Vaccine immunity has become a hot topic, especially with the emergence of COVID strains that appear to evade the defenses supposedly provided by the spike protein “vaccines.” Before I dive into this subject, it is probably best to discuss vaccines in general. There are important facts about vaccines that are pertinent any discussion of immunity.
When the public thinks about vaccines, the success of inoculations against smallpox, polio and other dread diseases comes to mind. These diseases had significant mortality rates and effective treatments were few and far between. If one survived, there were often debilitating injuries to deal with.
The success of conquering these diseases was the result of the development of vaccines to ward off getting the illness. Smallpox no longer exists anywhere except in a lab. The incidence of polio has dwindled into insignificance. Mumps, measles and rubella have largely disappeared.
To more completely understand vaccination, one must understand that vaccines come in two types, sterilizing and non-sterilizing. Sterilizing vaccines prevent infection. Let me repeat that. Sterilizing vaccines prevent infection. To the virus in question, you are a dead, lifeless rock. You cannot get the infection and you cannot pass it onto to others. The protection afforded to an individual tends to last a very long, in most cases a lifetime.
Among commonly-used sterilizing vaccines are MMR (measles, mumps and rubella), Varicella (chicken pox), OPV (oral polio) and others.
Non-sterilizing vaccine do permit infection. Some characterize this kind as “leaky.” The virus replicates and can be transmitted to others. Such a “vaccine” instead acts to reduce and, at least in some cases, eliminate symptomatic disease. The theory is that you will be less likely to be hospitalized and/or die. In other words, the more serious aspects of the disease are mitigated. Oh, and technically, these are not vaccines at all (which by definition prevent infection); these are prophylactic therapies.
At this point, it is probably instructive to review the history of polio vaccines to more fully understand the situation that currently exists in relation to COVID. As Karl Denninger has pointed out:
“…the United States used both IPV (injected polio vaccine) and OPV (oral polio vaccine) in sequence for polio until the 1990s. OPV produced sterilizing immunity but IPV did not. OPV had a very small (but non-zero, about 1 in a million) risk of causing polio because it was a codon-deoptimized live virus which, on rare occasion, would mutate back to its virulent form in the human body. So, to mitigate that risk, you got IPV first in the US (to prevent systemic infection; this was non-sterilizing), then OPV which is sterilizing — that is, it prevents not only getting sick from polio but also replicating and shedding the virus, thus giving it to others along with preventing the promotion of mutations that WILL eventually escape the vaccine.”
Let me emphasize that last point. Non-sterilizing “vaccines” allow for virus replication and mutation. This means that, in active virus populations, new strains will appear due to mutation. Eventually, the “leaky” vaccine will not mitigate the illness in question.
What category of vaccine does the mRNA spike protein ”vaccine” fall into? We all know the answer to that. The stats released during the trials told us that. It was 94% effective at preventing infection. That is, 6% of those jabbed still got COVID.
One of the big fake news stories of 2020 was all about asymptomatic spread of COVID. This was why it was necessary to lockdown entire countries. However, according to a WHO pronouncement in June of 2020, such spread was extremely rare if it occurred at all. If you got COVID, you became symptomatic. Transmission to others occurred only when you were symptomatic.
How was the 6% non-effectiveness number arrived at? Did they routinely test the participants to see if they tested positive for COVID? The answer is “No.” Testing was only done if a participant fell ill. So, the 6% was from those who got a significant illness and were tested. This is an important distinction.
No testing was done for asymptomatic illness. Since the idea of non-sterilizing “leaky vaccines” is to reduce and/or eliminate symptoms, why wasn’t testing done of all participants? Why wasn’t testing done of people in close contact with a known case in a vaccinated person?
As Karl Denninger says:
“They knew damn well, in other words, that the jabs were not sterilizing but did not want that data up for public debate because then those who have read history would be likely to make the connection to the present day and thus they did their level best to hide it. That has now blown up in their face with it being conclusively known that jabbed people in fact not only get infected but spread the virus to others.”
The public was sold a bill of goods. The public was told that the development of vaccines would result in zero COVID. COVID would be stopped dead. Now, perhaps in the very early stages of this virus breakout, it might have been possible to do so. However, once China made the decision to allow the spread of COVID around the world, there was no chance that a non-sterilizing vaccine would result in zero COVID. Ever.
Perhaps the clearest example of this is Israel. Israel has the highest vaccination rate for a country of any size. It is over 84%. According to Dr. Fauci, this should have conferred herd immunity on Israel regardless of which number Dr. Fauci used. Despite this COVID has been running wild there. And it is not just the unvaccinated who are getting sick. At least half of hospital admissions have been vaccinated individuals.
There is another basic scientific fact about non-sterilizing vaccines that has been hidden from the public but has been known by experts in the field for some 70 years.
There is no safe means of mass-use of non-sterilizing vaccines so long as transmission within the community does or is likely to exist.
Ever.
There are no exceptions.
This is not theory. It is a well-known medical fact.
Experts in the field have been trying to warn the public of this for quite a while. Dr. Peter McCullough, an expert on COVID and Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA therapy being used for COVID, have been some of the loudest voices. Needless to say, their early efforts were less than successful. Now, however, as more and more vaccinated get sick with COVID, their voices are beginning to be heard.
Karl Denninger notes:
Had we done with polio what we’re doing now with Covid — IPV (non-sterilizing) use only with virus circulating in the United States — it is very likely the virus would have mutated, escaped the vaccine and killed millions in America. Every single so-called expert knows damn well why we didn’t do that with polio and how dangerous it is to attempt it. Indeed, where polio still circulates but money is scarce, they use OPV only (which is sterilizing) and accept the risk of the rare but possible active case it can cause for this exact reason.
It looks like the COVID virus is escaping the vaccines. In particular, the Pfizer vaccine which was the primary one in use in Israel. The Delta variant is infecting both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. And now the Lambda variant also appears to be resistant to the vaccines.
Despite this, the powers that be are doubling down on the pressure to coerce people to get jabbed. Vaccination passports are all the rage in this country and many others. This is medical insanity. It will only lead to more variants escaping the vaccines. How long will it be before a more serious version of the virus mutates into existence? This is a highly dangerous activity that our government and others are engaging in.
And there is still more to discuss. Much of what I will now attempt to convey is highly technical in nature. I will attempt to simplify this without losing the essence of the issue.
If you get COVID-19 and recover, you have natural immunity. And that immunity is sterilizing. That is, the protection it conveys should last decades if not a lifetime. So, why are the powers that be insisting that everyone, including those who have recovered from COVID, should be vaccinated? Doesn’t becoming ill with COVID, confer significant immunity?
Let’s take a closer look at natural immunity. Natural immunity comes in several parts.
First is the respiratory and nasal response. This is where the virus entered the body. Essentially this is the mucus response of the nose, throat and other respiratory passageways. This response will be conserved. That is, these systems of the body will remember their response to the virus if and when the virus is encountered in the future.
Then comes the antibody response. This is how the body attacks the pathogen and eventually rids the body of the illness. There are three parts to this, “N,” “S,” and T-cell. “N” refers to the technical term nucleocapsid. This immune response is enduring in connection with the coronavirus. That is, protection is expected to last decades if not for the rest of one’s life. A small study has found that this immune recognition extended to the bone marrow in a large percentage of cases and in those people is likely to confer decades-long if not lifetime protection.
“S” stands for the infamous spike protein. This antibody response is less enduring, typically fading after about 6 months. This is because coronaviruses have evolved over millions of years to have a relatively rapid mutation rate with their spike proteins. It is how the common cold can continue to infect people despite people having had many colds in their lifetimes.
Then there are the T-cells. In a sense these are the body’s sentries. They stand guard looking for known pathogens. Studies have shown that people who had had the Spanish Flu in 1918-19 still had a T-cell response over 80 years later.
Let me repeat what I said earlier. Natural immunity is sterilizing. That is, it will protect you from re-infection. The protection provided should last decades if not a lifetime. Again, why are those in power insisting that everyone should be vaccinated? This is counterfactual and anti-science.
This leads to the obvious question. Was development of the various vaccines defensible on any level? Karl Denninger notes:
It was acceptable to issue EUAs for potentially non-sterilizing jabs to be used only by very high-risk individuals — such as those in nursing homes — with the understanding that they will fail to provide anywhere close to complete protection and might, over time potentiate worse outcomes. But with actual informed consent and on a limited, not population-wide basis, that was defensible.
Of course, this ignores the risk of serious side effects. And the number and type continue to grow. VAERS has recorded more than 12,000 deaths in this country after being jabbed. There are another 40,000+ deaths that are labelled “unexplained” for people who perished after receiving the jab. The known serious side effects are more than 100 times higher than was ever allowed for a mass shot before. Why wasn’t the vaccination process halted when this became apparent? Why were no autopsies done to determine the cause of death? Wouldn’t performing such autopsies be good science?
There is something else that is potentially far worse going on with this whole process. Denninger reports:
“…there is a developing body of evidence that those who previously had Covid and then get vaccinated may destroy their “N” protein recognition by doing so, ruining their previous nearly-perfect immunity. That we did not specifically prove that this did not happen before giving these shots to anyone with prior infection is outrageous. While the data on this is quite thin at present that there is a higher breakthrough rate in persons with prior infection than those who were infected but did not get vaccinated is what the data currently shows, which strongly implies that vaccination after infection actually screws you.”
Think about what Denninger is saying. If you had COVID, your body’s “N” antibody defenses should protect you. However, there is a growing body of evidence that the mRNA gene therapy posing as a vaccine may destroy that protection. Once again, why are the powers that be trying to coerce people who have had COVID to get jabbed?
The so-called “public health” authorities (think CDC, NIH and various others) who continue to push this whole approach know all of this is true. However, instead of banning the vaccination of people who have recovered, they are intentionally going ahead with an approach which is highly dangerous. Why?
In view of all of the above, what should the approach be? Some people do get seriously ill. Dr. Fauci believes in the single pill approach. I am sure some Big Pharma companies are furiously working toward such a solution.
This is the wrong approach. Fauci followed this approach with AIDS years ago. It did not work. Patients would get better for a while and then would get worse. A second drug would be used. The same thing would happen. Eventually all AIDS patients would die. Why? Drug resistance. HIV’s mutation rate was high enough to be able to ward off any single drug. What worked were multi-drug cocktails.
That should be the approach here. There are a host of therapeutics which are quite successful against the virus. Will this lead to zero COVID? The answer is “No.” COVID is now endemic just like the flu or the common cold. It should continue to mutate to increase its infectiousness and reduce its severity.
The governments of the world have lied to us over and over. They seem unable to back away from a course of action that has little to no benefit and, in fact, may be highly dangerous. What will it take to stop this madness?
