1

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 16/06/2022 08:12:34 »

This ensure more dangerous variants will become competitive of course. And because of immune imprinting vaxxed have less natural immunity.

"Conclusion We report high incidence of omicron infections despite recent booster vaccination in triple vaccinated individuals. Vaccine-induced antibody titres seem to play a limited role in risk of omicron infection. High viral load and secretion of live virus for up to nine days may increase transmission in a triple vaccinated population."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.02.22273333v1.full

2

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 16/06/2022 04:43:56 »

Only a fool would think that vaccinating a few people would eliminate a virus. It took 70 years to eliminate smallpox, despite worldwide compulsory vaccination. But when did you last hear of a new polio case?

Herd immunity among the under-50s could be achieved by killing about 10%  of them, or crippling the hospital system with potential long-COVID survivors, but it wouldn't protect those who have paid for their medical services by taxation (i.e. the over-50's) nor the newborn. And the damage to The Blessed Economy would be irreparable. Incidentally, having a good-sized pool of infected folk would pretty much guarantee the evolution of new variants.

Who cares? Statistics is boring. Old people are boring. Truth is last year. Science? What's that?

What drives evolution towards resistance is not using TO LITTLE antibiotics. 
Same principle.
This mass vaxx pretty much guarantee herd immunity is impossible.

3

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 15/06/2022 08:27:52 »

In the absence of large scale antiviral prophylaxis

In my experience, people who talk obliquely about "prophylaxis" or "early intervention" are talking about Ivermectin.

They can't talk about Ivermectin directly, because the fact-checkers at Facebook tend to tag their posts.
- And the WHO points to the Clinical Trials and says that they cannot recommend Ivermectin for general deployment (although it is fine in a controlled clinical trial)
- The people who promote Ivermectin often seem to be paying an inordinate amount of credence to that fount of medical wisdom: Donald Trump (while blithely ignoring two other spouts on the same fountain: Hydroxchloroquine and internal application of UV, both of which are known to be dangerous)

So, what "antiviral prophylaxis" is he advocating?

Since the natural immune system is damaged

I think it is entirely fair to say that vaccination with the spike (S) protein produces antibodies against the S protein, but does not produce antibodies against the nucleocapsid (N) protein.

However, I feel it is not fair to say that "the natural immune system is damaged". The natural immune system  generates antibodies against antigens. If it is presented with S protein antigens, it will generate S protein antibodies. That is what it is supposed to do, and demonstrates a well-functioning immune system.
- At best it shows that the the vaccines are narrowly targeted. And there is a good reason for that: The more antigens you present, the greater the risk that you will match some natural protein in some fraction of the population, with potentially lethal side-effects.


I heard a podcast a couple of months ago saying that unvaccinated people who had a severe bout of COVID in the end had a predominance of antibodies against S protein. Yes, they also had antibodies against N protein, but that didn't neutralize the virus and allow them to pull through. [Disclaimer: Given peer-review cycle times, it is possible that these patients were infected with Delta or earlier variants, rather than Omicron - but I expect that the same would be true of Omicron...]

The problem seem to be immune imprinting. If infected with a new variant after the shot the immune system produce old type antibodies. Those can enhance infection Bossche argue and refer to studies.

"It gets even worse: for those vaccinated persons whose breakthrough infection occurred after the second dose, (illness detected on Day 29), their ability to develop N antibodies was 13 TIMES worse than that of the unvaccinated"

https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/moderna-knew-vaccinated-people-will?s=r

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1

4

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 14/06/2022 03:36:11 »

Since the natural immune system is damaged it leads to chronic Covid. T-cells are then damaged studies also show.

But some ADHD meds will help i am told spiritually. 100% sure about that.

5

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 14/06/2022 03:33:48 »

The shots damage the natural immune system. There are studies now.

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/328102

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1.full

6

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 17:42:01 »

I´m told ADHD meds will help for VAIDS.

Not sure why. Someone suggested because of methylation. Any experts?

7

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 14:29:36 »

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1

Igor explain what it means.

https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/moderna-knew-vaccinated-people-will?s=r


"This study looked at two sides of the Moderna Phase 3 vaccine trial: the vaccinated group and the control group. They looked at unvaccinated people having Covid, versus vaccinated people having so called “break-through Covid infections”.

Skipping some details, our natural, unvaccinated immunity learns to recognize the “spikes” (S-protein), the “nucleocapsid” (N-Protein) and other pieces of the virus, and develops antibodies and immune memory reacting to all of those.

This multifaceted memory also provides broader protection against “variants”.

In contrast, vaccination with any existing Covid vaccine, floods our cells with only S-protein (the “spike protein”) from a virus that only existed around January 2020.

The difference between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated is FIVE TIMES, which is huge. The unvaccinated are five times more likely than the vaccinated to develop broad immunity including N antibodies.

for those vaccinated persons whose breakthrough infection occurred after the second dose, (illness detected on Day 29), their ability to develop N antibodies was 13 TIMES worse than that of the unvaccinated.

This inability to obtain broader natural immunity is the reason for endless covids: a covid infection in the vaccinated does not result in lasting immunity and acts similarly to an almost-worthless booster shot. A “breakthrough infection” adds a large number of temporary S-antibodies to the obsolete Wuhan virus. Whereas, the unvaccinated obtain numerous antibodies to all sorts of facets (epitopes) of the virus that infected them."

8

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 12:50:42 »

Basically if i understand Bossche the problem is the narrow protection from the shot + immune imprinting. So when the virus is resistant infections in the vaxxed lead to a boost of non neutralizing abs. It becomes a vicious circle.

Those abs prevent severe disease but eventually the virus will likely mutate to variants that will overcome that immune pressure. More dangerous variants. Guess they can spread easier because the distance between vaxxed is shorter.

9

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 12:47:12 »

Why he believe the mass vaccination lead to more dangerous variants for the vaccinated.

Presumably because he doesn't understand biology. Viruses do not compete for territory or resources so no advantage accrues to a variant by the elimination of the parent. Whether the parent is suppressed quickly (by vaccination or quarantine) or slowly (by killing all the hosts that do not have natural immunity) makes no difference to the emergence of variants in the long term: as long as there is a viable base of parent, mutations will occur.

If anything, reducing the parent base by vaccination will reduce the probability of any particular variant evolving, and thus the likelihood of one that does not respond to or trigger the same antibodies.

Bossche says the variant that will diminish the immune pressure is the variant that will become dominant. The virus has no longer plan.

Usually it is more difficult for a very dangerous variant to spread but now that so many have been "vaccinated"?

10

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 10:58:07 »

From Vanden Bossches paper. Why he believe the mass vaccination lead to more dangerous variants for the vaccinated.

Natural selection of new, O-glycosylated variants, which I have predicted to rapidly emerge (https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/predictions-gvb-on-evolution-c-19-pandemic),would allow to overcome binding of both, potentially infection-inhibiting (i.e., neutralizing) Abs directed at theimmuno dominant receptor-binding domain (RBD) and potentially ‘trans infection’-inhibiting (note 2) (i.e., virulence-mitigating) Abs directed at the conserved antigenic site within the N-terminal domain of S protein (S-NTD). Consequently,O-glycosylation of the S-RBD would overcome population-level immune pressure that results from boosting of vaccine-primed Abs directed at conserved NTD-specific epitopes that cross-protect against severe disease. This is because NTD-associated ‘trans infection’-inhibiting (i.e., virulence mitigating) epitopes will be shielded against their corresponding Abs by the O-glycosites inserted at the predicted O-glycosylation sites of the new variants (New covariants). At the same time, these O-glycosites would also shield RBD-associated infection-inhibiting (i.e., neutralizing) epitopes against their corresponding Abs. Natural selection of the O-glycosylated Newco variants would, therefore, enable SC-2 to effectively counter the growing virus-neutralizing and virulence-mitigating capacity of a highly vaccine-experienced population that is exposed to Omicron, and thereby relieve the pressure on the viral life cycle.

The more Omicron expands in prevalence and the more frequently vaccinees get re-exposed and fall victim to breakthrough infections, the higher the prevalence of both elevated virulence-mitigating anti-S Abs will become.  The higher this prevalence and the higher the anti-S Ab titers, the higher the site occupancy of the predicted O-glycosylation sites will need to be for Newco variants to resist the trans infection-inhibiting immune response of Omicron-infected vaccinees. This is because more densely O-glycosylated variants will more effectively prevent mitigation of viral virulence. Given the population-level immune pressure caused by the exposure of highly vaccinated populations to the highly infectious Omicron, Newco variants will primarily rely on glycosite instead of amino acid mutations in their RBD to gain the required fitness advantage in a landscape of increasing population-level immune pressure on S-NTD.

This already explains why the upcoming Newco variants are likely to evolve to a super variant that is not only highly infectious but also highly virulent and fully resistant to C-19 vaccines, including those that have been adapted to the spike protein of the circulating variant. This is why the authors of this paper are desperately wrong in thinking that tailoring the vaccines to the polypeptide sequence of S on the dominantly circulating variant would have a beneficial effect on the outcome of the mass vaccination program. On the contrary, usage of so-called ‘updated’ vaccines to continue this program will only aggravate the outcome due to further boosting of anti-NTD Ab titers.

Conclusion:In the absence of large scale antiviral prophylaxis, the vicious circle of steadily increasing immune pressure causing steadily rising infection rates will ultimately drive highly vaccinated populations to promote the expansion of a super variant that will likely be featured by full resistance to potentially neutralizing epitopes (due to lack of immunogenicity of these epitopes) combined with a high propensity to cause Ab-dependent enhancement of infection (ADEI; facilitated by the infection-enhancing Abs) and a high propensity for causing ADEI-mediated Ab-dependent enhancement of disease (ADED).This is how the evolutionary dynamics of the virus will unfold and how the end station of this misguided mass vaccination program will look.

‍

11

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 08:34:26 »

"COVID vaccines can't keep up with new Omicron subvariants

New subvariants of the Omicron strain of the COVID-19 virus "appear to be even more immune-resistant than the original," Axios reported Wednesday.

The original Omicron strain was known as BA.1, but that's old hat by now. All the cool kids are getting BA.4, or even BA.5. Unfortunately, while the virus has moved on, vaccine makers are stuck in the past."

https://news.yahoo.com/covid-vaccines-cant-keep-omicron-145138040.html

12

COVID-19 / Re: Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 08:22:52 »

"Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

The deployment of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 brings the question of mutational escape from antibody prophylaxis to the forefront. Rapid evolutionary evasion of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) poses a number of threats to biomedical interventions aimed at bringing the virus under control, namely the risk of reduced vaccinal efficacy over time as resistant variants continue to emerge (which may or may not be rectifiable with annual vaccine updates), the risk of waning effectiveness of natural immunity as a result of evasion of common nAbs, and the risk of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)."

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250780

13

COVID-19 / Are Geert Vanden Bossche's predictions for Covid accurate?

« on: 13/06/2022 07:14:37 »

 I guess you have heard of him.

Basically as i understand he says it was insanity to mass inject people with a "leaky" vaxx during a pandemic.

Because we left the virus to mutate so that resistant variants will have an advantage and become dominant.

He also expects more dangerous variants. As far as i understand he mean non neutralizing antibodies take over when the virus is resistant to neutralizing abs.

The non neutralizing abs protect against severe disease but eventually there may be variants that overcome this immune pressure.

Usually dangerous variants can´t spread well but what about now when so many got the shots?

So he recommends governments implement large antiviral drug campaigns in heavily vaxxed countries.

I´m actually told by a very credible source that some ADHD meds will help for what is coming. Not sure if it´s a specific medication or why. I read these meds can increase methylation. Can that explain why?

 

What do you think of his thoughts? The first parts about the danger of mass vaxxing this way seems obvious to me.

An interview with Bossche from April.

https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/videos-and-interviews/deadlier-variants-dr-geert-vanden-bossche-on-what-to-expect-in-the-near-future-and-why

14

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can certain ADHD medication strengthen the immune system??

« on: 27/03/2022 15:58:56 »

 "Attention deficit–hyperactivity disorder is associated with allergic symptoms and low levels of hemoglobin and serotonin"

"Maternal autoimmune disease raises children’s risk of ADHD"

15

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can certain ADHD medication strengthen the immune system??

« on: 27/03/2022 12:28:54 »

"Recently studies have suggested involvement of cytokine pathways in those with ADHD. There is accumulating evidence that catecholamine and indolamine imbalances may be a cause or result of inflammation.

Cytokines are key mediators of immune function and can be either pro-inflammatory or anti-inflammatory. Therefore, ADHD may be linked with other systems in the body including the immune system, endocrine system, gastrointestinal system, and biochemical pathways."

16

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can certain ADHD medication strengthen the immune system??

« on: 08/02/2022 14:40:52 »

From a study on the plant Ephedra. Relevant or not i do not know.

"Antiviral effects of Ma Huang Tang (Ephedra) against H1N1 influenza virus"

"Ma Huang Tang (MHT), a classical Chinese herbal decoction which has been used in clinic for thousands of years, was very effective in treating the upper respiratory tract infection. But its activity against influenza virus A, the anti-inflammatory effect and the underlying mechanisms have been poorly investigated in previous researches. In this study, the antiviral efficacy of MHT directly inhibiting influenza virus A was investigated in vitro in MDCK cells. In an ICR pneumonia mouse model infected with influenza virus A PR/8/34, MHT (8, 4 and 2 g/kg) were oral administrated for 7 days after viral challenge, to evaluate the effect of MHT on ameliorating viral pneumonia and decipher the underlying mechanisms. The in vitro results showed that MHT possessed antiviral activity with low toxicity. The in vivo assays showed that MHT (8 and 4 g/kg) significantly attenuated lung histopathological changes, decreased lung index, interleukin (IL)-4,5, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), CD3+, CD8+ T cell levels, increased IL-2, gamma interferon (IFN-γ), CD4+ T cell levels and CD4+/CD8+ ratio, inhibited toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), myeloid differentiation factor 88 (MyD88) and tumor necrosis factor receptor associated factor 6 (TRAF6) protein levels. All these results demonstrate that MHT can strikingly ameliorate influenza virus A pneumonia in mice, which is associated with the regulating effect of MHT in the imbalance of body’s immune function and the MyD88-dependent signaling pathway of TLR4."

17

Physiology & Medicine / Re: Can certain ADHD medication strengthen the immune system??

« on: 08/02/2022 14:37:02 »

"The COVID-19 infection rate is nearly 50% higher among individuals with unmedicated ADHD compared to individuals without ADHD"

I thought I read that the increased risk was due to unmedicated ADHD people acting a bit more risky and impulsive and not due to any antiviral benefit from medication.

The numbers are so large i don´t think this can explain it all. And research suggest ADHD may be an immunological disease.

18

Physiology & Medicine / Can certain ADHD medication strengthen the immune system??

« on: 08/02/2022 12:26:03 »

Some quotes from studies that may be relevant.  I think Ephedra is used in Chinese medicine. Any experts?

-----------------
Amphetamine in ADHD medication increase these same hormones i think. Adrenaline and Noradrelanine.

"In the new study, the investigators were able to show that the massive redistribution of immune cells throughout the body was orchestrated by three hormones. The general pattern, Dhabhar said, was that norepinephrine is released early and is primarily involved in mobilizing all major immune-cell types -- monocytes, neutrophils and lymphocytes -- into the blood. Epinephrine, also released early, mobilized monocytes and neutrophils into the blood, while nudging lymphocytes out into "battlefield" destinations" "


"The COVID-19 infection rate is nearly 50% higher among individuals with unmedicated ADHD compared to individuals without ADHD"


"After controlling for confounding factors, the results indicated that influenza risk significantly reduced in the group of ADHD patients who were prescribed methylphenidate for 90 days and more"


It could be that unmedicated are more risk taking. But numbers seem so high. Also research show ADHD may be an inflammatory disease.