Two teenage boys who, separately, were found dead in their beds three and four days after taking their second doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine likely died from toxic myocarditis, according to a February 15 clinical and autopsy early release study in the Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine of the College of American Pathologists.
The Pfizer killing goes on...
I hope this helps explain Covid mortality and long COVID in recovered patients. Vitamin D deficiency is associated in all autoimmune disease. Long COVID is a thiamine deficiency brought on by vitamin d deficiency effecting gut Microbiome. It does look to be that simple!
Gut microbiota composition reflects disease severity and dysfunctional immune responses in patients with COVID-19
Vitamin D deficiency changes the intestinal microbiome reducing B vitamin production in the gut. The resulting lack of pantothenic acid adversely affects the immune system, producing a “pro-inflammatory” state associated with atherosclerosis and autoimmunity
Contract with Unibo DIFA pure bullshit.
The Pfizer killing goes on...
The covid beats Pfizer by a mile. They are not even in the same league!
How vitamin D, zinc, Ivermectin got me through, Broadbent
THE Member for Monash, Russell Broadbent, has turned the traditional treatment for COVID-19 on its head.
In two statements to the Australian Parliament in the past week, our local MP has promoted the use of vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, B1 and other supplements “to improve my immune system” as well as the antiparasitic drug Ivermectin as his treatments of choice.
“I won’t be vaccinated,” he said, “because my view was the risk from being vaccinated was just as high as the risk, I was taking from getting the virus itself.”
The claims have since brought down a storm of criticism, particularly from the Rural Doctors Association of Australia, of which Wonthaggi’s Dr Nola Maxfield is a former Victorian branch president, specifically from Bairnsdale’s Dr Rob Phair, the current president.
Unlike Mr Broadbent, the Rural Doctors Association of Australia is strongly promoting a third dose of an approved vaccine “the best line of defence against the Omicron variant which has swept through rural communities over recent weeks”.
Quoting Australia’s peak body on immunisation Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI), the RDAA says “a booster dose is expected to reduce the risk of symptomatic infection, severe illness and death from COVID, in combination with enhanced public health and social measures.
But just as importantly ATAGI and the rural doctors say “an earlier booster dose is… also expected to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 on the health system and its the broader impacts on the community”.
So, not only are you doing the right thing by yourself, you’re doing the right thing by the health system and the community.
That’s not how Mr Broadbent sees it. He believes getting the vaccine or not remains a matter of free choice and he’s choosing to go his own way.
I have never sought to influence people’s choices, just made my decision based on the advice from my health practitioners, and I have been pilloried for it,” he said in Parliament in the past week.
On Monday, February 14, while other Federal MPs were using the Members Statements session to pay tribute to a 105-year-old Sydney veteran, the 14th anniversary of the stolen generation apology and the 80th anniversary of the Bangka Island Massacre in World War II; Mr Broadbent was making a personal statement:
“On 21 January this year, I proved positive to COVID. I wasn’t too worried about that because my health advice over the last 12 months has had me on vitamin D, vitamin C, zinc, B1 and other supplements to improve my immune system, although I was in trepidation about going back home to Phillip Island to tell my wife that I had tested positive.
“I also had access to Ivermectin, which we both immediately went on as soon as I tested positive. We had five days of Ivermectin and then another five days to prove it treated.
“I had some symptoms. I had a bit of a rough time for three or four days. I am not vaccinated. I won’t be vaccinated because my view was the risk from being vaccinated was just as high as the risk I was taking from getting the virus itself.
“So, I had to make a decision, and I made a decision on my behalf. I made a decision that I wanted to continue in this House, and I had just been through a fairly major health issue only a few weeks before, so I was fairly vulnerable.
“But I believed I had actually done the right thing and protected my body in the way that I wanted to protect it, by the choice that I made and the choice that all of those demonstrators out there we’re talking about have made — choice and freedom and not having the things that they do imposed upon them by politicians in this place and others.”
He continued his comments during debate on the Appropriate Bill whereby $15.9 billion will be committed to additional government programs since the May 2021 Budget, including $2.86 billion to support the government’s response to COVID-19.
However, while his Perth colleague, Ian Goodenough gave a list of projects around Australia that would benefit from an $11.9 billion injection, when Mr Broadbent rose to speak on the bill, it wasn’t to highlight where in the seat of Monash some of that money was going, or should go.
It was back on to the subject of his own experience with COVID-19.
“I have not had a COVID vaccination. There seems to be great interest in my decision. On Monday I updated the House and those interested in my electorate and elsewhere that I had contracted COVID.
“I described what I did to treat myself during the course of my illness and the support I got from the state government, which is the standard support for every person in Victoria. It was a matter of transparency and honesty as far as I was concerned.
“Now I am being accused of spreading dangerous conspiracy theories, according to Dr Rob Phair, President of the Rural Doctors Association of Victoria. I have never done this. I tell it like it is when put to me firsthand. I have only ever put forward views of those I represent who cannot be heard otherwise — heartbreaking stories around vaccinations from both health practitioners and patients alike.
“I represent the views of those often ignored. People who know me know this to be true. Since when has it been the case that, if one wants to tell it like it is — not, as the media puts it, to toe the line or go after a headline — suddenly one is spreading dangerous conspiracy theories?
“I am not a right winger, as you know, Deputy Speaker Coulton, let alone an extremist. I am an independent thinker. I owe no-one and no-one owns me. My parliamentary colleagues know I don’t fit into a box. I’ve crossed the floor in the past on a matter of principle.
“Mind you, the truth can be very threatening if one is in an environment where truth is not valued. Why can we not have a discussion when we have a difference of opinion? Having a discussion does not cost lives. People will continue to decide what vaccines they will have, what treatments they will embrace, and good on them for doing that.
“That is their choice. I have never sought to influence people’s choices, just made my decision based on the advice from my health practitioners, and I have been pilloried for it. I have told the House stories of reactions to the vaccine received. They are facts, not hearsay.
“Are we no longer able to bring to light evidence that is uncomfortable, that presents a different picture? It is well known that fear polarises people. When did we become a fearful nation? Divisions are deep in our community, and they are getting deeper. Fear undermines everything and is a powerful form of manipulation.
“There is an alternative. The alternative is love, for love casts out fear. We heard a lot about it in the Religious Discrimination Bill speeches, and I think the member for Burt made a marvellous contribution last week. They were probably the highlight of the 46th Parliament.
“We have a choice: fear or love. Love does not rejoice about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful and endures through every circumstance: 1 Corinthians. Love requires courage as well as compassion, which we see in everyday acts of kindness. Love knows that everyone is entitled to some respect, however great or little.
“Truth must win out, because it’s fundamental to good governance, and the people of Australia have every right to expect it. Love, truth, respect, all underpinned with humility. Finally, wisdom—without it, we’re dancing in the dark. Love, truth, respect, humility, honesty, integrity and wisdom: I look forward to seeing their manifestation in this parliament.”
He then went on to make some comment about the additional allocation to the budget, expressing his concern that funds provided outside the budget process “are not assessed against any objective criteria”.
Rural doctors critical
As noted by Mr Broadbent himself, his comments have drawn criticism from the medical profession.
Dr Rob Phair of Bairnsdale, President of the Rural Doctors Association, said Mr Broadbent’s message was damaging to the community and a risk to his own health.
“I don’t really want to get into an argument about this. I’d rather be talking about the lack of funding, from the Federal Government, for the health system in general, and specifically in growth areas like Bass Coast and South Gippsland.”
Notwithstanding the $115 million for a new hospital at Wonthaggi, Dr Phair said there weren’t enough health professionals to fill shifts in Bass Coast in particular, including at Cowes and the Wonthaggi area.
“But you can’t let it go. There’s absolutely no scientific basis for what Russell Broadbent is taking about.”
He said the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) strongly discourages self-medication and self-dosing for the treatment or prevention of COVID-19.
“It very dangerous to take large doses of ivermectin and there is insufficient evidence to validate its safe and effective use for COVID-19,” according to the TGA.
“But, setting the freedom of choice question aside for a minute, it’s concerning, frankly sad, that a guy who is what, in his 70s, in a high risk group isn’t vaccinated.
“The fact is, he’s at risk of serious illness or death if he doesn’t get vaccinated.
“If this is the sort of message he’s prepared to give to his constituents, his fan base, he needs to be held to account at the ballot box, and it needs to be said, voted out,” Dr Phair said.
I agree, a consistent easily replicated 30% on 10W output would be very easy to prove. Or, even a consistent 5% on 10W, if it always happened and could be tested in multiple setups.
That is wrong on many levels.
Many experiments worked more than 30% of the time. With the right materials such as Johnson Matthey Type A palladium, some worked every time. See Miles Table 10. (https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf, p. 6) See also Fleischmann and Pons boil-off experiments. Storms and others described the necessary qualities of the materials, and how to test for these qualities. So, success is not random at all, and not unpredictable. The choice of materials cannot affect the calorimetry, so it is not causing artifactual heat.
The control parameters that make an experiment work or not work are well known. They are shown in McKubre's equation and graphs (https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf). When the parameters are met, heat is produced. Like the choice of materials, these parameters have nothing to do with calorimetry, so they cannot be causing artifactual heat.
Easy reproducibility has never been held as a standard for believing an experiment. Cloning mammals worked once per thousand attempts at first, but no one doubted that Dolly was a clone of her mother. Some early transistors worked less often then cold fusion experiments. Many experiments cannot be replicated at all because they are so expensive and difficult, such as the top quark experiment at Fermilab. There is only one Fermilab. No one claims the top quark does not exist because the findings have not been independently replicated.
What we have is inconsistent and non-replicable.
It is inconsistent but it is replicable. It has been replicated thousands of time in hundreds of different labs. As I said, the failure rate has no bearing on whether it is true or not. Many airplanes failed to fly before 1903. The Wright brothers 1903 flight proved that controlled flight is possible. Most U.S. rockets exploded before 1960. One successful Russian rocket in 1957 was enough to prove that orbital spaceflight is possible.
There are countless examples in the history of science and technology that prove that what you say has no logical or scientific basis. You are making up arbitrary reasons to reject the findings. Not only are your reasons irrational, they are factually wrong. As I said, better than 30% replicability has been achieved with some materials.
The covid beats Pfizer by a mile.
Only if you don't treat it.
But the rules of the game just have changed in UK age group < 30 now dies 3x more often if vaccinated...
Just wait until people check all the patient histories of claimed Omicron deaths. Then the picture will become true for all age classes.
Here is an example of very unreliable and unpredictable machines: early computers. We think of computers as purely determinate machines. That is, extremely consistent, producing the same output from the same numeric input. Modern computers are by far the most reliable devices ever made. They do billions of operations per second, often flawlessly for days or weeks. But the early ones were anything but reliable. Here is a description of the Los Alamos MANIAC computer in 1953. Bear in mind, this was after ten years of intense R&D into computers, with the modern equivalent of billions of dollars in U.S. government money. This computer was being used to develop the hydrogen bomb, a high priority project that called for the best technology in the world and carte blanche funding.
QUOTE:
When the computer ground to a halt, was it noise in the deflection of an electron beam, or the transposition of one bit in specifying a memory address? “False start machine or human?” reads the first entry for a blast wave calculation run in February 1953. And an answer: “Found Trouble in code—I hope!”
“Code error, machine not guilty,” admitted Barricelli on March 4, 1953. “What’s the use? GOOD NIGHT,” is recorded at 11:00 p.m. on May 7, 1953. “Damnit—I can be just as stubborn as this thing,” notes a meteorologist on June 14, 1953. “I’ll never know why you have to load these codes twice sometimes to make them go, but they go usually the second time.”
All computations were run twice, and accepted only when the two runs produced duplicate results. “I have now duplicated BOTH RESULTS how will I know which is right assuming one result is correct?” asks an engineer on July 10, 1953. “This now is the 3rd different output,” notes the next log entry. “I know when I’m licked.” Someone running a hydrogen bomb code from 2:09 a.m. to 5:18 a.m. on July 15, 1953, signs off: “if only this machine would be just a little consistent.”
“THE HELL WITH IT,” is the final entry for June 17, 1956, at thirteen minutes past midnight, noting that the master control is being turned off. “M/C OFF (WAY OFF!!).” It took years of midnight oil to sort these problems out,
- Dyson, George. Turing's Cathedral: The Origins of the Digital Universe . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
If cold fusion had been given the kind of funding computers got between 1943 and 1953, it would probably be a lot more reliable than this machine was.
5 chemistry Profs. did ask the German big pharma mafia data faking center RKI institute and also Government why Pfizer crap still is allowed despite no control for bad batches does exist.
They also did ask why 2 carcinogenic ingredients are allowed without ever testing them. (In German)
Many experiments worked more than 30% of the time.
You I think have misunderstood my point. I was talking about (following you) 30% excess power measured.
Replicability is a complex issue, How does it change:
In a different lab
With different (expert) calorimetrist
With different instrumentation
With different calorimeter
All of these things are relevant to believing an isolated claim. Enough replicability is needed for them all to be checked.
As for your other examples: all of them had future work that delivered better replicability.
That does alas not yet seem to be the case for LENR?
I suggest that if it was the case we would be in a very different place.
Will Omicron induce herd immunity or will it enable SARS-CoV-2 to transition into variants capable of potentiating ADE in vaccinees?
Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.
by Geert Vanden Bossche
Dedicated to all the courageous Canadian and American truckers and to the doctors who support them in their vitally important fight against vaccine mandates and immunologic discrimination.
Could Omicron metamorphose into a wolf in sheep’s clothing?
Given the high and steadily increasing vaccine coverage rates in large parts of the world and the ongoing mass vaccination of children and continuation of booster campaigns, I am of the opinion that Omicron has the capacity to evolve into a much less benign variant, regardless of whether or not infection prevention measures are relaxed or lifted.
A coronavirus (CoV) can only replicate and mutate. The widely held belief that during the course of a pandemic viruses tend to become more infectious but less virulent is a myth—one kept alive by those who don’t understand the evolutionary dynamics of a pandemic. The latter are fully dependent upon the outcome of the interplay between the virus and the host immune system at a population level. Abiding by this ‘rule’ is the sole qualifier necessary to be an expert of viral pandemics. For several months I’ve been warning that continued mass vaccination and high vaccine coverage rates would prevent SARS-CoV-2 (SC-2) from generating sufficient herd immunity to control, let alone end, the current pandemic (1, 2, 3). The advent of Omicron hasn’t changed my mind, on the contrary!
Now that mass vaccination campaigns have quickly rendered the virus resistant to the adaptive immune response (cfr. Omicron), I am fearful that this may have a snowball effect. I’ve been postulating that the mechanism of innate immune adaptation to viral exposure (i.e., through a process of epigenetic changes referred to as ‘training’) is compromised in the vaccinated population and I am now predicting that the resulting burden of infectivity will cause massive population-level immune pressure on Omicron. In an attempt to overcome high immune pressure on Omicron’s infectiousness, natural selection of viral mutants that are capable of resisting both the acquired SC-2-specific and the CoV-reactive innate immune response in vaccinees is likely to occur. To understand why I fear that the growing vaccine coverage rates that we’re witnessing in large parts of the world could ultimately promote the propagation a new type of variant that has the capacity to fully resist both types of SC-2-directed immunity in the vaccinated population, one must turn to the ‘rule’ mentioned above:
While the vast majority of healthy unvaccinated individuals continue to resist Omicron’s high infectious pressure by virtue of the ongoing training of their innate immune effector cells (4, 5), a steadily increasing number of vaccinees are now becoming more susceptible to vaccine breakthrough infection and contracting C-19 disease. Although resistance of Omicron’s receptor-binding domain (RBD) to vaccinal anti-S antibodies (Abs) is thought to diminish suppression of innate Abs and therefore enables a predominantly mild course of the disease, a subset of the S-directed Abs may still be able to bind to immunogenic domains situated outside of the RBD of the S protein. Abs directed at the N-terminal domain, for example, have been reported to interact with lipid rafts on target cells via multivalent interactions (6, 7). As multi-specific innate Abs (i.e., IgMs) are known to bind to S using the same type of multivalent interaction, it is reasonable to assume that even non-neutralizing vaccinal Abs still have the capacity to compete with relevant innate Abs for binding to SC-2. It is, therefore, entirely possible that even non-neutralizing vaccinal Abs outcompete innate B1a cell-derived Abs for binding to SC-2, particularly under the following circumstances:
In the case innate immune effector cells had no opportunity to adapt to viral exposure prior to being short-circuited by vaccinal S-specific Abs (e.g., in case of high-speed mass vaccination programs conducted in populations with relatively low infection rates)
In the case of C-19 vaccination of children. Although present in high quantities, innate Abs in children are largely naïve (i.e., antigen (Ag)-inexperienced) and therefore prone to being outcompeted by S-specific vaccinal Abs (Note: subjects with naturally acquired Abs are endowed with trained innate immunity as naturally acquired Abs result from the virus breaking through their innate immunity)
In the case of recent C-19 boosting of vaccinees or subjects who previously recovered from C-19 disease or in the case of re-vaccination with an updated (i.e., anti-Omicron) vaccine. In either case, previously vaccine-induced Abs will be recalled. The recall results in high titers of anti-S Abs which have no neutralizing capacity towards Omicron. It has been reported that—due to antigenic sin—even anti-Omicron vaccines primarily recall Abs directed at the S protein of the Wuhan lineage (8).
Consequently, it becomes obvious that the continuation of mass vaccination campaigns now increasingly targeting children and focusing on booster shots (or Omicron-specific vaccinations) will result in a significant fraction of the vaccinated population compromising their innate B1a-derived Abs (IgMs). There can be no doubt that accelerated mass vaccination campaigns followed by booster shots at intervals as short as 4-5 months and complemented by C-19 vaccination of children will lead to a higher incidence of disease in the vaccinated population. Since innate Abs more readily compete with low-affinity, non-neutralizing anti-S Abs, symptoms of Omicron infection in vaccinees are predominantly mild to moderate. However, the high incidence of disease across a wide variety of vaccinated age groups is likely to drive a massive surge in the population’s anti-Omicron Ab titers. A large peak of anti-(Omicron) S [anti(O)S] seroprevalence could cause high population-level immune pressure on viral infectiousness. However, on a background of high infectious pressure, the heightened S-directed immune pressure exerted by the vaccinated population cannot confer sterilizing immunity. The non-sterilizing immune pressure exerted by the vaccinated population would, therefore, serve as an optimal breeding ground for the selection of variants that are capable of overcoming the S-directed immune pressure placed on Omicron’s infectiousness. Any mutation that changes the physicochemical properties of the virus’ N-terminal domain in ways that strengthen the latter’s interaction with lipid rafts on respiratory epithelial cells would readily facilitate adsorption of viral particles to these cells and mediate fusion of the viral envelope with the target cell membrane such as to allow an alternative route of viral entry into the cell. It is reasonable to assume that the fitness cost of such a change in physicochemical properties is much lower than the one the virus would incur upon selecting and breeding a variant that incorporates a number of immune escape mutations sufficient to avoid neutralization by anti-(O)S Abs while not causing steric hindrance of RBD-ACE-2 receptor[1] interactions. Clearly, viral entry would likely be expedited by a multitude of naturally acquired Abs that bind to Omicron’s RBD without neutralizing the virus, for hydrophobic sites within the N-terminal domain would now serve as a substitute for RBD to trigger viral entry into epithelial host cells. Enhancement of an alternative mechanism of viral entry as enabled by abundant coating of viral particles by anti-(O)S Abs and strong suppression of CoV-reactive innate Abs is likely to cause an accelerated course of the disease. The overall effect would manifest as an increase in pathogenicity/ virulence of the virus. Such antibody-dependent enhancement or exacerbation of C-19 disease (ADE) in vaccinees could have disastrous consequences, not only in vaccinated children but also in older age groups that are highly vaccinated. It is even uncertain whether early multidrug treatment could mitigate such ADE. Unless the above postulate is scientifically proven wrong or at least improbable, halting mass vaccination and instead implementing large scale antiviral chemoprophylaxis campaigns and raising global awareness about the vital importance of healthy food and a healthy lifestyle in order to dramatically reduce viral infection rates and strengthen people’s innate immunity, respectively, should be declared a health emergency of international concern. On the other hand, no vaccine can contribute to controlling a pandemic of an acute self-limiting viral infection, and for that matter of SC-2, unless it induces sterilizing immunity.
Disruption of the link between infectious cases and severe disease/ death reflects or predicts viral immune escape in the vaccinated population
Based on my understanding of the evolutionary capacity of SC-2 in response to population-level immune pressure, I postulate that dominant expansion of more infectious immune escape variants as a result of ‘symptomatic’ mass vaccination engenders a high incidence of vaccine breakthrough cases in vaccinees and causes the natural link between infectious cases and severe disease or death to be broken in the vaccinated part of the population (a situation that has previously been observed during the ‘delta’ phase of the pandemic and which motivated Boris Johnson to lift the lockdown measures in the UK on July 21st). The disruption of this link enhances the expansion of more infectious immune escape variants that can even resist neutralization by vaccinal anti-S Abs (e.g., in the case of Omicron). Resistance to neutralization by Abs directed at the RBD diminishes, but does not abolish (!), suppression of SC-2 binding by relevant innate Abs, thereby improving protection in vaccinees while failing, however, to prevent viral transmission of the highly infectious Omicron. The resulting dissociation between Omicron’s high infectivity rate (cases) and the incidence of severe C-19 disease/ death is primarily going to lead to a high morbidity rate over the coming weeks, especially in countries with high vaccine coverage rates, and hence cause a high anti-(O)S seropositivity rate in the population. This is to say that the broken link between infections and severe disease/ death in the vaccinated part of the population will now cause this group to exert immune pressure on Omicron’s infectiousness and is, therefore, likely to promote natural selection and adaptation of new immune escape variants that enable an even higher infectiousness. As described above, Omicron could readily transform into a viral variant exhibiting a high degree of virulence in vaccinees without paying a high fitness cost or taking much time to cross the fitness valley.
According to the above, the evolution of the virus as accelerated by the Covid-19 mass vaccination program proceeds in two stages: The first stage consists of erosion of vaccine-induced acquired immune capacity in vaccinees and occurs as a result of expansion in prevalence of more infectious immune escape variants. In a second stage, the innate immune effector capacity in vaccinees becomes more and more eroded as a result of dominant circulation of a highly infectious variant (i.e., Omicron) that serves as a natural booster and – as a result of ‘antigenic sin’ – leads to a rapid recall of previously induced vaccinal Abs in a large fraction (due to high infection rate!) of the vaccinated population. Naturally boosted, non-neutralizing vaccinal Abs have the capacity to compete with relevant innate Abs for binding to Omicron. The ensuing erosion of the first line of immune defense would diminish the capacity of the host’s innate immunity to adapt to viral exposure in a vast portion of the vaccinated population while subsequently promoting the expansion of immune escape variants that – thanks to Ab-dependent coating – are able to strongly suppress CoV-reactive innate IgM and acquire a level of viral infectiousness that is high enough to fully blow through the vaccinee’s first line of immune defense. The bottom line is that training of the host’s innate immune defense resulting from exposure to the highly infectious Omicron is at risk of being ‘too little’ and arriving ‘too late’ in the overwhelming majority of the population (i.e., the vaccinated) to ensure protective herd immunity.
It goes without saying that large scale booster campaigns and vaccination programs using updated (i.e., anti-Omicron) vaccines are only going to inflate surges in infection and morbidity rates in vaccinees and are, therefore, at risk of dramatically expediting selection and adaptation of new SC-2 immune escape variants that could enable a much more pathogenic course of C-19 disease in people whose protective innate immune capacity cannot adequately be trained as a result of vaccine-mediated immune priming.
I cannot imagine how failure to generate herd immunity against Omicron could prevent the type of catastrophe I’ve been warning against since the beginning of 2021.
Why won’t naturally acquired anti-S Abs in unvaccinated healthy people compromise their innate immune defense against Omicron and promote immune escape?
In contrast to the situation in vaccinated people, training of innate immune effector cells in non-vaccinated individuals initially occurs in the absence of S-specific Abs. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that their SC-2-experienced innate Abs can better resist competition from naturally induced non-neutralizing S-specific Abs for binding to Omicron. In addition, breakthroughs of innate immune defense against SC-2 are unlikely to simultaneously occur in vast portions of the unvaccinated SC-2-experienced population and, therefore, unlikely to cause population-level immune pressure that could drive immune escape.
How will healthy unvaccinated people deal with variants potentiating ADE in vaccinees?
As host cells infected by variants enabling an alternative pathway of receptor-mediated entry into susceptible host cells will be largely eliminated by IgM secreted by SC-2-experienced (i.e., trained!) innate immune effector cells, ADE is not expected to occur in healthy unvaccinated people who previously recovered from mild or moderate C-19 disease, regardless of their S-specific Ab titers. This assumption is based on effective viral clearance by trained innate immunity. By abrogating viral reproduction and transmission at an early stage of infection, effective functional reprogramming (‘training’) of polyreactive innate immune cells not only protects healthy unvaccinated individuals from C-19 disease but also contributes to establishing herd immunity. In case the virus breaks through the first line of immune defense and causes disease, the S-directed Abs acquired upon recovery from disease will also contribute to controlling viral infection upon subsequent exposure. That is why natural immunity (= innate ± naturally acquired immunity) is always superior to C-19 vaccine-induced immunity, regardless of the height of anti-S Abs. (see relevant links on p. 7).
Lessons (to be) learned
During a CoV pandemic only innate immunity can reliably protect you from clinically relevant disease and generate herd immunity. This is because innate immunity can be trained, is able to recognize all SC-2 variants (and all CoVs) and capable of abrogating viral replication and transmission at an early stage of infection, and because innate Ab secreted by Ag-experienced/ trained B1 effector cells have increased affinity and are, therefore, not suppressed by naturally acquired Abs. However, even a properly trained innate immune system can only function sufficiently so long that it’s not compromised by interfering Ag-specific Abs within a healthy individual. Nutritious food and a healthy lifestyle (no overweight + exercise!) are, therefore, paramount to bring to bear the full capacity of a trained innate immune system such as to ascertain protection from repetitive exposure to SC-2 during a pandemic. Nasal and oral-pharyngeal washes with diluted povidone-iodine or hydrogen peroxide together with supplementssuch as zinc, vitamin C and D (the latter in winter!) can be game changers when applied at the earliest manifestation of discomfort or even as prophylaxis after high-risk exposure. For as long a no herd immunity is achieved, vulnerable people (i.e., those with underlying diseases or other immune suppressive or immune degenerative conditions) should be protected by adequate infection prevention measures and be granted access to early multidrug therapy.
None of the current C-19 vaccines can block SC-2 transmission and will, therefore, inevitably subvert acquired and undermine innate host immune responses that are directed at SC-2. This will ultimately result in viral immune escape and may even cause the virus to become highly virulent in vaccinees. It is also scientifically plausible to anticipate that prolonged suppression of CoV-relevant innate Abs will lead to an increased incidence in autoimmune disease and other viral respiratory diseases in younger age groups and other infectious or non-infectious immune-mediated diseases (including cancer) in older age groups. To investigate whether there is an increase in the incidence of these diseases in the vaccinated as compared to the unvaccinated part of the population, their occurrence should be closely monitored over the coming weeks and months. A potential increase in the incidence of these diseases would come on top of the frightening increase in adverse events that are directly related to the injection of these vaccines, particularly the genetic C-19 vaccines, as documented in the VAERS (US) , the Yellow Card system (UK) or by EudraVigilance (Europe) [for more information on side effects: see relevant links on p. 21, 25, 31].
The current C-19 vaccines have been shown to provide partial and short-term protection against hospitalization and death in that they can to some extent prevent C-19 disease from developing into severe disease. This is thought to be due to stimulation of (cross-reactive), non-cytolytic T memory cells (9-13). It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that this effect is due to immune inflammatory cytokines and, therefore, both non-specific and limited in time. As vaccine-induced cytokine-secreting T cells are endowed with memory, their protective effect can be readily recalled upon re-exposure to relevant Tc epitopes comprised within the pathogen (i.e., CoV) or vaccinal immunogen (e.g., S protein). However, stimulation of non-cytolytic Ag-specific T memory cells is suspicious of causing immune inflammatory disease in genetically predisposed individuals. It is well known, indeed, that immune pathology resulting from natural infection or vaccination always involves non-cytolytic T cells. Building an immune intervention strategy on this type of T cells is, therefore, futile and unsafe.
In conclusion, there is no place in this pandemic for any of the current C-19 vaccines. Even the most passionate vaccinologist can only conclude that the current C-19 vaccines are harmful, both from an individual and public health viewpoint, and that their use in mass vaccination campaigns is violating all rules of vaccinology. Instead of cutting the chain of viral transmission, these vaccines are now increasing the rate of infectious cases in the vaccinated as compared to the non-vaccinated population across all age groups (14-19). Furthermore, there is no single scientific rational, let alone scientific data, to believe that their use in mass vaccination campaigns across all age groups (including children and pregnant women!) will not entail detrimental consequences for both individual and public health. Those would come on top of the alarming rate of adverse events that are regularly reported shortly after the injection of the genetic C-19 vaccines. Their administration (without informed consent!) should be halted immediately and replaced by large-scale antiviral chemoprophylaxis at a population level (to control the pandemic in countries with high vaccine coverage rates) and early multidrug treatment at an individual level (to control the disease in vulnerable individuals). The ongoing mass vaccination campaigns are a threat to our human species. Vaccine mandates and immunologic discrimination are, therefore, a crime against humanity and will undoubtedly be referred to as such in the history of mankind.
Once again, I hope I am wrong, but unfortunately, I doubt it. I am afraid to predict that it will take a disaster before these hardened sinners become fully aware of all the harm they’ve been causing to our very own species.
References
1. https://trialsitenews.com/omic…-calm-before-the-tsunami/
2. https://trialsitenews.com/a-la…-pandemic-is-toning-down/
3. https://trialsitenews.com/to-a…pandemic-into-endemicity/
4. “The cellular basis of trained immunity and heterologous protection against secondary infections resides in the functional reprogramming of innate immune cells, which were first observed in invertebrates.” In: Trained Innate Immunity, Epigenetics, and Covid-19: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcibr2011679
5. https://www.frontiersin.org/ar…89/fimmu.2020.595535/full
6. https://www.journalofinfection…-4453(21)00392-3/fulltext)
7.
8. https://www.biorxiv.org/conten…2.02.03.479037v1.full.pdf)
9. https://www.voiceforscienceand…why-not-resort-to-t-cells : When anti-S(pike) antibodies against Omicron can no longer sustain the narrative, why not resort to T cells?
10. https://www.voiceforscienceand…urse-of-omicron-infection : Do cross-reactive T cells explain mild course of Omicron infection?
11. https://www.voiceforscienceand…y-the-devil-is-the-detail : To all those who continue to attribute abrogation of SARS-CoV-2 infection to pre-existing cross-reactive T cells rather than to innate immunity. The devil is in the detail of peer-reviewed publications.
12. https://www.voiceforscienceand…ion-in-covid-19-contacts: Cross-reactive memory T cells are associated with (but not responsible for) protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in COVID-19 contacts
13. https://www.voiceforscienceand…omicron-variant-oh-really : ‘Killer’ immune cells still recognize Omicron variant…. oh really?
14. https://www.bitchute.com/video/b6l1NY2uPN04/
15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/
16. https://thepulse.one/2021/11/1…d-cases-cautions-citenry/
17. https://theconservativetreehou…e-in-covid-19-infections/
18. https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…101/2022.01.28.22270044v1
19. https://palexander.substack.co…-negative-efficacy-public
[1] ACE-2 receptor: angiotensin converting enzyme-2 receptor
Display MoreHere is an example of very unreliable and unpredictable machines: early computers. We think of computers as purely determinate machines. That is, extremely consistent, producing the same output from the same numeric input. Modern computers are by far the most reliable devices ever made. They do billions of operations per second, often flawlessly for days or weeks. But the early ones were anything but reliable. Here is a description of the Los Alamos MANIAC computer in 1953. Bear in mind, this was after ten years of intense R&D into computers, with the modern equivalent of billions of dollars in U.S. government money. This computer was being used to develop the hydrogen bomb, a high priority project that called for the best technology in the world and carte blanche funding.
QUOTE:
When the computer ground to a halt, was it noise in the deflection of an electron beam, or the transposition of one bit in specifying a memory address? “False start machine or human?” reads the first entry for a blast wave calculation run in February 1953. And an answer: “Found Trouble in code—I hope!”
“Code error, machine not guilty,” admitted Barricelli on March 4, 1953. “What’s the use? GOOD NIGHT,” is recorded at 11:00 p.m. on May 7, 1953. “Damnit—I can be just as stubborn as this thing,” notes a meteorologist on June 14, 1953. “I’ll never know why you have to load these codes twice sometimes to make them go, but they go usually the second time.”
All computations were run twice, and accepted only when the two runs produced duplicate results. “I have now duplicated BOTH RESULTS how will I know which is right assuming one result is correct?” asks an engineer on July 10, 1953. “This now is the 3rd different output,” notes the next log entry. “I know when I’m licked.” Someone running a hydrogen bomb code from 2:09 a.m. to 5:18 a.m. on July 15, 1953, signs off: “if only this machine would be just a little consistent.”
“THE HELL WITH IT,” is the final entry for June 17, 1956, at thirteen minutes past midnight, noting that the master control is being turned off. “M/C OFF (WAY OFF!!).” It took years of midnight oil to sort these problems out,
- Dyson, George. Turing's Cathedral: The Origins of the Digital Universe . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
If cold fusion had been given the kind of funding computers got between 1943 and 1953, it would probably be a lot more reliable than this machine was.
If the kind of funding into vaccines, went into early Covid treatment, the pandemic would have been over a year ago. You might also use some of your logic before calling Covid treatments quackery. Concerning Covid treatments, you resemble THH views on CF.
2022:02:18 01:23
Wondering
Il Dottore,
Now that the papers of Levi on the operation of the SKlep that is the same as the demonstration seen on e-cat world.com have been retracted how is going now the new patents ?
Thank you if you can answer.
Be Best,
Wondering
2022:02:18 01:26
Adria Rossi
WTF do you mean ? Please rephrase the question which I must deem nonsense until la Guardia Di Finanzi pound on my door.
Than you for your interest in the great works of our Team.
Best Regards,
AR
Trudeau breaks Canada constitutional laws to get free hands on truckers....
As I said: The world is in the hand of highly criminal individuals. Most states have mafia leaders as their head. Putin - head of Leningrad mafia, Scholz head of German finance mafia (Free masons - FM), Trudeau FM, Xsi China all mighty triad close to FM. France FM, Switzerland FM/rotary, AU FM,.....USA Biden FM.
All these people are of mediocre intelligence and steered by greed for money=power.
If idiots meet other idiots then a war is around the corner. As insiders say. Russia is dealing with/ preparing for a nuclear strike since more than 2 months now. They just repeat a nuclear exercise in the following days. Expect it soon or even sooner.
The Ukraine war will start within 2 days from now as politics just did end yesterday and Russia today misses the Munich meeting.
Now that the papers of Levi on the operation of the SKlep that is the same as the demonstration seen on e-cat world.com have been retracted
Have they been retracted?
Power of blowing O2
Have they been retracted?
Indeed. Which is interesting in that they were not published in the usual sense.
Which bodes well for a retraction of the Multi-Professor Lugano paper, which they would not defend from critics because (they claimed) it was not published (yet is available on the Unibo server).
Contract with Unibo DIFA pure bullshit.
Did you get confirm from them?
Indeed. Which is interesting in that they were not published in the usual sense.
Which bodes well for a retraction of the Multi-Professor Lugano paper, which they would not defend from critics because (they claimed) it was not published (yet is available on the Unibo server).
I thought it was odd (at best) that they weren't signed or anything. Is there a public link to the retraction?
I thought it was odd (at best) that they weren't signed or anything. Is there a public link to the retraction?
I asked politely to DIFA, and got confirmation. I don't know where or when the retraction will appear. Probably in Levi's papers page, but who knows. The original papers aren't there, nor are they likely to appear there with the UNIBO insignia illicitly attached.
