Elder, senior vaccines policy adviser for the Doctors Without Borders’ Access Campaign.

Several important items are glaringly missing from the article:

  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, along with the US government (Avril Haines representing the US intelligence community) and China CDC, planned out the pandemic in October of 2019 by means of an “exercise” called Event 201.
  • Sars-Cov-2 is lab engineered and was designed intentionally
  • As pointed out by our astute reader Mel, do not forget the 3.1 million shares of BioNTech that Gates bought in Sept 2019 for $18.10/share. That $55 million investment was worth $1.7 billion by Aug 2021.
    EX-10.36
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation financed the organization that developed Sars-Cov-2 (EcoHealth Alliance) via grant INV-002838, and possibly more.
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation financed University of North Carolina, where Ralph Baric developed Sars-Cov-2 for EcoHealth Alliance, via 56 grants: INV-026327 INV-030330 INV-031704 INV-028991 INV-036494 INV-032887 INV-033909 INV-036560 OPP1192462 OPP1199232 OPP1201585 OPP1203327 OPP1195157 OPP1195363 OPP1191684 OPP1061107 OPP1090837 OPP1086528 OPP1108279 OPP1107923 OPP1235 OPP3436 OPP1142921 OPP38920 OPP38381 OPP23847 OPP17809 OPP1161858 OPP1158402 OPP1154943 OPP1172799 OPP1183027 OPP1181722 INV-006232 INV-001748 INV-005277 INV-016221 INV-019193 INV-016163 INV-003112 INV-001805 INV-003266 INV-002551 OPP1203712 OPP9404 OPP1014802 OPP1015539 OPP1024615 OPP1024664 OPP1015381 OPP1018000 OPP51976 OPP53107 OPP53450 OPP52037 OPP49260
  • Bill Gates had close ties with Jeffrey Epstein and visited him numerous times
Nevertheless, the mere publication of this article has huge importance. The things that most of us know and talk about, are appearing in the so-called “mainstream press” — after the damage was all done, of course.

The virus was released; millions died; over a billion young people were force-vaccinated under false pretenses. When it is too late to change anything, Politico is finally stating the obvious. Still, it is better than nothing.

Almost everything in the Politico article was known a year ago. Where was Politico then? Busy taking government covid vaccine advertising money.

The pandemic was a crime, not an accident.
.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Did the CDC once AGAIN, work to deceive & mislead & lie to the public? It seems so based on new media reports: "CDC admits agency gave false Information on COVID-19 Vaccine safety"
CDC spokesperson: 'the false information was given because CDC thought media reporters were asking about a different type of analysis adding that CDC’s “overall lack of transparency is unacceptable"

Dr. Paul Alexander
11 hr ago




What is the bottom line? The bottom line is they all, CDC, NIH, Fauci et al. are trying to run backwards and cover up and reverse what they did the last 2.5 years but we must not let them. These people collectively conspired and caused lives to be lost and they must be accountable. If the CDC did not conduct the proper harms analysis especially in a period when the vaccine was first rolled out, means they, still to today, have no idea about the safety of the vaccine they forced on people.

Source 1

‘Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the agency’s director, said in a letter made public on Sept. 12 that the CDC did not analyze certain types of adverse event reports at all in 2021, despite the agency previously saying it started in February 2021.

Walensky’s agency had promised in several documents, starting in early 2021, to perform a type of analysis called Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) on reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which it helps manage.

But the agency said in June that it did not perform PRRs. It also said that performing them was “outside the agency’s purview.”

Walensky’s newsletter, dated Sept. 2 and sent on Sept. 6 to Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), shows that Walensky is aware that her agency gave false information.

The letter “lacked any justification for why CDC performed PRRS during certain periods and not others,” Johnson, the top Republican on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Investigations, told Walensky in a response.

“You also provided no explanation as to why Dr. Su’s assertion … completely contradicts the CDC’s initial response … as well as your September 6, 2022, response to me,” he added.

He demanded answers from the CDC on the situation, including why the CDC did not perform PRRs until March and why the agency misinformed the public when it said no PRRs were conducted.

The CDC and Walensky did not respond to requests for comment.

SOURCE 2:

CDC Admits Scary Truths About Vaccine

SOURCE 3:

Walensky Admits CDC Gave False Information on COVID Vaccine Safety Monitoring. The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a letter made public Sept. 12 acknowledged publicly for the first time that the agency gave false information about its COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring, but the letter provided no explanation.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Spike protein from infection (and thus ALSO vaccine induced) can cause damage to cardiac pericytes, to endothelial function, to mitochondria, and can also impair DNA self-repair
Exploding excess (all-cause) mortality & plunging birth rates can be explained by the ravages of the spike protein; as COVID infection deaths have dropped appreciably, there is a rise in vaccine death
Dr. Paul Alexander
13 hr ago

I share 4 pieces of evidence for your perusal and updating of your libraries, the issue being that we know the lethal role of the spike protein itself on cardiac cells, on the vascular walls etc. and we thus must infer that the spike manufactured by your cells induced by the COVID injection, will do same. We also know that spike persists in the body for many months and I argue there is no ‘off’ switch and that it persists life-long, doing damage; Patterson et al. showed us this, indicating that the spike post vaccine will persist as a pathogen and cause life-long damage; no one in their right mind would have chosen the spike ‘mutable’ protein as the antigen target and thus it begs the question, why would Pfizer and Moderna et al. chose the lethal toxic portion of the COVID virus as the component to be made by your cells as the antibody target? We even have evidence that the spike purified, on it’s own, is lethal, it does not need the rest of the viral ball to go along with it:

The SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein disrupts human cardiac pericytes function through CD147 receptor-mediated signalling: a potential non-infective mechanism of COVID-19 microvascular disease

The capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect vascular cells is still debated. Additionally, the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) protein may act as a ligand to induce non-infective cellular stress. We tested this hypothesis in pericytes (PCs), which are reportedly reduced in the heart of patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Here we newly show that the in vitro exposure of primary human cardiac PCs to the SARS-CoV-2 wildtype strain or the α and δ variants caused rare infection events. Exposure to the recombinant S protein alone elicited signalling and functional alterations, including: (1) increased migration, (2) reduced ability to support endothelial cell (EC) network formation on Matrigel, (3) secretion of pro-inflammatory molecules typically involved in the cytokine storm, and (4) production of pro-apoptotic factors causing EC death…In conclusion, our findings suggest that the S protein may prompt PC dysfunction, potentially contributing to microvascular injury. This mechanism may have clinical and therapeutic implications.’

SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2

‘in the current study, we show that S protein alone can damage vascular endothelial cells (ECs) by downregulating ACE2 and consequently inhibiting mitochondrial function. We administered a pseudovirus expressing S protein (Pseu-Spike) to Syrian hamsters intratracheally. Lung damage was apparent in animals receiving Pseu-Spike, revealed by thickening of the alveolar septa and increased infiltration of mononuclear cells.’

An evidence that SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19 spike protein (SP) damages hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells in the mechanism of pyroptosis in Nlrp3 inflammasome-dependent manner

‘Mounting evidence accumulates that hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPCs) and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) are damaged during severe SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19 infection [1, 2]. It has been reported that patient infected with COVID-19 are frequently presented with anemia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia [1,2,3]. This negative effect of the virus on human hematopoiesis and endothelium has been reported in infected patients and demonstrated in vitro after exposure of cells to SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19 spike protein (SP).’

SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro

‘Clinical studies have indicated that patients with severe COVID–19 exhibit delayed and weak adaptive immune responses; however, the mechanism by which SARS–CoV–2 impedes adaptive immunity remains unclear. Here, by using an in vitro cell line, we report that the SARS–CoV–2 spike protein significantly inhibits DNA damage repair, which is required for effective V(D)J recombination in adaptive immunity…findings reveal a potential molecular mechanism by which the spike protein might impede adaptive immunity and underscore the potential side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines.’

Persistence of SARS CoV-2 S1 Protein in CD16+ Monocytes in Post-Acute Sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) up to 15 Months Post-Infection

‘We analyzed T-cell, B-cell, and monocytic subsets in both severe COVID-19 patients and in patients with post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). The levels of both intermediate (CD14+, CD16+) and non-classical monocyte (CD14Lo, CD16+) were significantly elevated in PASC patients up to 15 months post-acute infection compared to healthy controls (P=0.002 and P=0.01, respectively). A statistically significant number of non-classical monocytes contained SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein in both severe (P=0.004) and PASC patients (P=0.02) out to 15 months post-infection.’
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Covid-19 Pandemic is Ending, not through the actions pushed by Teodros and His WHO & UN Cronies, but by an Avalanche of Incriminating Evidence of Harm that is Too Big to be Overlooked!!
NSW, Australia shows a pandemic of the vaccinated! Hong Kong in trouble with again rising cases and deaths! Peer reviewed study showed very poor booster risk-benefit outcomes. Graphene Oxide Study!

SuperSally888
18 hr ago

Teodros has just announced that the end of the pandemic is in sight, calling on countries to “take a hard look” at their covid-19 and pandemic policies and “strengthen them”, and to invest in 100% vaccination of at risk groups including health workers and of their elderly.



Tedros and his UN buddies are no doubt right that the end of the pandemic is nearing. I say NOT because of them, IN SPITE of them, because the house of pandemic lies has been built on quicksand! The flimsy threads of safe and effective are unravelling rapidly and can no longer be held together in the face of the mounting evidence.

The Covid-19 Pandemic was engineered to bring in the mRNA vaccines (modify the codes of life), social controls, wealth transfer, and population controls, among others. Surely by now those who are aware can see that the C19 and the vaccines are part of a larger plan to collapse and reset the entire world!

If the safe and effective fails will the rest of the plan fail?

Effective? Safe?​

They renamed the experimental gene modification therapies as vaccines to increase acceptance and then marketed them aggressively as the way out of the pandemic. Remember lockdowns were to “flatten the curve” while the health care system ramped up? I suspect that was part of the psy-op to prepare the citizens to submit to the coming warp speed jabs.

The jabs were first equated to traditional vaccines and pushed to prevent infection and transmission. Then the narrative changed (though not in the Philippines, we are still at the “Wall of Immunity”, protect others phase) and they were marketed as a means to stop severe illness and death. But they are worse than ineffective, they drive infection and deaths! Every single place that the vaccines were rolled out cases and deaths exploded.

I have observed that when a country crosses a threshold at somewhere between high 60% and 80% of their population jabbed, they had (still have) waves of infection!

Australia has 86.5% of their population injected to date (225 doses/ 100 people); data from NSW which has a population of 8 million, 1/3 of Australia’s population, shows deaths and hospitalizations predominate in the vaccinated, the more doses (green = 4 doses) the worse the outcome.


Heavily Vaccinated Hong Kong is Having Rising Cases and Deaths​

I haven’t written about Hong Kong before. Hong Kong, a bastion of obsessive masking, testing, isolation, and repressive C-19 safety measures, had effectively no C-19 cases, convincing most of the population that all the sacrifices, lockdowns and draconian border controls were somehow worth it (They still have mandatory, self-paid hotel quarantine for all returning residents and visitors)! When they hit 67% of their population vaccinated (160 doses/100 persons including 17.8/100 persons boosted) cases and deaths firestorm exploded.



As of 10th September 2022, they are up to 92% of their population jabbed and 73% boosted; expatriates have left, residents are fleeing in droves to other countries, they have a huge labor shortage, and no more tourism; no-one goes to the once proud vibrant Hong Kong anymore! Currently they have nearly 10,000 cases a day and deaths are rising again! The vaccines are clearly working, how they work!! Hong Kong is a shell of herself!

Denmark Stops Boosters for Most Under 50s​

After stopping new vaccination of under 18s last 1st July 2022 and all vaccination of this age group by 1st September 2022, Denmark has now stopped booster vaccination for nearly everyone under 50!


Safety Based on Peer Reviewed Studies​

For all the naysayers hanging out for peer reviewed studies, they are finally, belatedly being published, 1 1/2 years too late.

This discussion on peer reviewed research of Covid-19 Vaccine Boosters concluded that the booster vaccines are Unethical and 98x worse than covid-19 infection for young adults, paper here.



Serious adverse events of special interest? These skew the risk benefit the wrong way!



Another peer reviewed and discussed paper found abnormal blood in vaccine recipients.



Graphene Oxide​


It has long been rumored that there is graphene oxide in vials. Here is a Forensic Report on the presence of graphene oxide in UK Vials of all the key vials.



Discussed by Dr. Anna as linked, I cannot absolutely vouch for these documents, but have no reason to believe they are not genuine. They are certainly devastating and incriminating.

Dr. Ana’s Newsletter
UK Forensic Report Finds Graphene: Qualitative Evaluation of Inclusions In Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines – by UNIT: Self-Assembly Graphene Nanoparticles confirmed
The Expose reported on a Forensic Analysis of C19 injection vials. https://expose-news.com/2022/09/10/uk-lab-report-graphene-covid-vaccines/ Here is the full document: This report is of utmost significance as it has a meticulous chain of custody documentation, which is important to be able to submit it for any court case. This forensic laboratory report ha…
Read more

15 hours ago · 45 likes · 18 comments · Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD

If you still don’t believe there is a problem, just search the term “Sudden Death”. I got 216 million hits!



Sudden deaths?. Rubbish! Let’s cut the chase and call a spade a spade! Most are likely vaccine related. Please do not take any more of these products called vaccines than you already have!
.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Pfizer mRNA Vaccine-Related Brain Injuries
Many people are inquiring about brain-related adverse events, or side effects, from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

Amy Kelly
11 hr ago

Psychiatric Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs), such as epileptic psychosis, autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infection, and postictal psychosis, are found in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-released Pfizer document titled, “5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021.”

A search for the word root "cereb" – a prefix that indicates a word relates to the brain – in the previously mentioned Pfizer document returns 33 results including:
cerebrovascular accident, cerebral infarction, cerebral ischemia, cerebral thrombosis, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, ischemic cerebral infarction [with] lacunar infarction, cerebellar infarction [with] thrombotic stroke, cerebral hemorrhage, cerebral hematoma, cerebellar artery thrombosis, cerebellar embolism, cerebral amyloid angiopathy, cerebral arteritis, cerebral artery embolism, cerebral artery thrombosis, cerebral gas embolism, cerebral microembolism, cerebral septic infarct, cerebral thrombosis, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, cerebrospinal thrombotic tamponade, cerebrovascular accident, embolic cerebellar infarction, embolic cerebral infarction, precerebral artery thrombosis, secondary cerebellar degeneration, thrombotic cerebral infarction, and cerebellar hemorrhage.

Digging deeper, we find other brain-related AESIs such as basal ganglia stroke and basal ganglia hemorrhage. "The basal ganglia are subcortical structures located at the base of the forebrain." [Basal Ganglia – Foundations of Neuroscience] Searching the document for the term "brain" reveals that there are even more brain-related issues such encephalitis of the brain stem, brain stem embolism, brain stem thrombosis, and rheumatic brain disease.

In addition, brain fog, also known as "vax fog," and other brain-related issues, including a myriad of cerebral vascular events, have been documented following COVID vaccination.

A recent study linked the often-fatal prion disease known as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. CJD is a degenerative brain disease that can cause dementia and has similarities to Alzheimer's disease.

The FDA-released Pfizer documents and other scientific literature clearly demonstrate that mRNA COVID vaccines cause a diverse set of adverse events, including death, affecting the brain. This topic will require additional research and updates as the FDA continues to release the court-ordered Pfizer documents and as more time elapses, both of which may bring other brain-related side effects to light.
.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

This was a 2 part article, I snipped the 2nd part, it was the first part that I thought was relevant to the thread. Click on the link if you want to read the whole thing.


MUST READ: Doctor At A Large Teaching Hospital Provides Insights Into The Coming Cold & Flu Season
And some additional insights into covert tech.
2nd Smartest Guy in the World
12 hr ago

My anonymous source emailed the following just now:

I spoke with a doctor friend yesterday. While a lot of problematic events are coalescing around the world (pandemic, economic issues, war in Ukraine, threats against Taiwan, food and energy shortages, etc.) my friend has a singularity of focus on Medical issues due to his senior position at a large teaching hospital.
I talked to him yesterday with the same suppositions I emailed you, about the Chinese likely knowing a lot more about Covid than they let on. He concurred, but went into a lot more detail. He regularly discusses Australia as the canary in the coalmine. They are emerging from their winter just as we are looking to shortly enter ours which in his mind makes them a good predictor of what’s to come in our winter here.
Australia’s flu season started earlier than usual, which would correlate to ours starting in Oct. This would be right during the 14 day (technically unvaccinated yet excessively vulnerable status) of those who chased down and got the dual variant vaccine as soon as they could.
His concerns are as follows:
Australia had by far their worst flu/covid season ever. More illness and death than anything on record for them. Yet they are well over 90% vaccinated.
My friend is predicting the same situation to occur in the US. But of specific mention is the fact that Australia is seeing more and more reinfections from covid as well as chronic issues caused by covid. Problems include lungs, heart, brain, kidney, as well as general immunity issues. Over the long term, constant Covid reinfection IS worse than the flu!
Life expectancy is declining dramatically there (as it is in the US and other vaccinated countries).
Imagining COVID is 'like the flu' is cutting thousands of lives short. It's time to wake up (medicalxpress.com)
He was my earlier source and again cited Omicron variant Ba2.75 (also known as Omicron 22d or Centaurus) as most likely leading the next wave. I checked on Nextstrain and indeed it is now up to 5% of reported global infections. This is the first time I’ve seen it this high and it is growing while the other variants are in decline. It nearly doubled since their last report.
Nextstrain / ncov / gisaid / global / 6m
He was agreeing with my email from yesterday that there is a good PROBABILITY that China knows a lot more about Covid than we do, and that it may (over the long term) be much worse than we know. Especially if your immune system is compromised due to the vaccine. That’s the reason for their zero covid policy, their lockdowns (despite crushing their economy,) their spraying down the streets while dressed in hazmat suits, and their not using an mRNA vaccine themselves, etc.
He thought it both ironic but intentional that at the same time the WHO is releasing statements that they think the pandemic is ending, that governments around the world are ending mandatory testing and reducing their reporting on covid infections. Some reporting is being entirely eliminated. Thus automatically fulfilling their prophecy of the pandemic in remission.
End of COVID-19 pandemic is 'in sight', WHO director says (yahoo.com)
The problem my friend sees is: If the new Ba2.75 wave he’s predicting hits, with tracking virtually eliminated, we may easily be deceived into believing whatever “the experts” tell us.
As people die of pneumonias and other organ related failures due to covid, or from depleted immune systems caused by the covid vaccine, other things will be blamed, perhaps the return of the flu, stress, climate change, (maybe increased background radiation issues from a Russian tactical nuke used in Ukraine) whatever.
Bottom line: Like I, he fears that covid (and the vaccine effect) is a lot more serious in the long run than we know. We are in for one tough winter.
Worse still, we are being set up to be deceived again as to what’s causing it all, it ‘ll be Anything But Covid (or vaccine) related according to the government/pharmaceutical experts because according to them, the pandemic is ending.

[snipped the 2nd part]


The above perfectly gibes with what this substack has been warning about for many months now.

I highly suggest that both unvaccinated and especially “vaccinated” individuals run ivermectin at prophylactic doses as well as daily administration of powerful nutraceuticals like VIR-X ahead of what is all but certain to be a most disastrous winter.

.
 

psychgirl

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Do we know what the article above my post means ….by saying to use “nutraceuticals”? What are those?

Or do I already know and it’s just too early, lol?

Frightening article though, say the least!
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
I THINK THIS IS GEERT'S RESPONSE TO ROBERT MALONE'S COMMENT A FEW MONTHS BACK ON THAT VIDEO WITH DEL BIGTREE. !!!!!

ETA: Yes it is!!!

see post 64,347

Geert Vanden Bossche @GVDBossche
9:00 AM · Jul 22, 2022

... I have now been repeatedly contacted regarding a statement R. Malone made in a recent interview on the Highwire. In that interview, R. Malone stated that I have been wrong in concluding the mass vaccination program has been responsible for driving the dominant circulation of naturally selected SC-2 immune escape variants, and that this phenomenon was simply due to chronic infection of immunosuppressed individuals. ...





(fair use applies)


Q&A #22 : about the origin of dominant immune escape SARS-CoV-2 variants
By Geert Vanden Bossche
September 15, 2022

Question:

How could I be so wrong as to pretend that mass vaccination is responsible for immune escape of more infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants? Isn’t it rather the immunosuppressed people who enable the virus to escape the vaccine-induced immune response? This would also explain why the vaccinees are responsible for breeding immune escape variants: SARS-CoV-2 has now become a chronic infection in vaccinees and -like the situation with HIV- chronic infection leads to immune suppression and causes immune evasion of SARS-CoV-2 because the suboptimal immune response can easily be overcome by viral mutants. All of this is the result of antigenic imprinting/sin, which results in enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and the development of chronic infection.


Answer:

This reasoning is completely wrong. First, it is critical to understand that the enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 does not imply chronicity of infection. The enhanced susceptibility to infection directly results from the recall of potentially neutralizing, vaccine-induced antibodies (Abs), which largely fail to neutralize Omicron variants. Diminished neutralizing capacity may enable the host immune system to recognize the enhancing antigenic site on S(pike)-NTD (N-terminal domain) and thereby elicit infection-enhancing Abs. Fantini et al. (Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination? - PubMed) have shown, indeed, that diminished neutralizing capacity of anti-S Abs leads to Ab-dependent enhancement of infection. However, there is no evidence that enhancement of infection in vaccinees leads to chronic infection. On the contrary, enhanced viral clearance by cytolytic T cells would even explain why the amount of virus shed by vaccinees is lower than in the unvaccinated (| medRxiv C-19 mass vaccination triggers a chain reaction of new pandemics and epidemics | Voice for Science and Solidarity). There can also be no doubt that the infection-enhancing effect results from increasing resistance of SARS-CoV-2 to the vaccine-induced neutralizing Abs and that viral resistance results from natural selection and dominant propagation of SARS-CoV-2 immune escape variants, a phenomenon that can only be explained by mass C-19 vaccination.

If enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 would lead to chronic infection and immune suppression, one would not expect that vaccinees continue being protected against severe C-19 disease and, more recently, are even less prone to developing C-19 disease all together. The combination of enhanced susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe disease in vaccinees can only be explained by immune dysregulation, and not by immune suppression (like in HIV patients) following repetitive re-infection (still followed by viral clearance). Immune dysregulation involves inhibition of trans infection of susceptible alveolar cells by SARS-CoV-2 tethered to dendritic cells as well as accelerated clearance of virus-infected cells and antigen-presenting cells at an early stage of infection or antigen upregulation and presentation on MHC molecules, respectively. Consequently, the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is anything but immune suppressed. As already mentioned, this explains why (at least for now!) high viral infectiousness and intrinsic virulence of Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 variants can still be kept in check by the host and prevent severe C-19 disease.

I am therefore not buying the concept that repetitive SARS-CoV-2 infection in C-19 vaccinees leads to immune suppression and that this is why and how antigenic imprinting/sin causes enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and promotes immune escape. Dominant propagation of immune escape variants is the consequence of mass vaccination and causes immune dysregulation in vaccinees, thereby leading to their enhanced susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe C-19 disease, not the other way around!

In addition, I am not aware of any conclusive evidence showing that immunosuppressed individuals are responsible for the emergence of dominant immune escape variants in the population. Here are three publications dealing with the topic:




Alle of these publications clearly illustrate that in order for immune escape to occur in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, the latter should be in a pre-existing immunocompromised state and treated with convalescent plasma or monoclonal Abs. None of this is the case in the overwhelming majority of vaccinees. In addition, there is no evidence that escape mutants that emerge in such immunocompromised patients are transmitted, or that the types of mutations are comparable to those induced in the vaccinees.

It can, therefore, be unambiguously concluded that immune dysregulation[1] in C-19 vaccinees indirectly results from immune escape driven by mass C-19 vaccination, and not the other way around. This clearly implies that there is no rationale whatsoever to suspect immune suppressed individuals, even if unvaccinated, of breeding immune escape variants that expand in prevalence such as to become the dominant circulating lineage in the population.


[1] Even if immune ‘dysregulation’ were to be considered a form of immune ‘suppression’, the evidence cited in the text would disprove the hypothesis postulated in the opening question.
Good find and nice detective work HD
Ty

Geert is the GOAT
 
Neutraceuticals are the general term for nutritional, non-drug substances like vitamins and minerals, intended to be used against things like cold and flu, and other respiratory conditions. My words. The mention of VIR-X was a sales pitch. Here is what I use:
/* Quercetin 500mg Supplement, Zinc 50mg, Vitamin C, Vitamin D3, Bromelain for Immune Health Support - Zinc Quercetin with Bromelain Supplement - Immunity Health https://a.co/d/hXYWiQw
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
Good find and nice detective work HD
Ty

Geert is the GOAT
I THINK THIS IS GEERT'S RESPONSE TO ROBERT MALONE'S COMMENT A FEW MONTHS BACK ON THAT VIDEO WITH DEL BIGTREE. !!!!!

ETA: Yes it is!!!

see post 64,347

Geert Vanden Bossche @GVDBossche
9:00 AM · Jul 22, 2022

... I have now been repeatedly contacted regarding a statement R. Malone made in a recent interview on the Highwire. In that interview, R. Malone stated that I have been wrong in concluding the mass vaccination program has been responsible for driving the dominant circulation of naturally selected SC-2 immune escape variants, and that this phenomenon was simply due to chronic infection of immunosuppressed individuals. ...





(fair use applies)


Q&A #22 : about the origin of dominant immune escape SARS-CoV-2 variants
By Geert Vanden Bossche
September 15, 2022

Question:

How could I be so wrong as to pretend that mass vaccination is responsible for immune escape of more infectious SARS-CoV-2 variants? Isn’t it rather the immunosuppressed people who enable the virus to escape the vaccine-induced immune response? This would also explain why the vaccinees are responsible for breeding immune escape variants: SARS-CoV-2 has now become a chronic infection in vaccinees and -like the situation with HIV- chronic infection leads to immune suppression and causes immune evasion of SARS-CoV-2 because the suboptimal immune response can easily be overcome by viral mutants. All of this is the result of antigenic imprinting/sin, which results in enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and the development of chronic infection.


Answer:

This reasoning is completely wrong. First, it is critical to understand that the enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 does not imply chronicity of infection. The enhanced susceptibility to infection directly results from the recall of potentially neutralizing, vaccine-induced antibodies (Abs), which largely fail to neutralize Omicron variants. Diminished neutralizing capacity may enable the host immune system to recognize the enhancing antigenic site on S(pike)-NTD (N-terminal domain) and thereby elicit infection-enhancing Abs. Fantini et al. (Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination? - PubMed) have shown, indeed, that diminished neutralizing capacity of anti-S Abs leads to Ab-dependent enhancement of infection. However, there is no evidence that enhancement of infection in vaccinees leads to chronic infection. On the contrary, enhanced viral clearance by cytolytic T cells would even explain why the amount of virus shed by vaccinees is lower than in the unvaccinated (| medRxiv C-19 mass vaccination triggers a chain reaction of new pandemics and epidemics | Voice for Science and Solidarity). There can also be no doubt that the infection-enhancing effect results from increasing resistance of SARS-CoV-2 to the vaccine-induced neutralizing Abs and that viral resistance results from natural selection and dominant propagation of SARS-CoV-2 immune escape variants, a phenomenon that can only be explained by mass C-19 vaccination.

If enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees to SARS-CoV-2 would lead to chronic infection and immune suppression, one would not expect that vaccinees continue being protected against severe C-19 disease and, more recently, are even less prone to developing C-19 disease all together. The combination of enhanced susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe disease in vaccinees can only be explained by immune dysregulation, and not by immune suppression (like in HIV patients) following repetitive re-infection (still followed by viral clearance). Immune dysregulation involves inhibition of trans infection of susceptible alveolar cells by SARS-CoV-2 tethered to dendritic cells as well as accelerated clearance of virus-infected cells and antigen-presenting cells at an early stage of infection or antigen upregulation and presentation on MHC molecules, respectively. Consequently, the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is anything but immune suppressed. As already mentioned, this explains why (at least for now!) high viral infectiousness and intrinsic virulence of Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 variants can still be kept in check by the host and prevent severe C-19 disease.

I am therefore not buying the concept that repetitive SARS-CoV-2 infection in C-19 vaccinees leads to immune suppression and that this is why and how antigenic imprinting/sin causes enhanced susceptibility of vaccinees and promotes immune escape. Dominant propagation of immune escape variants is the consequence of mass vaccination and causes immune dysregulation in vaccinees, thereby leading to their enhanced susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and protection against severe C-19 disease, not the other way around!

In addition, I am not aware of any conclusive evidence showing that immunosuppressed individuals are responsible for the emergence of dominant immune escape variants in the population. Here are three publications dealing with the topic:




Alle of these publications clearly illustrate that in order for immune escape to occur in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, the latter should be in a pre-existing immunocompromised state and treated with convalescent plasma or monoclonal Abs. None of this is the case in the overwhelming majority of vaccinees. In addition, there is no evidence that escape mutants that emerge in such immunocompromised patients are transmitted, or that the types of mutations are comparable to those induced in the vaccinees.

It can, therefore, be unambiguously concluded that immune dysregulation[1] in C-19 vaccinees indirectly results from immune escape driven by mass C-19 vaccination, and not the other way around. This clearly implies that there is no rationale whatsoever to suspect immune suppressed individuals, even if unvaccinated, of breeding immune escape variants that expand in prevalence such as to become the dominant circulating lineage in the population.


[1] Even if immune ‘dysregulation’ were to be considered a form of immune ‘suppression’, the evidence cited in the text would disprove the hypothesis postulated in the opening question.
And here is Geert dealing with the same subject.


63237ab474c50d39e977aa61_VSS_37.jpg

1. Yet Another Curveball in the COVID Mutation Nightmare?​

From Geert: This is the best piece of ‘scientific’ propaganda I’ve seen to make people believe that the dramatic evolution of the virus is not driven by population-level S-directed immune pressure caused by mass vaccination with S-based vaccines!
Yet Another Curveball in the COVID Mutation Nightmare
 
Last edited:

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Can you combine Paxlovid with other COVID-19 drugs?
Alexander Tin - CBS News
Fri, September 16, 2022, 1:37 PM

Taking Pfizer's blockbuster COVID-19 pills, Paxlovid, at the same time as a rival's treatment for the virus might be safe and more effective than either drug alone, federal scientists have found.

The combination might also offer a solution to so-called "rebound" cases, when patients see a return of symptoms after finishing off a course of Paxlovid.

But more research is needed, and the Food and Drug Administration does not currently allow doctors to prescribe both drugs to a patient.

The findings, published this month as a preprint that has yet to be peer-reviewed, come from a study run by the National Institutes of Health in monkeys.

After being infected by the Delta variant, some were given both Paxlovid and Lagevrio — the COVID-19 antiviral drug produced by Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics.

Animals who got both treatments saw "decreased SARS-CoV-2 shedding and replication" early on in their infection, and "milder disease" compared to those who got only one drug or the other. The researchers saw no concerning reactions among animals who got the two drugs.

However, the study's authors cautioned that there were key questions that will need to be addressed in future human trials and experiments with the two drugs. And for now, the FDA says doctors are not allowed to prescribe Paxlovid to patients at the same time as Lagevrio.

Greenlighted last year under the name molnupiravir, Lagevrio is only authorized by the FDA for use in patients where alternative options "are not accessible or clinically appropriate."

Lagevrio carries additional warnings that Paxlovid does not, like risks it could pose to reproduction — it should not be taken during pregnancy — and the chance it could lead to new, worrying variants.

"Therefore, if a patient is taking Paxlovid, an alternative COVID-19 treatment option authorized by the FDA, they would not be eligible for Lagevrio," Chanapa Tantibanchachai, a spokesperson for the agency, said in a statement.

Another treatment option, Eli Lilly's bebtelovimab, carries the same kind of requirement, which effectively bars providers from combining the monoclonal antibody drug with Pfizer's pills.

"No data" on how to treat rebound

Earlier this year, South Korean researchers reported in a preprint that they had found a "profound" improvement in mice who were given both drugs.

The NIH's study tested the two drugs in rhesus macaques, the "closest surrogate to humans."

But while the study's authors speculated the combination might "counteract the 'rebound effect'," the animals in their experiment only received four days of treatment before autopsies were conducted.

By contrast, rebound cases in COVID patients have generally been reported a few days after the person finishes the full five-day course of Paxlovid.

In an email, the National Institutes of Health's Dr. Heinz Feldmann blamed the early end to the study on "viral kinetics": Before the animals' virus levels dropped too low, the scientists wanted to be able to compare samples from of the viral load in different parts of the body.

"We went for peak virus replication (day 3 or 4) to better show the efficacy of the treatment," Feldmann wrote.

The approach has sparked interest in part because the two drugs work in different ways. Paxlovid works by blocking the process by which the virus replicates in the body. Lagevrio aims to battle the virus by creating too many errors as it replicates.

"Combination antivirals are the rule in other viral diseases, for example HIV and hepatitis C. The combination of antivirals can enhance the potency and decrease the risk of the emergence of resistant viruses," Dr. Roy Gulick, chief of the division of infectious diseases at Weill Cornell Medicine, said in an email.

Gulick is co-chair of the NIH's COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines panel, which has continued to publish updated recommendations for doctors treating patients throughout the pandemic.

He also pointed to other viruses that do not need more than one antiviral, like herpes and hepatitis B.

"It's potentially worth studying in humans, but it may be challenging to improve upon the 89% success rate of Paxlovid," Gulick wrote, citing Pfizer's initial results in high-risk unvaccinated adults.

In August, the FDA said it would amend Pfizer's emergency use authorization to require a clinical trial to study rebound cases. The company says it plans to study "retreatment" with another course of Paxlovid for these patients.

So far, the NIH panel's recommendations for doctors treating rebound cases say that there is "currently no data on the efficacy of administering longer courses or a second course of ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir."

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president's outgoing chief medical adviser, is among the Americans who have reported battling a COVID rebound.

The 81-year-old told the "NIH Record" that he sought out a second course of the pills, after he came down with the return of symptoms.

"I got much more sick than I was the first time around," said Fauci.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


National COVID-19 wastewater levels signal viral uptick ahead of fall

ARIELLE MITROPOULOS - GMA
Fri, September 16, 2022, 6:07 AM

Although reported COVID-19 case levels in the U.S. are still falling after a viral resurgence over the summer, there are preliminary indicators that infection rates may be back on the rise across the country.

In recent weeks, federal data has shown that the number of U.S. wastewater sites reporting increases in the presence of COVID-19 in their samples appears to be back on the rise, following declines seen throughout the latter part of the summer.

In the U.S., about 50% of wastewater sites, which are currently providing data to the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, have reported an increase in the presence of the COVID-19 virus in their wastewater over the last 15 days, up from the 40% of sites reporting increases last month.

From coast to coast, every area of the country has seen a rise, according to a regional breakdown from Biobot, a wastewater monitoring company based in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

The Northeast, in particular, appears to be seeing higher growth levels, reporting the highest wastewater levels of any region, Biobot data shows.

"Increase in virus concentration found in wastewater has [predictably] been a key indicator of a forthcoming COVID surge. In fact, given the challenges in case estimation and the decline in testing, wastewater surveillance may be one the last remaining high-quality datasets public health can rely on," said epidemiologist Dr. John Brownstein, chief innovation officer at Boston Children's Hospital and an ABC News contributor, who is also a member on the board of advisers for Biobot.

In Boston, wastewater levels had plateaued after a spring and summer surge, but in recent weeks, data indicates that COVID-19 sampling levels have increased again to their highest level in two months.

However, on a national level, federal data is notably unavailable for many areas of the country, particularly across much of the South and the West.

Since last spring, many states have moved to shutter public testing sites, with more at-home COVID-19 tests now available.

COVID-19 testing levels have also plummeted to their lowest point since the onset of the pandemic, with approximately 350,000 tests reported each day, compared to more than 2.5 million tests reported daily at the nation's peak in January.

Most Americans are not reporting their results to officials, and thus, experts suggest that infection totals are likely significantly undercounted.

With official COVID-19 case data becoming less reliable, many scientists have been turning to wastewater data to monitor the state of the pandemic.

"While there are important caveats in how these data are collected and integrated, we should still take this signal as a warning that we are not out of the pandemic," Brownstein said.

With fall around the corner, health experts have reignited their calls for all Americans to get vaccinated.

"We're calling on all Americans: Roll up your sleeve to get your COVID-19 vaccine shot," White House COVID-19 Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha said during a press briefing last week. "If you're 12 and above and previously vaccinated, it's time to go get an updated COVID-19 shot."

To date, less than half of the fully vaccinated population has received their first COVID-19 booster.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


EU regulator backs wider use of AstraZeneca COVID therapy
Pushkala Aripaka and Natalie Grover
Fri, September 16, 2022, 2:44 AM

LONDON (Reuters) -Europe's medicines regulator has backed using AstraZeneca's preventative COVID-19 therapy as a treatment for the disease and also endorsed another medicine as preventative option for another common virus.

The regulator's recommendations are usually followed by the European Commission when it takes a final decision on drug approvals.

AstraZeneca said on Friday the European Medicines Agency (EMA) had backed Evusheld as a treatment for adults and adolescents with COVID who do not need supplemental oxygen and who are at increased risk of their disease worsening.

Last month, Japan became the first country to approve the long-acting antibody as a treatment for COVID - making Evusheld the first such therapy authorised for both prevention and treatment of the viral disease.

Evusheld had previously had largely secured global approvals, including in Europe, as a preventative therapy for people with compromised immune systems who see little or no benefit from COVID vaccines.

AstraZeneca is leaning on Evusheld to help offset tepid sales of its COVID vaccine that has rapidly lost ground to mRNA shots in the fight against the rapidly evolving virus.

Evusheld, first launched in December, generated $914 million in the first half of 2022 for the Anglo-Swedish drugmaker.

Separately on Friday, the EMA also endorsed AstraZeneca and partner Sanofi's experimental long-acting therapy Beyfortus for the prevention of lower respiratory tract infections caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

RSV causes thousands of hospitalisations and deaths globally each year in toddlers and the elderly, but the complex molecular structure of the virus and safety concerns have stymied efforts to develop a vaccine since the virus was first discovered in 1956.

But there is one therapy, Synagis, also developed by AstraZeneca but sold by Swedish Orphan Biovitrum in the United States.

It is designed to prevent lower respiratory tract infections caused by RSV in high-risk infants and requires up to five injections to cover a typical RSV season.

Meanwhile, if Beyfortus were approved, it would be the first single-dose preventative RSV therapy for the broad infant population - including those born healthy or are deemed high-risk - during their first RSV season.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Is COVID's end in sight? "We're going to live with the virus," expert says

Tori B. Powell - CBS News
Fri, September 16, 2022, 3:15 PM

The director of the World Health Organization said this week that "the end is in sight" for the coronavirus pandemic. CBS News medical contributor Dr. David Agus said although he believes the U.S. is "at the end of the pandemic," COVID-19 is not necessarily "over."

"I do think COVID-19 is going to continue," Agus told "CBS Mornings" on Friday. "It is not going to be a pandemic that shuts things down. We're going to live with the virus. We're not going to hide from it. People are still going to get it."

The physician said booster shots and Pfizer's Paxlovid pill will help keep people from dying or being hospitalized from the virus.

"We're going to have to get used to testing when we feel sick and staying home," he said. "This is our regular cadence for the next couple years."

He encouraged people to become fully vaccinated against COVID if they haven't yet, adding that it is safe to mix booster doses and that doing so provides a "bump in immunity."

And with flu season approaching, Agus also urged people to get their flu shots.

"For two years — 40 million people normally get [the flu] a year — they didn't, so we have less immunity to the flu," he said.

He also pushed for more monkeypox vaccines to be provided to communities where the virus is spreading.

"It's still in this population of individuals, gay men predominantly," Agus said. "We need to get more vaccines to them, and if they do get it, we need to treat them because we have treatments that work, so monkeypox, unfortunately, it's spread like wildfire, but now it's getting under control."
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Is The End Of COVID-19 In Sight?
by Tyler Durden
Friday, Sep 16, 2022 - 11:20 PM

Delivering his most upbeat message since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic in March 2020, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, said that the end of the pandemic was finally near.

“We have never been in a better position to end the pandemic. We are not there yet, but the end is in sight,” he said at a media briefing on Wednesday.

Using the image of a marathon runner approaching the finish line, Dr. Tedros warned against complacency, however, saying that “a marathon runner does not stop when the finish line comes into view. She runs harder, with all the energy she has left.”

Statista's Felix Richter notes that while the world is still seeing millions of new Covid-19 cases per week, with the real number probably even higher due to limited testing, those infections are no longer resulting in as many severe cases or deaths as we’ve seen in earlier stages of the pandemic.

28264.jpeg

You will find more infographics at Statista

The weekly number of deaths is now lower than it has been at the end of March 2020, and it’s been below that level for a couple of months now.

Make no mistake, more than one million people still died from Covid this year, but the latest trend in hospitalizations and deaths is encouraging.

“We can see the finish line,” Dr. Tedros said in conclusion.

“We’re in a winning position. But now is the worst time to stop running.” To help the world cross the line and avoid the risk of “more variants, more deaths, more disruption, and more uncertainty, the WHO released six policy briefs outlining best practices to save lives, protect health systems, and avoid social and economic disruption.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Fauci ‘Clearly Misled Congress’ Over COVID-19 Origins: Former CDC Director
By Jack Phillips
September 16, 2022

The former director of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), who has long suspected the hypothesis that COVID-19 leaked from a Chinese laboratory, said that he believes White House adviser Anthony Fauci misled Congress about controversial gain-of-function research.

Dr. Robert Redfield asserted in a new interview that “everyone had to agree to the narrative” pushed by Fauci and other health officials that the virus came from a “wet market” in Wuhan in 2019 and not the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In an interview in early 2021 with CNN, Redfield, a longtime virologist, said the virus emerged from the lab, later sparking death threats against him and his family from prominent scientists.

And Fauci “may have overplayed his hand when he was so aggressive with Congress, saying that he was never involved in funding gain of function research,” said Redfield, referring to the controversial research to genetically alters an organism to enhance certain biological functions including transmissibility. “There’s too much evidence that’s just not true.”

“Fauci knows that he’s funded this research. He also knows that he misled Congress. They’re in protection mode,” he told Paul Thacker’s Disinformation Chronicle newsletter for Substack.

During hearings, Fauci has clashed with several Republican lawmakers and namely, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) over whether his agency provided funding to a third-party group to carry out gain-of-function research at the Wuhan laboratory.

In 2021, Fauci told a congressional panel that the National Institutes of Health did not provide money to researchers in Wuhan. However, documents released later that year revealed the agency funded gain-of-function research in China on bat coronaviruses.

“Yes, he clearly misled Congress,” Redfield said. “And then he went over the top taking on Rand Paul and others in an offensive way for a public servant. Tony and I are friends, but we don’t agree on this at all.”

‘Nature of the Beast’

Last summer, when asked about the research, Fauci denied that he lied before Congress.

“Sen. Paul, I have never lied before the Congress and I do not retract that statement. This paper that you are referring to was judged by qualified staff up and down the chain as not being gain of function,” Fauci told Paul.

“Sen. Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly, and I want to say that officially. You do not know what you are talking about,” he added during a July Senate hearing.

In the interview, Redfield also noted that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in the early stages of the pandemic made a “decision to put Fauci out in the public,” and it “was never the (Trump) White House blocking us at CDC from publicly addressing the pandemic. It was HHS.”

Over the coming months and now years, Fauci essentially becomes the federal government’s public face on COVID-19. In that span, Fauci has given likely hundreds of interviews to different media outlets, including local broadcasters.

Republicans have criticized him for recommending masking, lockdowns, school closures, and vaccine mandates while simultaneously making dire predictions on the trajectory of COVID-19. Several GOP lawmakers, including Paul, have said they plan on investigating Fauci after the 2022 midterms.

“The whole thing is scientific arrogance. There was an arrogance that they could contain this, that it wouldn’t escape it,” Redfield said. “I worked with the Chinese CDC for many years while in the military and while at the University of Maryland. And viruses get out of labs. That’s just the nature of the beast.”

The National Intelligence Council last year released an assessment on the origins of COIVD-19, reporting that the 17-agency intelligence community “remains divided on the most likely origin” of the virus. Some officials believe that “natural exposure to an infected animal” sparked it, while others believe it was “a laboratory-associated incident,” according to the report.

The Epoch Times has contacted the National Institutes of Health for comment.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Doctor: Intra-Nasal Immunization Against COVID-19 Is More Effective Than Injections

BY Weber Lee
September 16, 2022

COVID-19 has been infecting people around the world for more than two years. Many people still get the virus even though they have received as many as four vaccinations. Chiang Kuan-yu, a doctor of the Taipei City United Hospital in Taiwan, said that the “mucosal vaccine” given in the form of a nasal or oral spray can help activate immune cells in the respiratory tract and may be more effective in preventing infection than intramuscular (IM) vaccine injections.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus infects the mucosal surfaces of the nose and lungs and thus, the mucous producing surfaces are the first line of defense against pathogens.

The mucosal vaccines are different from injectable vaccines. Chiang said that the “mucosal vaccine” has an important feature—it preferentially promotes the production of secretory immunoglobulin A (IgA) in nasal secretions that can neutralize the virus.

He pointed out that although the intramuscular vaccine can reduce the severity of cases and the hospital admission rate, it cannot prevent mild illness or transmission of the virus.

He explained that when the vaccine is injected into the muscle, it triggers an immune response that activates B cells to produce antibodies and T cells. But the antibodies are not enough to provide immediate and rapid protection.

The immune cells in the respiratory mucosa, called tissue-resident memory T cells and B cells, function slightly differently from circulating T cells and B cells found in the blood and lymph. They produce secretory IgA, antibodies that are intertwined with the layers of the respiratory tract and are able to deter pathogens instantly.

Chiang pointed out that some mucosal vaccines are packaged into aerosols and inhaled through the mouth with a sprayer. The dose is one-fifth the amount of an injected vaccine.

Mainland China and India approved COVID-19 mucosal vaccines earlier this month that are administered by oral inhalation and nasal spray respectively.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), mucosal vaccines can generate an immune response in the mucous membranes of the respiratory tract and are therefore expected to be capable of preventing infection and the spread of the virus.

The WHO has not yet approved use of the mucosal vaccine. The organization needs to see more vaccine-related data in order to assess its efficacy.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Taiwanese Study Finds a Chinese Herb Stops Coronavirus From Penetrating Cells and Works Against Mutant Variants

BY Teresa Zhang
September 16, 2022

The COVID-19 pandemic is still happening around the world. Although many kinds of COVID-19 vaccines have been established, most of them are not effective against the virus variants. A study by China Medical University in Taiwan pointed that an alkaloid, peimine, which is extracted from Fritillary plants, has a preventive effect from some virus variants, and has the potential to be developed as a drug or health food. This research was published in the Journal of Food Biochemistry in July 2022.

Since the COVID-19 outbreak, many vaccines have been introduced to the market. The research team pointed out that Among them, the mRNA vaccine has a preventive effect of up to 95 percent on coronavirus. However, many studies have shown that the effectiveness is lacking toward certain virus variants.

The research team experiments proved that peimine (Zhebei A in Chinese) can block the binding of the virus’ spike protein to the human cell receptor ACE-2. Thereby, preventing the SARS-CoV-2 virus from invading the cells. Peimine is also effective against many variant viruses and is non-toxic to cells even at relatively high concentrations.

Peimine, therefore, is a relatively safe new drug. The study also discovered that in addition to Fritillaria Thunbergii, a variety of Fritillary plants can also protect against Covid infections.

Fritillary plants are common in traditional Chinese medicine. Varieties include Sichuan Fritillaria, Fritillaria Thunbergii, Fritillary, Fritillaria Unibracteata, and others. Their functions include clearing heat, resolving phlegm, and relieving cough. Medical research has shown that peimine also has an anti-cancer effect.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Nearly 50 Members of Congress Call on Pentagon to End Military Vaccine Mandate

By Katabella Roberts
September 16, 2022

Nearly 50 Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), have called on the Department of Defense (DOD) to withdraw its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for military members, citing concerns over the mandate’s impact on the readiness of the U.S. Armed Forces.

In a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin dated Sept. 15 (pdf), lawmakers, including Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), expressed their “grave concerns” over the impact of the mandate, particularly with regard to the U.S. Army.

“As a result of your mandate, eight percent of the Army’s approximately 1 million soldiers face expulsion, Army recruiters cannot meet their FY22 target, and the Army has cut its projected FY23 end strength by 12,000 soldiers,” they wrote.

Referring to Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, lawmakers noted that the U.S. military currently faces “a self-imposed readiness crisis.”

Citing “sparse” data from the Department of Army, they noted that “at least 40,000 National Guardsmen, 20,000 Army Reservists, and at least 15,000 Active Army Soldiers” have not yet received a COVID-19 shot and subsequently face being discharged from service.

“The Department of Defense’s own Covid response page indicates that approximately 900,000 soldiers are fully vaccinated out of the 1 million soldiers in the Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard,” they wrote.

Lawmakers pointed to testimony delivered in July by Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen. Joseph Martin, before the House Armed Services Committee. During that testimony, Martin stated that “less than 20,000” people were facing discharge for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine, much less than the initial figures that officials had provided.

‘Inquiries Remain Unanswered’


However, lawmakers in their letter to the DOD noted that the Army has not published official data pertaining to the number of unvaccinated service members in months.

“The opaqueness of the Department continues to frustrate Members of Congress attempting to perform oversight of the Executive Branch,” they wrote, noting that their “repeated inquiries remain unanswered.”

Republicans also pointed to the “thousands of servicemembers” that “have been left in limbo” while they await a formal judgment regarding their medical exemptions to the vaccine.

“Some have waited for nearly a year to learn if they will be forcibly discharged for their sincerely held religious beliefs or medical concerns,” lawmakers wrote.

“Furthermore, according to current Army policy, even those few soldiers who receive permanent exemptions will be treated as second-class soldiers for the rest of their careers—each of them requires approval from the Undersecretary of the Army to travel, change assignments, or even attend training courses away from their home station,” they wrote.

According to U.S Army fragmentary orders published by Fox News, the Army has barred unvaccinated soldiers from official travel unless they receive the undersecretary’s approval.

“The Department has abused the trust and good faith of loyal servicemembers by handling vaccine exemptions in a sluggish and disingenuous manner,” lawmakers said.

They then questioned who would replace the roughly 75,000 soldiers if they were to be discharged from the Army. Martin said in July that if a shortfall in Army troop size were to persist, it could have an impact on readiness.

Service Member Shortfall

Citing Army Secretary Christine Wormuth’s interview with NBC News earlier this year in which she noted that the Army has only met 52 percent of its recruiting goal for the fiscal year 2022, they asked, “How will it recruit another 75,000 troops beyond its annual target to account for vaccine-related discharges?”

In that same interview, Wormuth said she believes the Army would end up roughly 12,000 to 15,000 recruits short this year.

“The data is now clear. The Department of Defense’s Covid vaccine mandate is deleterious to readiness and the military’s ability to fight and win wars,” lawmakers concluded. “The vaccine provides negligible benefit to the young, fit members of our Armed Forces, and the mandate’s imposition is clearly affecting the Department’s ability to sustain combat formations and recruit future talent.”

“We urge you to immediately revoke your Covid-19 vaccine mandate for all servicemembers, civilian personnel, and contractors and re-instate those who have already been discharged.”

As of July 1, 2022, under the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate, members of the Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve who are not vaccinated and do not have an approved exemption are unable to participate in federally funded drills and training and will not receive pay or retirement credit.

Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate has been in place across the entire military since last year and the White House has defended the move, stating that mass vaccination will help stem the spread of the virus.

The Epoch Times has contacted the Department of Defense for comment.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ty50dhrmaI
Pandemic failures
15 min 43 sec

Sep 16, 2022
Dr. John Campbell

The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic 14th September 2022 Lancet... The Lancet COVID-19 Commission WHO response WHO acted too cautiously and too slowly Several important matters To warn about human transmissibility of the virus To declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern To support international travel protocols designed to slow the spread of the virus (This delay contributed to the spread of the virus and limited the possibilities for risk mitigation.) To endorse the public use of face masks as protective gear To recognise the airborne transmission of the virus. (These delayed and vague recommendations from WHO continued until late April, 2021.) Just 1 example, after receiving an open letter From 238 scientists in July, 2020, asking the organisation to address airborne transmission WHO did not change until April 30, 2021. Multiple failures of international cooperation Too many governments have failed to adhere to basic norms of institutional rationality and transparency, and the world's major powers have failed to collaborate to control the pandemic. Specific points Lack of timely notification of the initial outbreak of COVID-19 Costly delays in acknowledging the crucial airborne exposure pathway of SARS-CoV-2, and in implementing appropriate measures at national and global levels to slow the spread of the virus. Lack of coordination among countries regarding suppression strategies Failure of governments to examine evidence and adopt best practices for controlling the pandemic, and managing economic and social spillovers Shortfall of global funding for low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) Failure to ensure adequate global supplies and equitable distribution of key commodities, protective gear, diagnostics, medicines, medical devices, and vaccines Lack of timely, accurate, systematic data Infections, deaths, viral variants, health system responses, and indirect health consequences Again the report raised lab leak possibility Poor enforcement of appropriate levels of biosafety regulations in the lead-up to the pandemic, raising the possibility of a laboratory-related outbreak Failure to combat systematic disinformation Lack of global and national safety nets to protect populations experiencing vulnerability. As of May 31, 2022 There were 6·9 million reported deaths and 17·2 million estimated deaths from COVID-19 Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation IHME | COVID-19 Projections... This staggering death toll is both a profound tragedy and a massive global failure at multiple levels. Sustainable development process Set back by several years, Deep underfinancing, Sustainable Development Goals and, aims of the Paris Climate Agreement. Previous publications Lancet 2021 Lancet... Lancet Jan 2022 Lancet... Lancet...
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsQj7hW7tOg
Lancet Commission Report on COVID - The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
52 min 44 sec

Streamed live Sep 16, 2022

Interesting beginning of a new era of finger pointing and further bias in the name of commissions. Let's see what Lancet commission has to say.

https://twitter.com/thelancet/status/...
Page 4. United States and other countries.


URL list from Friday, Sep. 16 2022

The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic - The Lancet

The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic

WHO responds to The Lancet COVID-19 Commission

Timeline of WHO's response to COVID-19

WHO Declares COVID-19 a Pandemic - PubMed

Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

People at The Lancet

Richard Horton (editor) - Wikipedia

DrScott on Twitter: "People know we have to get a new flu vaccine every year to deal with variations of influenza virus. Wilensky is saying that nobody thought new variants might not be susceptible to the vaccine? Oh yes we were We were just CANCELED!! https://t.co/wYJbsHtnpn" / Twitter

Covid-19: How Much Herd Immunity is Enough? - The New York Times
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


What You Learned About Zoonotic Disease Spillover Risk During COVID-19 Pandemic May Be Wrong
By American Institute of Biological Sciences
September 16, 2022

Disease spillover risk was poorly communicated and oversimplified during COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 has been the first pandemic that has taken place alongside the interconnectivity of the Internet and pervasive social media. As a consequence, the spread of ideas and information about the disease has been unprecedented—but not always accurate. Among the widely circulated headlines was one about the relationship between land change and the spillover of diseases from wildlife to humans.

Writing in the journal BioScience on September 16, Andre D. Mader of the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies and colleagues survey primary and secondary literature, as well as webpage content on the subject of land change and zoonotic disease risk. Based on the troubling patterns picked up from this literature and media coverage, Mader and colleagues describe what amounts to a case study in improper science communication and its possible consequences.

According to the researchers, media messaging throughout the pandemic consistently described direct causality between zoonotic disease spread and land use change. This was despite the fact that only 53% of the surveyed peer-reviewed literature made this association. In the report the authors delve into theoretical scenarios that would demonstrate the difficulty of tracing the real risk of zoonotic spillover, emphasizing that the “complexity of pathogen responses to land change cannot be reduced to one-size-fits-all proclamations.”

Furthermore, the authors discovered that as the literature moves from primary research to review articles and commentaries, and finally to webpages, the “overstating of the evidence” continually increases. In fact, 78% of secondary papers imply the land use–zoonotic spillover association, and all but one of the sampled webpages make this association. In addition, the researchers also noted that secondary sources and web pages frequently failed to mention the uncertainty associated with their conclusions.

There are significant potential consequences of simplistic messaging and a lack of proper communication regarding zoonotic spillover. It can erode credibility, neglect the local community’s specific needs when it comes to policymaking, and detract attention from other factors that can lead to zoonotic spillover, say Mader and colleagues. They recommend more accurate, nuanced, and explanatory dissemination of the studies on zoonotic spillover risk, arguing that such an approach would also benefit science more broadly.

As Mader and colleagues conclude, “if the goal of science communication is to improve understanding, it must strike a balance: sufficient simplicity to be grasped by as broad an audience as possible but sufficient nuance to capture the complexity of an issue and contribute meaningfully to the discussion around it, especially when it goes viral.”

Reference: “Messaging Should Reflect the Nuanced Relationship between Land Change and Zoonotic Disease Risk” 16 September 20220, BioScience.
DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biac075
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Stick to Masks: Face Shields Don’t Provide High-Level COVID Protection

By University of East Anglia
September 16, 2022

The peer-reviewed study found that face shields did not give high levels of protection against external droplets.

According to a recent study from the University of East Anglia, if you used a face shield during the epidemic, it probably didn’t provide you with a high degree of protection against Covid. A study released today evaluated 13 different types of face shields in controlled laboratory environments.

While all of the face shields offered some protection, none provided high levels of protection from external droplets. In addition to doing laboratory studies on face shields, the research team polled individuals, including health workers, in middle-income nations (Brazil and Nigeria), regarding their attitudes about face shields as PPE.

Professor Paul Hunter, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, said: “Face shields have been popular because they don’t hinder breathing, they allow more natural communication than face masks and they provide splash protection. They were widely used throughout the Covid pandemic. But until now there hasn’t been a great deal of evidence about how protective they really are – particularly taking into account how people use them in the real world, and especially in poorer parts of the world. We wanted to find out more about how protective different styles of face shields might be, both in the lab and in real-world settings.”

UEA researchers collaborated with staff at the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), Britain’s regulator for workplace health and safety, who tested 13 face shield designs in a controlled laboratory setting, using a ‘coughing machine’ that ejected fluorescent drops onto manikin heads.

How much the manikin face was contaminated by the simulated cough droplets was graded from most to least.

Dr. Julii Brainard, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, said: “The lab tests showed that all of the face shields provided some protection, but none gave high levels of protection against external droplet contamination. The level of protection provided was influenced by design features, as well as which way the manikin had its head turned when it was ‘coughed’ at. We found that large gaps around the sides, and sometimes the bottom or top, allow respiratory droplets from other people to get to the face and this means exposure to possible viruses. The shields that offered most protection were closed across the forehead and extended well around the sides of the face and below the chin. It’s important to know that the lab experiments are in the scenario of someone actively coughing at the shield wearer from close proximity. But the chances of droplets getting around the shield onto the face from just speaking are much lower.”

To learn more about how face shields are used in a real-world setting, the team surveyed more than 600 people across Nigeria and Brazil, including health care staff.

Dr. Brainard said: “We wanted to know about how users cleaned them, and the things that mattered most when choosing facial PPE during the pandemic. Not surprisingly, we found that people want proven protective products that are comfortable, stable on their heads, easy to clean and don’t look strange. This study is important because the acceptability of facial PPE during the pandemic has been mostly studied in richer countries like the UK or USA. The participants in our study were in Nigeria and Brazil and we shouldn’t assume that people in all countries view facial PPE in the same way. It is also important to understand what design features in face shields could be more or less protective so that people are able to choose the most effective designs.

“Finally, we wanted to know how people cleaned reusable face shields – methylated or surgical spirits were popular, for instance, but so was plain water and soap. Some cleaning chemicals could be incompatible with shield coatings intended to prevent fogging or facilitate quick-drying, for instance. Dust outside and fogging inside shields were occasional problems, too,” she added.

The study was recently published in the American Journal of Infection Control. In a related project, the HSE team tested face shields available for use in the UK. The results of this work, together with more details of the cough simulator, are published in the journal Annals of Work Exposures and Health.

Dr. Brian Crook, a microbiologist on the HSE team, said: “It is important that people using any type of PPE to protect themselves from infection know how effective it is, but also its limitations. We are working with an international standards committee to write guidance towards a better means of providing that information.”

Reference: “Evaluation of Face Shields, Goggles, and Safety Glasses as a Virus Transmission Control Measure to Protect the Wearer Against Cough Droplets” by Samantha Hall, Paul Johnson, Claire Bailey, Zoe Gould, Robert White and Brian Crook, 20 July 2022, American Journal of Infection Control.
DOI: 10.1093/annweh/wxac047
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Higher risk of serious COVID-19 complications in children with immunodeficiency
by Karolinska Institutet
September 16, 2022

Children with certain immunodeficiency diseases carry mutations in genes that regulate the body's immune system against viral infections and they have a higher mortality rate due to COVID-19. This is according to a study by researchers from Karolinska Institutet, published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

Most children infected with the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus develop a mild illness or show no symptoms at all. But for a small percentage, serious complications may develop.

"Mortality is much higher among children with primary immunodeficiency diseases infected with SARS-CoV-2. Our results indicate that basic immunological examination and genetic analysis should be conducted in children with severe COVID-19 or multi-inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C). The clinicians will then be able to help these children with more precise therapies based on their genetic changes," says Qiang Pan-Hammarström, professor at the Department of Biosciences and Nutrition, Karolinska Institutet, who led the study.

How the infection affects patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases (i.e. hereditary and congenital diseases of the immune system) is controversial. Even among these patients, some suffer from severe COVID-19 while others experience mild or no symptoms.

To investigate this more closely, and try to find genetic explanations for severe forms of COVID-19, researchers from Karolinska Institutet have studied young patients with primary immunodeficiency diseases (also called inborn errors of immunity, IEI) who developed severe or critical SARS-CoV-2 infection. Genetic and immunological analyses were performed.

Opportunity for more targeted therapy


"Our results clarify the molecular mechanism of these immune diseases, which opens up the possibility of developing a more targeted therapy. The knowledge acquired from the study also allows us to develop better strategies for the treatment and prevention of severe COVID-19 disease in these patients," says Qiang Pan-Hammarström.

The study included 31 children aged five months to 19 years. All children had some type of primary immunodeficiency disease without a molecular diagnosis and suffered from severe or critical COVID-19. Participants were recruited from August to September 2020 in Iran. None of the children were vaccinated against COVID-19.

Eleven of the children, more than one-third, died of complications from the infection. Five children, 16%, met the criteria for multi–inflammatory syndrome, MIS-C. Some of the children lacked antibodies to the coronavirus.

"This suggests that many children with this type of immune disease cannot produce antiviral antibodies and therefore would not have the full benefit of vaccination," says Hassan Abolhassani, assistant professor at the Department of Biosciences and Nutrition, Karolinska Institutet, and the study's first author.

Mutations in immune genes


Genetic analyses showed that more than 90% of the participants, 28 children, had mutations in genes that are important for our immune defense, and that could explain their immunodeficiency. An important mechanism was mutations that affect proteins that regulate the immune system during virus infection, known as interferons.

The analyses of the patients' immune responses showed that children with MIS-C had immunological profiles that differ from the profiles of children with primary immunodeficiency but without MIS-C.

The study also includes a literature review, where the researchers globally found reports of approximately 1,210 patients with primary immunodeficiency disease and COVID-19. About 30% of them were children. The mortality rate among children with primary immunodeficiency disease and COVID-19 was more than 8%, compared with about 0.01% among children in the general population.

The study is limited to severe cases of COVID-19, infected with the original strain of the virus, and non-vaccinated children. Further studies are needed to evaluate the importance of different virus variants and vaccines in this patient group.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Researcher proposes national program to support individuals with long COVID
by Boston University School of Medicine
September 16, 2022

While the COVID-19 pandemic wanes, the U.S. continues to face a national health challenge—the effective and equitable care of individuals with Long COVID. While the federal government is responding to this condition, few of their undertakings directly address clinical care and the potential of disability compensation. To ensure the effective and equitable care for millions of affected individuals, a Boston University School of Medicine (BUSM) researcher is urging the U.S. to commit to creating a National Long COVID Compensation Program (NLCCP).

"It will likely take years to understand the pathophysiology of this disorder, refine objective diagnostic criteria, and develop effective treatments. Many treatments will be tried, some based in biology, others offered by for-profit entities, with limited scientific basis. During this time it will be difficult for individuals to sort fact from fiction and those with financial means will pay for treatments, regardless of documented effectiveness," says Howard C. Bauchner, MD, professor of pediatrics at BUSM.

The CDC estimates that 150 million people in the U.S. have had symptomatic COVID-19 illness. There are additional estimates that as many as 50 percent of people who have had COVID-19 still report symptoms four months following infection. If just five percent ultimately fulfill criteria for Long COVID, 7.5 million individuals would be affected in the U.S. In comparison, each year in the U.S., approximately 1.8 million individuals are diagnosed with cancer and 1.5 million with diabetes.

According to Bauchner, as more contagious variants emerge and objective diagnostic criteria for Long COVID are developed, the number of patients in need of care is expected to change. "Patients with the disease will have mild symptoms to substantial disability and it will be very difficult, particularly in individuals with diseases such as diabetes, or chronic pulmonary or cardiovascular disease, to separate the symptoms of Long COVID from those symptoms that evolve with other diseases," he adds.

In the face of this daunting challenge, Bauchner believes that the U.S. should look to the example of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which was created in 1986 to ensure a stable supply of vaccines, protect vaccine manufactures from liability claims and fairly compensate individuals who had very rare medical consequences associated with vaccines.

"With this model in mind, I recommend that the U.S. create the NLCCP in which several entities could contribute to such a fund, including pharmaceutical and other companies that have reaped substantial profit since the pandemic began; and health and disability insurers, who would benefit from such a program," he says.

While Bauchner admits that such a national program would face challenges, going without one may likely result in individuals not receiving the care they need, disparities in care will inevitably develop, patients will be exposed to ineffective treatments, and staggering costs will be passed on to employers and state and federal governments. "Only a coordinated, national program, could ensure an effective and equitable system of care for patients with Long COVID."

This opinion appears online in the journal Health Affairs.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)

Excess weight, not high blood sugar, associated with increased risk of COVID-19 infection and long COVID
by Diabetologia
September 17, 2022

High body mass index (BMI), rather than high blood sugar levels, are associated with excess risks of COVID-19 infection and long COVID, according to a meta-analysis of over 30,000 UK adults from nine large prospective cohort studies.

The findings by Dr. Anika Knuppel from the MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing, University College London, UK, and colleagues are being presented at this year's European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) Annual Meeting in Stockholm, Sweden (19-23 Sept).

"Early in the pandemic research identified diabetes and obesity as risk factors for becoming severely ill with COVID-19. And we know that many people living with type 2 diabetes are also carrying excess weight. Our early findings support the idea that obesity-related mechanisms may be responsible for the excess risks of COVID-19 associated with diabetes, rather than high blood sugar per se," says Dr. Knuppel.

Previous research showed that people with diabetes and obesity are more likely to become severely ill and die if they catch COVID-19, but are no more likely to contract it. However, the underlying mechanisms, and their role in prolonged post-COVID-19 symptoms (long COVID), remains unclear.

To find out more, researchers looked for associations between a range of clinical characteristics measured before the pandemic—HbA1c (average blood sugar level), self-reported or medication-based diabetes, body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR)—and self-reported COVID-19 infection and long COVID in nine ongoing UK cohort studies.

The analyses included the most recent measurements (taken between 2002 and 2019) of HbA1c, weight, height, waist and hip circumference from each study as well as information from questionnaires on health and lifestyle.

All eligible participants (maximum 31,252, aged 19-75 years old, 57% female) had data on previous measurements and completed at least one questionnaire during the COVID-19 pandemic (May 2020 to September 2021) covering questions on COVID-19 and, where possible, questions on the length of ongoing COVID-19-related symptoms.

Participants reported having COVID-19 based on a positive test or strong suspicion. Long COVID was defined as symptoms that went on or affected functioning for longer than four weeks post-infection and was compared to those reporting symptoms for less than four weeks.

Where possible, associations were adjusted for sex, smoking, ethnicity, income, and education at the time of measurement.

Between May 2020 and September 2021, 5,806 participants reported ever having COVID-19, and 584 reported having long COVID (around 7% of COVID-19 cases with information on symptoms length).

Analysis of data from 31,252 participants in nine studies found higher BMI was associated with greater odds of COVID-19 infection—with the risk 7% higher for each 5kg/m2 increase in BMI. People with overweight (BMI 25-29.9kg/m2) and obesity (30 kg/m2 or greater) had 10% and 16% greater odds of COVID-19 infection, respectively, than healthy weight individuals (less than 25 kg/m2.

Similar results were observed for long COVID (4,243 participants, six studies)—with the risk 20% higher for each 5kg/m2 increase in BMI. People with overweight and obesity had 20% and 36% greater odds of long COVID, respectively. However, for both COVID infection and long COVID associations with categories of BMI were not all statistically significant (so we cannot be sure they are not due to chance).

Analysis investigating the association with WHR were inconclusive.

Notably, studies focusing on average blood sugar level (HbA1c) and diabetes (15,795 participants and 1,917 for long COVID) revealed no association with COVID-19 or long-COVID.

The researchers stress the need for further research to explore the mechanisms underpinning these associations and to reduce the excess risk associated with high BMI. "Our early findings suggest a link of adiposity with COVID-19 infection and long COVID-19 even after taking into account socio-demographic factors and smoking. We need to further explore what makes people with overweight and obesity at risk of worse outcomes and how this relates to severe cases", says Knuppel.

The authors acknowledge that the study was observational and cannot prove that higher BMI increases the risk of COVID-19 infection, and they cannot rule out the possibility that other unmeasured factors (e.g., underlying conditions) or missing data may have affected the results. They also point out that COVID-19 was based on suspicion rather than a positive test, and clinical measurements taken before the pandemic could be outdated for some of the included studies. Finally, they note that study participants were healthier than the general population which may limit the conclusions that may be drawn.
 

Heliobas Disciple

TB Fanatic
(fair use applies)


Should you get your flu shot and COVID booster together? Here's what experts say
by Lisa M. Krieger
September 16, 2022

The flu shot is as familiar an October ritual as football, foliage and Halloween.

But health officials are urging Americans to get the new flu shot and COVID booster at the same time—the sooner, the better.

"Right where we are now—that's a good time to be vaccinated," influenza expert Dr. Lisa Grohskopf of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told the nation's physicians in a conference call late last week.

That's ahead of time, by traditional measures. Flu season most often peaks in February—and our levels of protective antibodies are at their highest about two weeks after the shot, then wane over the next four to six months.

Yet this year's season could start early if it follows the pattern seen elsewhere in the world. So a delay could catch people unprepared.

There's another concern: People may not want to make two trips to the vaccination clinic—so they may get the new COVID booster but fail to return for the flu.

Is there a perfect time to be vaccinated?

If you have a crystal ball, "it's 14 days before the flu attacks the community that you're living in," said Dr. Darvin Scott Smith, clinical lead for flu vaccination at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, who has already gotten his shot.

Here's the problem: Nobody knows when that will be.

Nearly four decades of CDC data shows that 45% of flu seasons peak in February.

But 18% of the time, the season peaks as early as December. In another 16%, it peaks as late as March. Protection isn't assured until two weeks after your shot.

"It is impossible to predict the flu season with any accuracy," said Dr. Kelly L. Moore, president of Immunize.org, a nonprofit group that works to increase immunization rates.

If you want to save time and travel, said Moore, get your flu shot when you get the new COVID booster, now widely available at California's pharmacies and clinics. It's safe and will spare you a return trip. There's no data to show that side effects will be worse.

A flu shot won't protect against COVID, and a COVID shot won't protect against flu. The two vaccines are very different.

"I really believe this is why God gave us two arms—one for the flu shot and the other one for the COVID shot," White House COVID coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha said at a Sept. 6 news briefing.

Children who need two doses of the flu vaccine—those six months through 8 years who have never been vaccinated—should receive their first dose immediately, said experts.

A September shot will create antibodies that can persist long enough to help fend off a later infection, experts said. And even if they don't, you'll get less seriously ill than if you weren't vaccinated at all.

"I'm going to try to get my flu vaccine at the earliest opportunity," said Dr. Bali Pulendran, professor of immunology at Stanford University School of Medicine

"Even if the durability of the antibody response is just a few months, I should be good throughout the season," he said.

September also offers a practical advantage: It's easier to get an appointment. Everyone won't all be rushing in at once, as could happen once the virus arrives.

October is the optimal time from an immunological perspective, experts said. Like all cells, antibodies die of old age. A Kaiser study found a 16% increase in the odds of catching the flu every additional 28 days after peak protection.

That's especially true for older adults, who experience a greater waning of protection than younger people.

"Just don't forget," said Moore. "When the opportunity arises, get it."

If you're not vaccinated by October, it's not too late. Vaccines help as long as flu viruses are circulating.

Once spring comes, you may be worried about protection. But don't get a second flu vaccine, said Smith.

Forecasting a flu season is always a challenge. It can vary in different parts of the country. Every year is different.

Because COVID has changed our behaviors, "the old rules—what we knew about when flu starts, when it ends—may not work this year," said UCSC infectious disease expert Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, who aims to get his shot in mid-October.

"I wouldn't game the system," he said. "If the flu has a slow burn, you'll want it before it peaks."

There are three reasons to be cautious, said Smith.

Based on this year's experience in the Southern Hemisphere, flu season could come early. U.S. health officials look to Australian trends for guidance—and cases there started in April instead of the usual June.

It also was a worse season than the two previous years when people were masked and distancing, said Kaiser's Smith. Behaviors have changed. People are going out more.

Finally, we have less overall immunity to the flu because we've been sitting it out for two years, with lower vaccination rates and reduced exposure to the flu virus.

Last year, flu season was mild but ran long. Experts were surprised by a second small peak, with cases jumping in April and May.

Infectious disease trends "are all whacked out," said Chin-Hong. It's not just flu—the timing of the common respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), monkeypox and other pathogens have proved startling, he said.

To be sure, flu vaccines are far from perfect. CDC data shows that efficacy ranges widely from year to year, falling to 19% in 2014-15 and climbing to 52% in 2013-14. This year's vaccines are "quadrivalent," meaning they target four different strains of the flu virus; of these, two are different from last year's shot.

Circulating viruses may also genetically drift over time, so a vaccine that is well matched in September may be mismatched in March.

Scientists are now striving to build a better flu vaccine, so it's less critical to time shots perfectly, said Pulendran.

The biggest worry now is not whether the shots are perfectly scheduled—but that people will skip the vaccines altogether, or just forget, said Moore.

"If you sit down at the Thanksgiving table with someone who is sick," she said, "it's too late."
 
Top