Skip to main content
Menu

Covid-19

Spike Protein Behavior

I’ve been getting a lot of questions in the last few days about several Spike-protein-related (and vaccine-related) topics, so I thought this would be a good time to go into them. There’s been a recent report about the vascular effects of the Spike protein alone (not coronavirus infection per se), and another presentation on similar effects in lung tissue. These are almost certainly looking at the same phenomena – the lungs are of course full of vascular tissue, and what’s being seen in both cases is very likely mediated by effects on the vascular endothelium.

In the first study, hamsters were injected with a pseudovirus was created that expressed surface Spike protein, while in the second the researchers just injected the protein directly into mice. The pseudovirus team went on to compare endothelial cells with different mutational forms of the ACE2 surface protein (S680D, with increased stability and S680L, with decreased stability). The response to the pseudovirus was quite different in these two, suggesting that it is indeed the binding of the Spike protein to ACE2 that’s a key part of this process. That happens as the coronvirus infects vascular tissue, of course, but this work shows that it’s not the whole process of viral infection that’s responsible for all the trouble: it starts with the initial binding event.

So I’ve been getting questions about what this means for vaccination: if we’re causing people to express Spike protein via mRNA or adenovirus vectors, are we damaging them just as if they’d been infected with coronavirus? Fortunately, the answer definitely seems to be “no” – in fact, the pseudovirus paper notes near the end that the antibody response generated by vaccination against the Spike protein will be beneficial in two ways, against infection and against the Spike-mediated endothelial damage as well. There are several reasons why the situation is different.

Consider what happens when you’re infected by the actual coronavirus. We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people, so the route of administration is via the nose and/or lungs, and the cells lining your airway are thus the first ones to get infected. The viral infection process leads at the end to lysis of the the host cell and subsequent dumping of a load of new viral particles – and these get dumped into the cellular neighborhood and into the bloodstream. They then have a clear shot at the endothelial cells lining the airway vasculature, which are the very focus of these two new papers.

Compare this, though, to what happens in vaccination. The injection is intramuscular, not into the bloodstream. That’s why a muscle like the deltoid is preferred, because it’s a good target of thicker muscle tissue without any easily hit veins or arteries at the site of injection. The big surface vein in that region is the cephalic vein, and it’s down along where the deltoid and pectoral muscles meet, not high up in the shoulder. In earlier animal model studies of mRNA vaccines, such administration was clearly preferred over a straight i.v. injection; the effects were much stronger. So the muscle cells around the injection are hit by the vaccine (whether mRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles or adenovirus vectors) while a good portion of the remaining dose is in the intercellular fluid and thus drains through the lymphatic system, not the bloodstream. That’s what you want, since the lymph nodes are a major site of immune response. The draining lymph nodes for the deltoid are going to be the deltoid/pectoral ones where those two muscles meet, and the larger axillary lymph nodes down in the armpit on that side.

Now we get to a key difference: when a cell gets the effect of an mRNA nanoparticle or an adenovirus vector, it of course starts to express the Spike protein. But instead of that being assembled into more infectious viral particles, as would happen in a real coronavirus infection, this protein gets moved up to the surface of the cell, where it stays. That’s where it’s presented to the immune system, as an abnormal intruding protein on a cell surface. The Spike protein is not released to wander freely through the bloodstream by itself, because it has a transmembrane anchor region that (as the name implies) leaves it stuck. That’s how it sits in the virus itself, and it does the same in human cells. See the discussion in this paper on the development of the Moderna vaccine, and the same applies to all the mRNA and vector vaccines that produce the Spike. You certainly don’t have the real-infection situation of Spike-covered viruses washing along everywhere through the circulation. The Spike protein produced by vaccination is not released in a way that it gets to encounter the ACE2 proteins on the surface of other human cells at all: it’s sitting on the surface of muscle and lymphatic cells up in your shoulder, not wandering through your lungs causing trouble.

Some of the vaccine dose is going to make it into the bloodstream, of course. But keep in mind, when the mRNA or adenovirus particles do hit cells outside of the liver or the site of injection, they’re still causing them to express Spike protein anchored on their surfaces, not dumping it into the circulation. Here’s the EMA briefing document for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine – on pages 46 and 47, you can read the results of distribution studies. These were done two ways – by using an mRNA for luciferase (and thus looking at the resulting light emission from the various rodent regions!) and by using a radioactive label (which is a more sensitive technique). The great majority of the radioactivty stays in and around the injection site. In the first hours, there’s also some circulating in the plasma. But almost all of that ended up in the liver, and no other tissue was much over 1% of the total. That’s exactly what you’d expect, and what you see with drug dosing in general: your entire blood volume goes sluicing through the liver again and again, because that’s what the liver is for. But when things like this hit the hepatic tissue, they stay there and eventually get chewed up by various destructive enzymes (that’s also a big part of what the liver is for). It’s a one-way ticket.

So the reports of Spike protein trouble are interesting and important for coronavirus infection, but they do not mean that the vaccines themselves are going to cause similar problems. In fact, as mentioned above, the fact that these vaccines are aimed at the Spike means that they’re protective in more ways than we even realized.

Update: there’s another level of difference that I didn’t mention. In the Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, J&J, and Novavax vaccines, the Spike protein has some proline mutations introduced to try to hold it in its “prefusion” conformation, rather than the shape it adopts when it binds to ACE2. So that should cut down even more on the ability of the Spike protein produced by these vaccines to bind and produce the effects noted in the recent papers. That comes in particularly handy for the Novavax one, since it’s an injection of Spike protein itself, rather than a vaccine that has it produced inside the cells. Notably, the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is producing wild-type Spike (although that’s still going to be membrane-anchored as discussed above!)

446 comments on “Spike Protein Behavior”

  1. Some Dude says:

    Are there any consequences for the protein-based vaccines currently in development?

    1. John says:

      “Our findings show that the SARS-CoV2 spike protein causes lung injury even without the presence of intact virus,” Pavel Solopoy, a research assistant professor at the Frank Reidy Research Center for Bioelectrics at Old Dominion University said. “This previously unknown mechanism could cause symptoms before substantial viral replication occurs.”

      THIS PREVIOUSLY UNKNOWN MECHANISM !!!???

      What total BS.

      There are literally hundreds of papers that talk of this “previously unknown mechanism”.

      1. John says:

        The “news” article also states:

        “These findings show that the genetically modified mouse together with just a segment of the spike protein can be used to study SARS-CoV-2 lung injury,”

        The “news” article is (probably deliberately) vague about the experiment.

        I automatically assumed that the segment injected was the S2 subunit and the “reviously unknown mechanism” was simply cell-cell fusion (syncytia).

        Derek really should do an article on covid induced syncytia.

        It turns out that the segment injected was the S1 subunit, and that the effects (severe inflammation, an influx of white blood cells into their lungs and evidence of a cytokine storm) were due to some sort of ACE2 down-regulation, or something.

        Anyway it sounds like BS to me.

        Let us see if this (unrefereed) paper is ever accepted.

    2. Cris P says:

      o my understanding, the mRNA trial vac stimulates autoimmune response initially with cell mediated immune system. T cells destroy the modified cell but leaving some parts probably the spike protein as seen in vaccinated health workers serum (Oxford studies). These free spike proteins in the serum will activate humoral immunity that’s when B cells come in and produce autoantibodies.
      This autoimmune response may play role in some serious side effects, similar to what they’ve noticed in COV19 serious patients. Overloaded immune response cytokines productions and bleeding.

      1. Ann says:

        If you already have an auto immune disease like Graves disease would this vaccine send you into a thyroid storm? T cells are already reeking havoc on the body. This sounds like severe reactions would definetely risk lives of people eith auto immune disorders.

        1. Derek Lowe says:

          There have so far been no safety signals with autoimmune disorders, fortunately.

    3. Tina Lloyd says:

      To me, this article raises more questions. What would be the implications in the unlikely event if hitting a vessel and injecting into the bloodstream were to occur?

      I can’t help be see hundreds of times on TV where techs are giving the injections and they do not aspirate most of the time. Granted, it doesn’t happen very often by skilled nurses. Only happened to me twice in 40 years as a nurse. GOK where they have gotten all of these vaccine givers from and many are obviously not skilled. IF you don’t aspirate you won’t know if you hit a vessel are not. Always better safe than sorry.

      It would be interesting to know the level of qualifications for those that gave the vaccine to those that had vaccine injuries. It may be a simple fix. Aspirate!

      1. Question says:

        I had this same question. This is being done in grocery stores and many other places now by staff in some cases who have had little training in giving vaccines. What is the ramification if they miss the muscle they are supposed to hit?

      2. Eva Smagacz says:

        In UK the initial aspiration preceding the pressing down of a syringe plunger is not considered necessary, and is not included in an instruction explaining the technique (for application of a vaccine).

      3. TheHeck says:

        Abso-effing-lutely nothing will happen. The vaccine doesn’t contain spike protein. It contains mRNA encapsulated in lipid microspherules. So if the vaccine is injected in to a vein, the microspherules will end up in the liver, where they will be destroyed. mRNA doesn’t stand the chance of a snowball in hell outside of those protective sperules. So the only effect is that the recipient will not develop the required level of immunity.

        1. Linda Smith says:

          And the source of your certainty?

          1. Cassandra says:

            Joe Biden and Fauci said so. This is going to be a case of many dead fish going along with the flow. Mass hysteria is killing our children now.
            https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/06/25/teen-boy-dies-a-few-days-after-receiving-second-covid-vaccine-shot/amp/
            That kids death counts for more than 1000 end of life “covid deaths” – absolutely tragic considering the quality and many decades of life years lost. And unfortunately there will be more as the murderous fools in many nations are now rolling out vaccines to teenagers. Informed consent is being withheld from patients (for their own good?). We know that mass vaccination will direct the virus to evolve into escape mutants – so where the gain? I see none. Pfizer, Moderna and the other fully indemnified snake oil peddlers see a lot of gain and no downside. Unfortunately the downside is very real for that child and his family. A fool could see that the risk benefit profile for vaccines in teens is weighted down with tonnes of risk.

        2. theasdgamer says:

          Nonsense. The vaccine could end up anywhere in the vasculatory or lymphatic system and invade vascular cells, WBCs, and other cells.

      4. Rhiannon says:

        Hear hear!!
        I am a nurse, and amazed at the number of poor techniques with Covid vaccinations that I see on TV – this includes European news programs, as well as Australia, where I live.

        1. Rhiannon N says:

          I see another Rhiannon in May – not me
          I am Rhiannon N

  2. Some girl says:

    What about future inhaled vaccines?

    1. Giselle Tamayo says:

      I would use antibodies instead of proteins and the like-type of vaccines for inhaled treatments.

      1. another dude says:

        antibodies are proteins

        1. Rhiannon says:

          I think she may be referring to neutralizing antibodies as opposed to the the spike protein, but I could be mistaken.

      2. JT says:

        You do know we are paying attention to see how “You Experts” on the subject respond? I’m just an old, scientifically uneducated fool, and I read a lot and pay attention to what people say. Now, could be someone is feeding me bad information because they don’t care if I live or die, they actually may wish I would die..
        I hate to say that but the political divide is so filled with hate that I believe there could be a plan to elementary a portion of our population-but I am not an expert on anything. I read, I watch more than one news station ,
        I ask people I know, I pray I make my best guess. I hope we all live through it.

    2. Mantis toboggan says:

      Are there any examples of inhaled vaccines that have outperformed injected vaccines? I remember a little while ago an inhaled (nasal) flu vaccine not being very effective and recommended against. I do see that there are some in development for COVID, just wondering what the precedent was.

      1. Garth says:

        One university has developed a vaccination patch which circumvents the needle. https://stories.uq.edu.au/news/2021/needle-free-covid-19-vaccine-shows-promise/index.html

  3. Aaron says:

    Is stabilized spike protein able to bind to ACE2 at all?

    If it can’t bind and damage cells, it may not be an issue for many of the vaccines.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      Good point – added that to the post.

      1. sgcox says:

        Isn’t it other way around ? In the prefusion conformation protein is open and RBD exposed to the receptor binding, as well as to neutralising antibodies. PP mutations will probably hampers virus-cell fusion but that is irrelevant to soluble spike which was a subject of these studies.

        1. Derek Lowe says:

          You know, that’s a good question. I suppose it depends on if the ACE2 binding effects seen in these latest papers are set off by just the initial RBD binding, or by the rearrangement that happens afterwards!

          1. Craig says:

            I developed MGUS along with an apparent hemolytic anemia about 3 weeks after my 2nd Pfizer vax. VAERS doesn’t allow this to be easily reported. Although the alleged reaction to mRNA introduction of the M Spike suggests this trigger event is unlikely, how and who should be collecting the possibile elevated incidence of hemolytic anemias?? Thanks

          2. Scam says:

            I don’t see a “doctor” anywhere in your name.
            Please explain how an experimental vaccine such as moderna was developed in 2 days and is pushed for people who are in NO stretch of the imagination at risk.

            Multiple tracks of longstanding medical best practices have been destroyed. We see you.

            Please explain cycles for PCR tests.

            Please explain Illinois Dept of Health and Dr. Birx explicitly saying “… it means if you were going to die of something else already, but had COVID at death, your cause of death will be listed as covid19”.

      2. Narcy says:

        Something is amiss here. If the Spike from the vaccines is different and more stable, why are there so many adverse events like thrombocytopenia? My aunt is in hospital. Surely, they have not had enough time in the trials to investigate the spike ending in the bloodstream. It might work in theory, but in practice it is so difficult to imagine, there are thousands of post-vaccinal deaths!

        1. Linda M says:

          I agree. It is clear to me that we are being subjected to government and Big Pharma propaganda. You have to ask why in the UK our health service the NHS, are saying the vaccines are safe and effective having been through rigorous stage 3 trials when the medicines regulator MHRA via its yellow card reporting system says “It is vitally important that data is collected to ensure the vaccines are safe and effective. This will enable it to move out of stage 3 trials.” Most vaccinated people don’t realise the stage 3 trial is ongoing until 2023 and they have unwittingly taken part in it. It is clear that the MHRA don’t know whether these vaccines are safe or effective.

          1. I completely agree the Yellow Card System with it’s £1.5 million A.I. software package should be doing job but last week showed 859,481 Adverse Drug Reaction(ADR) with 1200 deaths and they know a lot are not reported. As a Qualified Biologist with 30 years of Science Teaching under my belt I have made an informed choice not to be ‘vaccinated’/jabbed and let my immune system do its job as is my human right and respect those that have but know that the international law has been broken because most have been uniformed consent. Many were jabbed and then given one A4 sheet of paper with 4 A4 sheets condensed down with ADRs on it, that is not informed consent.
            The idea of “anti-dependent enhancement(ADE)” worries me for the the 53+ million already done and especially now, according to my MP, the under 18s vaccines and distribution is all in place for when the Vax team say ,”GO”! There as been too little time for sufficient data for children that show very few cases or problems.
            The whole system is being based on the PCR test which it’s inventor Karry B. Mullins always said that it should not be used for infectious diseases who sadly died last year of pneumonia. This test uses a small quantities of dangerous chemical, “EPA classified ethylene oxide as a human carcinogen in December 2016. Studies of workers show that their exposures to ethylene oxide are associated with an increased risk of cancers of the white blood cells (the infection-fighting cells of the immune system). Studies also showed an increased risk of breast cancer in females Someone is making a lot of money from this virus and testing system so keeping the fear up is vital to line their pockets.

          2. David says:

            Please teach your students to ignore Facebook as a source of scientific information (https://www.facebook.com/ProgressiveTruthSeekers/photos/a.325627377817371/1172730303107070/?type=3&theater) and to check things, even if they are told by grownups (https://fullfact.org/online/pcr-test-mullis/). What it seems that he said was “Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron” (http://www.virusmyth.org/aids/hiv/jlprotease.htm). I’m sure that lots of things have changed since 1996

            I agree that the ‘The idea of “anti-dependent enhancement’, is scary. But It seems to be more of a work of fiction than of nonfiction (and not as scary as misinformation).
            The effects of Covid-19 are real

        2. Gift of the Jab says:

          I only ever seem to hear about TTS with the (fairly or otherwise) controversial AZ/Oxford vaccine, which doesn’t have the proline spike mutations and thus lacks the prefusion stability of other COVID vaccines. Derek and other informed writers are confident that the transmembrane anchors provide enough of a safety net for the AZ/Oxford natural spike, though I’m having a miserable Google time trying to find a comparative study of vaccine membrane-boundness. There’s more than one way to build a bridge, as it were.

    2. Not-an-epidemiologist says:

      Yes, the stabilised spike binds ACE2 just fine, see:

      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-34171-7

      “Indeed, both the wild-type and 2P-stabilized SARS-CoV S ectodomains demonstrate similar affinities for ACE2 by SPR (185 and 150 nM respectively)”

      The Hsieh et al, Science, 2020 paper on HexaPro also notes that the HexaPro mod and the S-2P mod have the same ACE2 affinity (although they don’t make the comparison to wild-type).

      (Note that the conformational change upon binding is all about assisting viral entry into the cell, not binding the ACE2 receptor.)

      1. Elliot Groove says:

        Thank you for this. Good knowledge.

      2. Sjantz says:

        So if I’m understanding, this could happen in the vaccines?

  4. Jon Duran says:

    It seems odd to not even discuss the potential correlation between this and observed side-effects, no? Was very much looking forward to that being addressed here.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      Short answer is that we are not seeing reports of lung damage from the vaccines, from what I can see. So I don’t think there’s much to correlate?

      1. Jon Duran says:

        The correlation to examine wouldn’t be spike protein effects on lungs, but of clotting specifically. Referencing: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.05.21252960v1.full

        “Here we suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause substantial impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may result in the persistent large microclots we have noted here and previously in plasma samples of COVID-19 patients. This observation may have important clinical relevance in the treatment of hypercoagulability in COVID-19 patients.”

        Inadvertent injection into blood vessels has been raised in the comments here previously (“aspirate to vaccinate.”)

        Since blood clots and these vaccines are top-of-mind, it’s hard not to ask this, for me at least.

        1. Clueless says:

          Excellent point, thank you

        2. Some Guy says:

          Derek?

        3. Kassandra says:

          Thanks a lot for your comment. The relation of accidental blood stream injections and resulting clotting problems in particular in the brain seems to have another potentially relevant aspect. The Astra-Zeneca shot uses a modified chimpanzee adenovirus as vector. These viruses use the CD46 receptor instead of the usual CAR receptor for infecting cells. “We found that human umbilical vein and brain microvascular endothelial cells (HUVECs and HBMECs) were CD46-positive” (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12692284/). That might result in brain endothelial cell being preferably infected by the vector, resulting in an expression of the S2 spike protein by the endothelium. In addition, auto-apoptosis of these cells infected by the vector might be inhibited by the adenovirus E3 complex suppressing it, thus the spike proteins are presented to the blood stream until T killer cells take them out. So, the spike protein may have plenty of time to trigger a Vaccine Induced Prothrombotic Immune Thrombocytopenia in the brain. This might explain the seemingly higher frequence of this serious complication compared to the mRNA delivery methods which have other problems, in particular related to the ionizable cationic lipid packaging which have strong toxic effects.

          1. Ross says:

            Ionisable cationic lipids are a large class of molecules; there are hundreds of them, and these can be mixed together in many thousands of different stable permutations forming lipid nanoparticles of different structure and size.

            SOME lipid nanoparticles made from ionisable cationic lipids ARE indeed extremely cytotoxic. But that is something that has been addressed during the design stage of these vaccines – the developers had to come up with a permutation that had the desired properties for delivery of the mRNA sequence into the cytoplasm and was also not cytotoxic.

            Which they did.

            Cytotoxicity is something that can be effectively screened for during preclinical stages. That some lipid nanoparticles are cytotoxic is a design challenge that biotechnologists seeking to use them as a drug delivery mechanism have been working on for years. There were too many possible permutations of different lipid mixtures to just use trial and error, so a rational design approach had to be taken, and it wasn’t until about a decade ago that enough study had been done to really take a proper rational design approach to the structure of lipid nanoparticles.

            So if you’ve read somewhere that the cytotoxicity of lipid nanoparticles is a problem – well, it is; but in the sense that it’s a problem to be solved during drug design and preclinical testing, not in the sense that it’s a problem that’s going to unexpectedly emerge during clinical trials.

      2. Virginia Nicholls says:

        VAERS & Yellow Card have hundreds of accounts of lung clots following the C19 vaccines. Have you looked?

        1. Mary says:

          As a non-scientist I want to mention that, since my first AstraZeneca dose 12 weeks ago, my legs and feet have felt icy cold. Two days ago I had the second dose (despite being deeply suspicious) and the problem continues. Never had anything like this before. Very worrying. I am convinced that the spike proteins have somehow compromised the blood circulation. The blackmail from our UK government continues at pace and very little news is heard about side effects.

        2. Hydroxide says:

          VAERS is a collection of sundry observations people made in temporary correlation with vaccination. There is no implied causative connection – that has to be investigated first. Given that especially elderly people have been prioritized and thus pose a significant percentage of those already vaccinated, it is both to be expected that some kind of health issues are observed because these people a)on average have more health issues and b)because they have more health issues, they take a significant amount of other drugs which can also cause adverse effects.

          VAERS might, in theory, even include someone who reads their smartphone while leaving the vaccination side, doesn’t pay attention and walks straight in front of a car. Since at first glance, it cannot be ruled out that the vaccine perturbed his ability to perceive his surroundings, such observations can get added. They’ll then be verified, and experts will conclude that it’s highly unlikely the vaccine had anything to do with it.

          VAERS should be handled with extreme care and not be considered a wish list for hypochondria.

          1. Nav J. says:

            VAERS actually includes reports of suicides by gunshot shortly following vaccination. So the car crash death hypothetical isn’t that far fetched.

            When you have a (random) third of the population vaccinated, it is mathematically the case that the number of unrelated instances of an event that occurs within 24 hours of vaccination is equal to a third of the daily number of instances of that event under normal conditions. For example, when 6000 people die a day, you should expect 2000 vaccinated people to have died within 24 hours of receiving the first dose, and another 2000 deaths 24 hours of receiving the second dose.

            This seems coincidentally similar to the ~5000 deaths reported to VAERS. And not all of those are same-day deaths.

          2. DavidG says:

            Nav. J… You are good in simple math but poor in common sense. You made two false assumptions.. 1. It’s not a random 6000 people that die per day. It’s most commonly the terminally ill, on their deathbed that die each day. 2. Those people are most likely NOT the people vaccinated in the previous day or two. It’s not a random 1/3 of the people that are vaccinated. Thus, the expected deaths 24hrs post-Vax should be far, far below 2000.
            … That is the problem with people like Fauci saying “science is truth” as he did. The math is easy; the difficult part is getting the data collection right and the assumptions right.. Those are human endeavors plagued by intentional and unintentional bias.

      3. Mai says:

        Why is the exact vaccine product not studied in pharmacokinetics?

    2. Patrick says:

      As far as I’ve heard, the only “abnormal” (as in, isn’t explained by the expected immune response or rare allergic reactions) side effect that I think we’ve seen is the blood clotting issue, which is A) not seen with the mRNA vaccines (so if it’s a spike issue rather than an adenovirus vector issue it still has to somehow be linked to the adenovirus vectors, which seems a stretch), and B) has no obvious possible mechanistic correction to this new information.

      1. Patrick says:

        Correction —> connection
        (Hmph!)

      2. Angela says:

        Vaers as of June 4th 2021 has clotting issues reported as follows: 2907 for Moderna, 3358 for Pfizer, 2158 for Jansen.
        Types of issues included in this VAERS search: pulmonary embolism, thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis, anticoagulant therapy, thrombocytopenia, pulmonary thrombosis, immune thrombocytopenia, prothrombrin time, thrombectomy, thromboplebitis superficial, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, cerebral thrombosis, portal vein thrombosis, and other blood clotting events.

        1. Kyle says:

          Angela the more important question is whether those numbers for clotting are higher than background clotting that is expected for the hundreds of millions of people who have received vaccine doses. In other words, is a few thousand cases of blot clotting over several months unusual in such a huge population?

          1. David says:

            I agree.
            Another question would be to compare the rate of Myocarditis (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7823176/pdf/11739_2021_Article_2635.pdf) and blood clotting (https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/what-does-covid-do-to-your-blood) in Covid-19 patents, as compared to those vaccinated.
            In addition to the many other clinical symptoms, that effect Covid-19 patents.

          2. theasdgamer says:

            Look at USA deaths 25044 yo at the bottom of the following link:

            https://swprs.org/the-latest-on-covid-vaccine-adverse-events/

            Yes, deaths are above background noise.

  5. Nigel says:

    What about inadvertent intravenous administration of the vaccine ?
    Might that be a contributing factor the the very rare side effects see with (eg) the AZN vaccine ?

    1. Will says:

      You are bang on, Nigel.

    2. Justin says:

      I think it has something to do with AZ using the native spike protein whereas the others are slightly tweaked with the 2P mutation

  6. Ppete says:

    That sounds all nice, except we have a real cases of quite suspicious myocarditis possibly linked to mRNA vaccines…
    Yes, the incidence is low, but again, like with clots, it’s overwhelmingly young people with negligible risk from covid itself

    1. Brian Kilkowski says:

      1. That “possibly” is a shaky hook to hang that much weight. How about first coming up with slightly less thin gruel of evidence first?

      2. Assuming its real, is it *actually* dominant in young people, or is it only *noticed* in young people ( because in older people it blends into a background of cardiac disease, especially during a pandemic)?

      3. Assuming both of the above are true, it is perfectly reasonable for a society to expect its members, *all* of its members, to take up such risks on behalf of everyone. Unless you plan on putting a bullet in your own head on your thirty ninth birthday, one day *you* will be that elderly person who benefits disproportionately from universal vaccination. To not accept that risk now, yet expect that protection later, would make you a hypocrite.

      1. Ppete says:

        I don’t necessarily disagree, although I think the link is real…however the way how the problem is treated is kind of disingenuous (as it was with clots). And this post is part of it

      2. Jon Duran says:

        1. It’s worthwhile to examine this on its merits, good question.

        2. Ditto.

        3. I didn’t see anywhere that Ppete claimed he would expect others to inject things into their bodies when he was elderly (if he isn’t yet already) on his behalf, so I’m not clear how imagining he did and calling him a hypocrite based on what you imagine is productive.

        1. Ppete says:

          I’m actually young(er) and took the vaccine. It was before I know about this possible problem, but would took in nevertheless.

          To be clear I’m not saying it’s serious problem or even real problem at all…but I don’t like the way it’s treated (and other possible vaccine-related issues)

          1. Jon Duran says:

            I agree. And I didn’t assume anything about you, I just don’t like it when people do that as a discussion point and attack strawmen based on their imaginations.

            I’m desperately in search of honest dialogue & examination around these things. (Most of) the planet shut itself down recently so I don’t think that’s a crazy thing to seek. Abusive hectoring is just as toxic as wild-eyed fearmongering. A lot of it going around these days…

      3. Kathy Dopp says:

        natural immunity is probably more long-lasting and effective and less risky for a young person as a means to avoid any possibility of serious COVID in old age. See some of the studies here: http://www.kathydopp.info/COVIDinfo/Vaccines/NaturalImmunity

        1. B . Johnson says:

          Any website that parades the now widely mis-used quote by Thomas Jefferson about liberty, probably in regard to necessary public health measures, immediately falls under suspicion regarding any “compilation” of research data.

        2. DDC says:

          Having taken a quick look at your links, I can only assume that you have a very tenuous grip on reality. I think I have seen every one of them previously, usually to support the anti vaccine cause. Anything that ends up on Bitchute has to be regarded with extreme scepticism, since it’s a menagerie of material debunked or discredited previously. I don’t see a single link to actual science, lots and lots of opinions, often from individuals like Mike Yeadon, who has used his former status to push outrageous, unsupported views. This is a nice piece about him: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-coronavirus-vaccines-skeptic/ It illustrates perfectly the problem with opinions. They are essentially valueless. Especially when shared, quite deliberately with those who lack the educational background to read them and dismiss them as the hot air they are. Perhaps the scientists involved are feeling a lack of limelight or money, their webpages often seek “donations” or sell snake oil in their shops. Real science is the sort of cold, boring, entirely rational work, that demonstrates, in this case exclusively by double blind controlled trial, that a drug or vaccine works at all and at least as well as the existing gold standard, the RECOVERY trial is a good example: https://www.recoverytrial.net/results Dexamethasone & Tocilizumab are good examples. So, sorry, but none of your links is at all helpful and in fact expose your anti vaccine agenda clearly.

          1. Robert D says:

            “It illustrates perfectly the problem with opinions. They are essentially valueless.”

            Does that include yours?

      4. Yvette says:

        “…it is perfectly reasonable for a society to expect its members, *all* of its members, to take up such risks on behalf of everyone”
        As someone in a high-risk group now, I respectfully disagree with you. There are very serious, very deep ethical discussions here that have not taken place. What is perfectly reasonable to you is not a settled matter for many of us in terms of ethics. We always need to be careful of “common sense” assumptions, particularly when it comes to the things we feel it’s “perfectly reasonable” to demand others do with their bodies. And yes, potential exposure to a pathogen impacts others’ bodies too. As do many other human behaviours that we have had to weigh and measure to allow for a balance between individual autonomy and collective benefit. No one gets to short-circuit these ongoing ethical conversations with pronouncements that the conclusions are self-evident. Particularly when the science about the proposed intervention is still unfolding before our eyes.

        1. Daniel says:

          Well said.

      5. Question says:

        You are conveniently leaving out that there is a well established BASELINE for the number of heart events expected in this population of young people (in this case, young men in particular). We know how many people of that age we can expect to develop these heart issues. Those experiencing the heart events after getting jabbed is far, far higher than the expected baseline!

        You do not need the young jabbed to protect the elderly and the vulnerable who should get the jab. That is just a falsehood. The risks for bad outcomes for the young is higher with the vax in the short term than getting coronavirus, and we don’t even know the long-term effects of this vax. That’s what the data says. Just like with the lockdowns, we should protect those at risk, not the young and the healthy. Our response to the coronavirus has been insane and continues to be insane. How pathetic that so many people are buying the propaganda.

      6. Tim says:

        This comment didn’t age very well. Notice how we’re continually drip-fed these “warnings” 9 months after they started giving out the vaccines, after countless examples of these problems and being met with comments like yours.

    2. Martin says:

      Please keep in mind that myocarditis is accountable for 20% of sudden deaths in young adults. Over a 2 million cases of myocarditis with cardiomyopathy are observed every year worldwide. It’s not a rare occurence.

      1. Roland says:

        The disparity between ‘myocarditis following 1st dose’ and ‘myocarditis following 2nd dose’ in Israel seems to be a highly significant signal, and then we’re factoring out the background rate already (assuming cut-off for observing 2nd dose cases is less than the ~28 days between doses).

        The fact the data had to be leaked in Israel (and hasn’t been denied) and other countries are being cagey (mirroring some original reactions do the Oxford vaccine clot data, when we now know they were furiously whispering about how much to tell the public) is, I have to say, disappointing. If there are ‘specific concerns’, even rare and ‘not conclusively proven’ ones, surely it’s unethical not to mention those to patients when millions are being dosed every day?

        1. Cassandra says:

          It is a fact that informed consent has been withheld from the general populace. THIS VACCINE HAS UNKNOWN LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS. THIS VACCINE HAS A THEORETHICAL POTENTIAL TO CAUSE ENHANCED DISEASE IN THE CASE OF FUTURE INFECTION WITH AS YET UNIDENTIFIED VIRAL VARIANTS OR REDUCED ANTIBDOY TITRES.
          Is withholding such factual information (read the EUA’s) for the greater good? Who knows, the clinical trial is still running. I shall wait for long term data to rule out any more nasty surprises. Let’s also keep track of the escalating fatality rate in vaccine breakthrough cases – approaching 1.5% now according to CDC data. The idea of vaccinating kids is completely absurd – given the known risks of Covid and the unknown risks of vaccines.

          1. TheHeck says:

            You typed that in ALL CAPS. So it must be true.

        2. Cassandra says:

          I agree. It is a fact that informed consent has been withheld from the general populace. THIS VACCINE HAS UNKNOWN LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS. THIS VACCINE HAS A THEORETHICAL POTENTIAL TO CAUSE ENHANCED DISEASE IN THE CASE OF FUTURE INFECTION WITH AS YET UNIDENTIFIED VIRAL VARIANTS OR REDUCED ANTIBDOY TITRES.
          Is withholding such factual information (read the EUA’s) for the greater good? Who knows, the clinical trial is still running. I shall wait for long term data to rule out any more nasty surprises. Let’s also keep track of the escalating fatality rate in vaccine breakthrough cases – approaching 1.5% now according to CDC data. The idea of vaccinating kids is completely absurd – given the known risks of Covid and the unknown risks of vaccines.

          1. WST says:

            ..in the mean time, there were 3 days without any deaths in Israel, and few <5 in UK …

          2. Cassandra says:

            Oh yeah great point WST. Deaths in the UK fell to near zero, last summer after the first wave. Without a vaccine. Wow. If the vaccine were responsible for this reduction in deaths we would expect to see more due to the widespread use of the AZ vaccine and lower documented efficacy. Maybe there’s just no more susceptible people for the virus to kill. Israel are cocooning from the real world, see New Zealand as an example of what national isolation can achieve for reduction/prevention of deaths. So WST what is your point?

          3. Gus says:

            Because of the lockdown dullard. Please be quiet Cassandra – the adults are trying to have a conversation

          4. MisterGoober says:

            I’ve also noticed that the death rate in breakthrough cases is higher than expected. Couldn’t we assume a higher rate of immune system malfunction in those cases since they were “breakthrough” cases to begin with (the vaccine didn’t do what we expected)?

        3. Cassandra says:

          In the meantime there were days without deaths…. also at the end of wave 1 deaths fell to near zero in many places without vaccines – UK included. The UK got decimated in both waves, maybe there’s just nobody susceptible left to die? It’s certainly not vaccine efficacy at work there as more deaths would be expected due to AZ’s well documented lower efficacy and widespread use in that country. Try and book a flight to Israel – you can’t get in, so they are still prone to escape variants and effectively closed off from the wider world. Look at New Zealand for a comparison of national isolation. But hey, WST feel free to declare a triumph for vaccines for reduction of deaths. What then happened last in the UK last summer?

          1. Gus says:

            Lockdown

          2. Deva says:

            CDC just passed a document that indicates they want their samples from VACCINATED people to be 28 CT in the RT-PCR or less. That is way lower than I’ve seen being used upon everyone else.

            Wouldn’t that produce artificially lower results which would lead to the perception that the vaccines are more effective than they are? I know there is no standardized CT being used for the RT-PCR and that could be why there are so many false positives, as well as cases of missed diagnosis. There should be a standard if we are going to have a useful equivalence in measurement. The standard should be used on vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.

          3. Ogamol says:

            “days without deaths” is meaningless. The worst case progression was 2-3 days of onset (virus building up in a person’s system before hitting danger levels), followed by 11-12 days of hell in a hospital (high difficulty getting any oxygen, even with ventilator), and ending with massive heart and/or organ failure. Days without death only reveal a gap in the progression, not a gap in illness. Days without Covid-diagnosis hospitalization would have shown a gap in the severe illness. Days without any symptom set that is specific to Covid-19, including anosmia, would show a gap in onsets. Weeks without those symptoms are what you, and we, are looking for. And we already know of a few people who were infectious for a month, with no symptoms. That data point pushes “gaps that are a mystery to solve” out into the 2-3 month range; i.e. a 2 month gap between cases of anosmia (can’t smell anything) combined with positive Covid tests in each case (both sides of the gap) would be a mystery to solve. But “days without death” is nothing more than a measure of intensive care effectiveness. Not with a disease that can take weeks to stop being infectious.

          4. theasdgamer says:

            Ogamol,

            It doesn’t sound like you understand covid progression. I’ll lay out the median case. The range seems to be a day or so either way.

            Days 1-4: viral incubation

            Day 4-5: symptom onset

            Day 8: viral load maximizes

            Day 11: either symptoms disappear or disease progresses to immune overreaction, which may lead to hospitalization or death

            I have seen no solid evidence of asymptomatic spreading where the person remains asymptomatic. Early studies that thought they found it have been shown to be flawed.

          5. Rob says:

            Lockdown, Physical face barriers and social distancing has to be credited for the initial waves of virus degradation in any country. Anyone who is familiar with biological “agent” Morbidity and mortality rate patterns understands that this is biological outbreak passive defense 101.
            I’m seriously hoping that you were taking that into consideration before posting your comments. I’m not disagreeing with everything you’re saying, but you are going to be discredited of Jump Street if You try to maneuver around the positive impact of social distancing and other various basic passive defense measures regarding viral pathogens.

          6. WST says:

            I’ve promised myself no to feed trolls …but found a nice set of readily available graphs that show vaccines’ effects. Graphs come from the official Swedish health authority site.
            The graphs of interest are at the left hand side, the top one is new daily confirmed cases (“sjukdomsfall”), then daily ICU admissions (“intensive..”), the daily deaths (“avlidna”).
            There are 3 waves:
            1. April 2020, little testing was done so not many new cases, but there is an ICU admissions’ peak and corresponding peak in deaths.
            2. Dec 2020, peak in all 3 categories, a typical picture.
            3. April 2021, peak in new cases and ICU admissions but not in daily deaths. Vaccination started in last two weeks of December and apparently to high degree protects elderly and vulnerable .

            Similar set of graphs can be produced for many EU countries, Israel, UK etc…

          7. Bert says:

            WST, please look at some graphs for Chile, Uruguay and Bahrain and tell me what you find! You’ll find huge death rates in heavily vaccinated countries: please explain that. Your other “proof” is just serendipitous.

          8. WST says:

            Bert,
            the Swedish data contradicts your opinion, right ?
            We learn when meeting new facts or facts contradicting what we think we know. People that learn try to understand these facts rather then defend what they think they know already. The result maybe that they change their opinion or confirm their believes.
            From the Swedish data you can deduce that CFR (% of confirmed cases that eventually dies) went down since Jan 2021. So, while there still are many new cases, the issue is less frequently fatal.
            Few days ago I have made similar analysis for Chile and posted it in here, same results, CFR goes down as vaccination progresses, while the new cases increase. Do the analysis for Uruguay.
            Bahrain show the same pattern up to late May, then there was a surge in cases in deaths due to Eid holidays, but we talk about such a small numbers of deaths that there could be a lot of random variability either way.

            Changed CFR due to vaccination and dramatic decrease in deaths has been seen in most of the European countries, UK and Israel.

            Are the Swedish numbers “serendipitous” ? Well, you could easily find more demographic information in Swedish weekly reports, a dramatic decrease in cases in elderly after week 8, see table 2C, meaning less infection in vulnerable groups, less server cases and deaths. The Swedish numbers have a very good explanation.

            https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/globalassets/statistik-uppfoljning/smittsamma-sjukdomar/veckorapporter-covid-19/2021/covid-19-veckorapport-2021-vecka-20-final.pdf

            Now you can choose your attitude, either you learn or just seek to confirm your illusions.

          9. Teresa says:

            WST,

            Are you taking in consideration that they changed the way of counting COVID-19 death? Now, you must be COVID-19 positive AND at least three symptoms to be listed as death by Covid in contrast with before you just have to be positive.

          10. WST says:

            Teresa,
            which country do you talk about, Sweden ?
            In Sweden the FHM reviewed at one stage all death reports and reconciled the “deaths for positive cases” against medical deaths certificates, and remove tens of deaths by say, car accident. Now these checks are done routinely.
            There was no change in definition of covid death criterium in Sweden.

          11. theasdgamer says:

            WST says that Swedish data shows that declining deaths corresponded with vaccinations. If vaccinations were responsible for reducing deaths, they would first impact cases, then the impact on deaths would be seen about a month later.

            If you look carefully, the Swedish data doesn’t confirm WST’s hypothesis that vaccines reduced deaths.

          12. WST says:

            Game, in official Swedish statistics there is a dramatic drop in cases that progresses as the age groups are vaccinated. These are the people that were later on getting seriously ill and contribute to the death toll, and few weeks after that decrease one sees deaths coming down. BUT all in all, this was a small fraction of all new cases so you would not see it in total cases figures, that was still increasing as 20-40 years olds infections increased.

          13. Cassandra says:

            WST, the apparent reduction of deaths post vaccination is largely caused by the vaccines wiping out vulnerable people (instead of the virus). Deploying vaccines definitely caused a spike in mortality, this isn’t made up, it’s real and has happened almost everywhere vaccines have been pushed upon unsuspecting victims. Luc Montagnier speaks of this in his excellent interview where he also highlights the absurdity of covid vaccination campaigns only serving the purpose of applying selection pressure on escape variants. Basic science ladies and gentlemen. (Now queue the sniggers about the memory of water but you pharma shills can’t discredit two very simple and inconvenient truths – vaccine induced mortality and positive selection pressure).
            The UK’s chief medical officer knows the vaccines are futile and believes that it may take five years before vaccines could “hold the line” against a range of variants. FIVE YEARS ..:. I THOUGHT THAT VACCINES WERE GOING TO END THE PANDEMIC? This is a change of tune. The games up.

          14. theasdgamer says:

            WST, I can’t check your report on Swedish age group data. I can tell you that in my county, covid deaths peaked the third week of December. The community cases didn’t start dropping until the first week in January. Covid actually peaked back at the end of November in my county, but you wouldn’t know it until after the first couple of weeks in January. The case data is unreliable to determine the current status of infections and only shows exposure at some point in the past. Using case data to prove cause/effect for vaccine protection is a mistake.

            In my county, we likely achieved herd immunity around the end of November and vaccines were irrelevant. Most of the positives seen in January were likely leftover RNA from infections which occurred at the end of November.

          15. WST says:

            Cassandra says: “WST, the apparent reduction of deaths post vaccination is largely caused by the vaccines wiping out vulnerable people (instead of the virus).”

            I’ve looked at the all deaths statistics in Sweden and the 2021 figures follow the daily mean deaths in 2015-2019 averages after 4 February 2021. The daily deaths are at mean 2015-2019 past this date, there is no vaccination deaths peak and third wave peak. The deaths in first month of 2021 are a continuation of the second wave started in Nov 2020.
            The vaccination have really picked up after the 4th week (week one only for elderly homes) , see diagram 2 and following and there is no peak of deaths while hundreds oh thousands people were vaccinated.

            https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/folkhalsorapportering-statistik/statistikdatabaser-och-visualisering/vaccinationsstatistik/statistik-for-vaccination-mot-covid-19/uppfoljning-av-vaccination/vaccinationstackning-och-rapporterade-sjukdomsfall/

            The massive deaths you talk about did not happen as can be seen in the diagrams from SCB , table 1 (the statistics authority of Sweden).
            It’s obvious you don’t know what you are talking about.

            https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwja2qHXq6vxAhWm3eAKHS37Ac8QFjAAegQIAxAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scb.se%2Fcontentassets%2Fedc2b33f85ad415d8e7909002253ed84%2F2021-02-15-preliminar_statistik_over_doda_inkl_eng.xlsx&usg=AOvVaw0wwQbeX_MZNtT4dDFl9SSH

            Luc Montagnier is a very old man, did not do any research since at least 20 years. At the very beginning stated that there are some sars-cov-v2 genetic sequences that has never been seen before, to be quickly proven wrong by virologist providing many examples of the impossible….
            No new local variants appeared in the highly vaccinated countries, like Israel, UK, western Europe or US (variants take months to spread and be identified as “of interest”).
            What he says is just an opinion of somebody that has been systematically wrong for some time already…

            Game, you don’t deceive, just cherry picking information nobody can confirm.

      2. Question says:

        You are conveniently leaving out that there is a well established BASELINE for the number of heart events expected in this population of young people (in this case, young men in particular). We know how many people of that age we can expect to develop these heart issues. Those experiencing the heart events after getting jabbed is far, far higher than the expected baseline!

        1. TheHeck says:

          Citation please.

    3. JoeyManfredo says:

      Young people might not be at high risk for mortality, but there are many complaining of long term post-infection symptoms including warping of taste/smell. Living out your life w/o the ability to enjoy food could be a pretty serious quality of life issue. There was also a paper published yesterday that found persistent anosmia potentially indicates lingering virus in the brain.

      Definitely need more research all around.

      1. Trey says:

        Thank you for mentioning that. The number of younger people being diagnosed with things like dysautonomia disorders (which can be quite debilitating) like POTS post-covid is significant. We have so many joining our support groups over the last year that we’ve come to hope it will bring a silver lining in the form of more research for understanding and treatment of these disorders.

        1. Doug H MD says:

          where is your group?

      2. Enthusiastic nerd says:

        Yes. This needs more awareness. I was asymptomatic when I had covid, I didn’t even suspect myself of being infected, yet I lost my sense of smell for almost 3 months. When it came to back, which occurred at a really slow pace, I noticed that all of the bad smells are identical. I can’t tell rotten fruit from garbage apart. And with the pleasant smells, it’s not the same anymore. I can’t feel a good third of what I was aware of before.

    4. Not-an-epidemiologist says:

      The EU evidence pointed firmly against any link to myocarditis or pericarditis over previously-published background levels (which are actually quite high) a couple of weeks ago. Has anything changed?

      Background rates are here: https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/160/7/642/136637?login=true

      Note that the background rate is ~ 1 per 50,000 individuals every 30 days. So, you know, vaccinate 1M people in a month and you’d expect 20 cases as background. I can’t see any evidence that the case numbers that are supposedly worrying people are anything like this high.

      1. Roland says:

        That’s the background rate among well monitored, highly active, predominantly young service personnel. There’s no reason to think the rate of myocarditis serious enough to present to medical professional among the general population is similar.

        A recent paper puts the rate of hospital admissions for myocarditis at ~1 in 340,000 in England ( https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.140.suppl_1.11463 ). I don’t think it’s clear how serious the Israel cases are though, or indeed how they overlap with patients who may already be in hospital potentially with heart issues.

        I haven’t seen any EU evidence, or any real comment from the EMA at all other that they’re investigating.

        Interestingly the VAERS data *doesn’t* show any difference between myocarditis following first dose, and following second dose. One possible reason for the disparity in Israel is that at some point they put word around to look out for myocarditis, which surely increased detection. Perhaps that coincided with a increase in 2nd doses and sharp decline in 1st doses but the timeline is very unclear and I don’t think they were vaccinating fast enough to get such a clear division even if they increased vigilance suddenly and at the worst possible time.

        1. Roland says:

          That’s ~1 in 340,000 per 30 days sorry. Of course the rate in Israel may not be all that comparable. Another thing to consider about background rates is that viral infection is one of the main causes of myocarditis, and we’ve just skipped an entire Flu season, and presumably severely suppressed most other respiratory infections too. It wouldn’t be a surprise if background rates of myocarditis were significantly suppressed too.

          1. Charlie says:

            Excellent point about reducing the viral infections overall, on the planet.
            Though, I don’t buy any argument/discussion in which the Israel’s reported rate of 1:20000 in the age group 16-30 years is diluted by reporting it to the general population. The Health Minister in Israel was concerned explicitly about this very high rate. Pentagon also reported 14 ICU-grade of myocarditis in people 20-40 years old.
            But, on the other hand, there are more than just the severe types. I read forums where pro-vaccine people were discussing side effects. And some of them reported heart stabbing pains that awake them during sleep. Of course neither of them followed-up nor reported the side effect.

          2. Maidup Nayme says:

            Skipped an entire flu season? How about misdiagnosed an entire flu season as covid-19? Maybe I’m wrong and sitting in the house unable to exercise or get sunlight and human contact actually saves lives from viral infection. My research indicates that lack of sun exposure and subsequent vitamin D deficiency is harmful to one’s immunity. My research also indicates that oxytocin, which is released when one has physical contact with another human, is also helpful for improving immunity. I could be wrong, but it seems fairly evident that regular exercise should improve one’s ability to fight off a viral infection or at least survive a period of hypoxic conditions.

            Does anyone believe that the lockdowns have been so effective at preventing viral transmission that a whole flu season never happened, yet SARS COV 2 was running rampant under the same conditions? It seems more likely that most cases of influenza were misdiagnosed as covid either to get in on the bonanza of government money for treating those “cases” or out of clinical caution. Doctors, afraid of one of their patients spreading the virus, would understandably be more likely to diagnose covid when it could be influenza, rather than potentially be liable for the consequences of missing a case. Even if confirmatory RT PCR testing were required, the unacceptably high false positive occurance, as well as lack of standards for the cycle threshold value, make it relatively easy to “confirm” a case of influenza as coronavirus.

  7. NumCracker says:

    What about wild-type inactivated-virus vaccines as Sinovac’s? That seems me quite different scenario!

    1. Jon Duran says:

      It’s hard to imagine when that will ever be available in the US/Europe, but it seems particularly preferable given the experimental nature of the alternatives. Oh well.

      1. Derek Lowe says:

        I think you have that point backwards: the inactivated-virus vaccine, depending on the state of its Spike protein, might be worse from this standpoint.

        1. Jon Duran says:

          Great point, “inactivated” does a lot of work in the description – assumption would be that these effects are taking into account.

  8. Daniel Barkalow says:

    Have to mention the applicable xkcd: https://xkcd.com/2402/
    Also, it’s interesting to note that dictionaries are needing to update their definitions of “vaccine” because they don’t cover our current vaccines. They assumed that a less harmful analogue of the antigen would be in the preparation administered, which seemed unavoidable until recently.

  9. Mike nichols says:

    “when the mRNA or adenovirus particles do hit cells outside of the liver or the site of injection, they’re still causing them to express Spike protein anchored on their surfaces, not dumping it into the circulation. ”

    Except when the cell gets destroyed by killer t-cells. Then the spikes that were waiting to be expressed get released. The pfizer vaccine has 13 trillion mRNA instructions. Nobody knows how many instructions get delivered to a cell.

    1. Michael H says:

      Once the killer T-cell induces the targeted, spike-presenting cell to undergo apoptosis, wouldn’t it likely be engulfed by a macrophage before spikes are released? That way the spikes end up getting digested, rather than floating around freely.

      “Cells undergoing programmed cell death are rapidly ingested by nearby phagocytic cells. The phagocytes recognize some change in the cell membrane, most probably the exposure of phosphatidylserine, which is normally found only in the inner leaflet of the membrane. The ingested cell is then completely broken down and digested by the phagocyte without the induction of co-stimulatory proteins. Thus, apoptosis is normally an immunologically ‘quiet’ process; that is, apoptotic cells do not normally contribute to or stimulate immune responses.”

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27101/

      That last sentence sounds especially promising. It may be in the best interest of a virus for an infected cell to spill its contents freely, but the immune system “knows” that containment is beneficial.

      1. Rhiannon says:

        This does indeed seem promising and hopeful. Thank you for sharing this link.

      2. Yen says:

        How about the cells in the ovaries?

    2. Halton Arp says:

      Exactly

  10. Rens de Groot says:

    Vaccine induced thrombosis and thrombocytopenia (VITT) and thrombocytopenia on its own as side effects of in particular the adenovir based vaccines could potentially be partially explained by the discussed effects of spike on the endothelium. There is more (anti PF4 abs) but this may play a role in platelet activation and PF4 secretion.

  11. simmtomm says:

    BioNTech claims that the lipid composition of the coat around the mRNA specifically stees the particles of the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine for uptake by dendritic cells, which are those antigen presenting cells where the immun response party generally starts. Well designed.

  12. UncleOxidant says:

    How long will these spike proteins remain in a vaccinated person’s system? I’d guess not very long since the mRNA hits a cell and that cell starts expressing spike protein and then is done. Eventually you run out of those mRNA particles. Does this happen in a few days or is it longer? Side effects from the mRNA vaccines seem to not last much beyond a week for most people so maybe that’s the clue to this?

    1. pablo says:

      here is a science document regarding how long the Spike proteins lingered in different organs in the case of the Influenza Mrna vaccine trials:
      https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28457665/

      1. christian says:

        Thank you for this really interesting paper. In conclusion they had the solution for mRNA Vacancies back in 2017. (because as the paper shows they did human trails before and they work out!)

        That makes me more confident of taking my 2.nd shot in 2 weeks.

      2. Pablo help! i am trying to answer the same question but this giant article is daunting! How long is it?

      3. Charlie says:

        Interesting article, especially the end, the section called Conflict of Interest:
        “This study was funded by Valera Therapeutics, a Moderna Therapeutics venture”.
        And the study that they quote included 20 subjects in a perfect state of health if one looks at the exclusion criteria for the trial. Perfect liver, perfect immune system, less alcohol and less smoking, no serious reaction to a previous influenza vaccine. Basically, the study is as good as it gets. The results were reported interim on only 32 subjects although the study enrolled 201 people. And with these tough to meet criteria, they say that 48% of subjects had moderate AEs, meaning they had some limitations on their daily activities.

        1. Ross says:

          In most people, a normal healthy immune response will produce moderate AEs. The important word there is moderate. If you develop a mild fever that makes you feel tired for one day, that’s a moderate AE. A headache is a moderate AE. Muscle soreness in the injection site is a moderate AE. “Interferes with daily functioning” is a pretty wide definition.

          If you are barely getting any moderate AEs from your vaccine then the dose is probably too low.

          In fact if your study group is in very good health, you would EXPECT to see a lot of moderate AE reports like this, because people who are in very good health will really notice it if their immune response floors them for a few days – especially if they are young.

      4. PETER ROSS says:

        As far as I can tell, that article refers to mRNA distrbution not to protein distribution.

        There’s no direct evident that these MRNA injections generte any protein.

  13. izmimario says:

    i’m very sorry if this is just anedoctal evidence about myself, i’m 33 and the night after the first astrazeneca jab i had a very unusual 103°F fever. then intermittent pinches and burning sensations all around the body, not too intense and not too frequent, for 7-10 days, and headaches every other day. a CBC made at the time showed minor thrombocytopenia (124,000), i made another a few days later and platelets were back to normal. after the first 10 days, the pinching/burning sensations didn’t get worse but became much steadier, and this time always localized at the arms/legs, especially the part farthest from the trunk. i’m 20 days in and those bothersome pain sensations are still there, especially during the evenings. i strongly suspect it’s a vascular problem or something. i know i’ve never had great peripheral circulation, but i’ve never felt like this. in all honesty i don’t know what to do, i can only hope whatever happened is reversible. also i don’t know whether i should have a second jab or not.

    1. Kathy Dopp says:

      Every person I asked about their mRNA shot said they had a bad headache lasting about 2 days, so what causes this if none of the vaccine is getting to the vascular system around the head, as other doctors are claiming is a common spot for spike protein growth that causes scouring out of the small capillaries around the brain?

      1. Toby Gibson says:

        “Every person I asked about their mRNA shot said they had a bad headache lasting about 2 days”

        Here is one anecdotal experience that differs. Three of us had the BioNTech mRNA vaccine. Our side effects were mild. I only had soreness of the arm and nothing else. We did not have headaches.

        1. Charlie says:

          Headaches are very frequent, per CDC.
          “She cited statistics from the CDC’s v-safe, a post-COVID-19 vaccination smartphone-based monitoring program, which found that of the 1.6 million people enrolled, about 71% reported injection site pain, a third reported fatigue, and about 30% reported headache.”
          https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91288

      2. MisterGoober says:

        General Inflammation from the immune system ramping up to fight an intruder? Similar to a cold/flu?

  14. Doug H MD says:

    Derek: is it not possible to measure the spike protein itself? Has this been done if it is?

    1. Cassandra says:

      Hmmm, this blog is strange. Can’t quantify a protein. Western blot, calibration curve. Develop antibody if necessary. The attitude of Pfizer, Moderna, Jenner Eugenics & all other rainbow chasers trying to vaccinate the infinitely wilder and wylier virus – Who the F cares, we’ve enraptured the world with our scientific brilliance and are getting paid, Paid, PAID!!! (instead of spending) a fortune to run a clinical trial! (S-Protein, wow, a text book example of how NOT to interfere with nature, useless is a kind description – this approach is actually helping the virus to kill people, maybe it’s part of the plan and engineered to do so ). The stupidity of this generation will maybe teach the remaining race some lessons to save humanity in the future. Luckily we are just dealing with an emerging common cold. Counting fatalities among coffin dodgers is an easy pass time, grabs mucho headlines.. The real trouble is when a really dangerous pathogen hits (or is CAUSED to emerge by vaccination selection pressure interference). In this situation the hasty development and deployment of vaccines is about the stupidest approach that you can possibly take. And there’s the rub.

  15. JoeyManfredo says:

    One of the authors of the Salk Institute paper, that found the spike protein can cause cell damage on its own, did a local TV news interview today. He’s been adamant on his twitter, @manorlaboratory, that their paper is being misinterpreted by some saying it means vaccines could be problematic since they introduce spike proteins.

    Watch his explanation of how their paper may apply to vaccines from the news interview today: https://youtu.be/Uydsf51Lzv8?t=138

    1. john hewitt says:

      I talked at length with Uri from Salk Inst. publicly on Monday and it seems to me no one has a clue, let alone one shred of experimental data regarding how long vax-made spike actually lasts in the body or how it is dispersed once cells die or are lysed by reactive t-cells.

      1. Rob Deno says:

        Where did you speak to him? I hope you’re not talking about twitter as I’ve read through his replies and he says nothing like that.

        Seems like you have an agenda based on your replies after this one.

  16. Forex says:

    thanks for the great information

  17. john hewitt says:

    Spike is some nasty stuff, keep it out of your body at all costs

    SARS-CoV-2 spike protein induces brain pericyte immunoreactivity in absence of productive viral infection

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.30.442194https://muckrack.com/john-hewitt/articles

    1. MisterGoober says:

      So we have two choices here:
      1. Controlled non-replicating spike through a vaccine

      2. Wild replicating spike with a live virus attached.

      Not getting exposed to the spike at all doesn’t seem likely. Choice #1 seems like the preferable option.

  18. john hewitt says:

    Emma Burkey just got vaxxed, went into a coma, now she has to blink to communicate. This is what spike can and will do to your brain folks.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-03/victims-of-rare-vaccine-injury-wait-to-see-if-u-s-fund-will-pay

    1. Troll Feeder says:

      If your spike protein hypothesis is correct, a real COVID infection would probably have killed this young woman. It isn’t intuitive, but this might be the best possible outcome.

      1. theasdgamer says:

        Or maybe not. Maybe the actual virus would have elicited a robust, diverse immune response and the woman would have recovered.

        1. Ross says:

          No, all the evidence points to the targeted immune response to spike that is generated by the vaccines as being a better immune response than the one generated by natural exposure to SARS-CoV-2 virus.

          Also this rare clotting issue is a side effect of the adenovirus vectors, not of spike.

          1. theasdgamer says:

            Just cause you say it don’t make it so

  19. theasdgamer says:

    From the OP: “We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people”

    I thought it was aerosols. The MIT paper about indoor spread was pretty clear that aerosols were the primary means of spread and that social distancing had no effect on infections.

    I also have a chemistry question about the SARS-COV-2 spike proteins–do any of them have a polar character such that a small charge might be imparted to the lipid shell?

    1. John Wayne says:

      This quote (“We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people”) is a description of getting infected with aerosols.

      Exposure to aerosols are reduced by masks and social distancing when you are indoors. If you are outdoors the risks are way lower.

      The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines consist of the RNA of choice in a lipid shell. After these particles deliver their payloads to (mostly) the muscle cells at the site of injection, they make the spike protein. As a result, the spike protein will not really get an opportunity to interact with the lipid nanoparticles. On a separate note, when these nanoparticles are being designed, the average charge they possess is usually a critical parameter.

      1. theasdgamer says:

        “This quote (“We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people”) is a description of getting infected with aerosols.”

        _A guideline to limit indoor airborne transmission of COVID-19_

        https://www.pnas.org/content/118/17/e2018995118

        JW wrote: “Exposure to aerosols are reduced by masks and social distancing when you are indoors.”

        The MIT study found:
        “The current revival of the American economy is being predicated on social distancing, specifically the Six-Foot Rule, a guideline that offers little protection from pathogen-bearing aerosol droplets sufficiently small to be continuously mixed through an indoor space”

        The MIT guys were confused about masking and aerosols. The likelihood that aerosols will contain any water after a few minutes is vanishingly small because water will evaporate from them extremely quickly. Masking will only increase the rate of water evaporation from aerosols because masking increases friction from air jets going towards the ears. The aerosols are basically just virus once water evaporates from microdroplets.

        1. Cassandra says:

          Might help to explain why there has been a dramatic increase in infections since masks were introduced by dummies without any evidence of their efficacy in reducing viral transmission/infection. Excellent analysis on why the make them up as you go along rules are not working.

          1. Derek Lowe says:

            Once again, a gentle reminder that it does not have to be part of your day to post here. . .

          2. bruce says:

            Cassandra, there are a number of factors. The virus has simply had more time to spread, and there are more contagious variants out there now.

            But the reason that comes first to mind is that there are a lot of complete idiots out there who, often for political reasons, don’t wear masks, and spread conspiracy theories to discourage other people from wearing masks.

          3. theasdgamer says:

            Bruce, you might want to try science some time. It’s actually quite fun.

          4. theasdgamer says:

            Here’s some science, Derek, just in case some lurkers might be interested. You never know….

            “They [the researchers] found that at 35C (95F) and 40 percent relative humidity, a droplet can travel about 8 feet. However, at 5C (41F) and 80 percent humidity, a droplet can travel up to 12 feet. The team also found that droplets in the range of 14-48 microns possess higher risk as they take longer to evaporate and travel greater distances. Smaller droplets, on the other hand, evaporate within a fraction of a second, while droplets larger than 100 microns quickly settle to the ground due to weight.”

            Did you catch that? Smaller droplets evaporate within a fraction of a second. And friction (air jets, mask, skin) and expansion from beneath the mask into free space will tend to increase evaporation as friction produces heat and the increased space will increase evaporation which is explained by quantum physics (my physics isn’t _that_ rusty). The proportion of larger droplets will decrease and free virus proportion will increase with mask wearing from the jets going towards the ears. There will be _some_ filtering of virus from the mask. Some. But even the larger droplets captured by the mask will tend to evaporate water and free virus, ultimately.

            Do we know anything about the polarity of the virus? Does the spike protein introduce polarity to the virus, perhaps? That might help a mask with a charged filter capture polar virus even though the virus shell is lipid.

            My county has let its mask mandate expire and my interest in covid is vanishing, but I’m still just a little curious about masks and asymptomatic spread. It’s concerning that people in my county still tend to wear masks. People have little resistance to panic mongering and it’s a little discouraging.

        2. theasdgamer says:

          The MIT relied on several studies of location of infectees relative to an infected person.

          “There is now overwhelming evidence that indoor airborne transmission associated with relatively small, micron-scale aerosol droplets plays a dominant role in the spread of COVID-19 (4, 5, 7, 17⇓–19, 22), especially for so-called “superspreading events” (25⇓⇓–28), which invariably occur indoors (29). For example, at the 2.5-h-long Skagit Valley Chorale choir practice that took place in Washington State on March 10, some 53 of 61 attendees were infected, presumably not all of them within 6 ft of the initially infected individual (25). Similarly, when 23 of 68 passengers were infected on a 2-h bus journey in Ningbo, China, their seated locations were uncorrelated with distance to the index case”

          Conclusion: Distance between infectees and other people in indoor spaces don’t correlate to likelihood of infections.

          Here’s a little physics about microdroplets and evaporation…

          “•
          Small droplets (100 µm) settle within a small time frame (<0.5 s), limiting the radius of infection.

          Intermediate droplets (∼30 µm) show the highest probability of infection due to a slightly longer evaporation lifetime and low Stokes number."

          This study assumes that intermediate droplets are transmitted to nearby individuals. However, the MIT study's references showed that to not be the case.

          Here's the link to the physics microdroplet study…

          https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0015984

          Intermediate droplets have a _slightly longer_ evaporation time. Maybe 1 to 5 seconds to evaporate, in my opinion. And if you're wearing a mask, the jets towards the ears will cause even more evaporation due to friction with the mask, skin, and ambient air inside the mask, leaving a percentage of exhaled free virus to be wafted about the room by air currents.

          But, hey, what do physicists and engineers know?

          1. theasdgamer says:

            The copy didn’t work well.

            1. Small droplets (100 µm) settle within a small time frame (<0.5 s), limiting the radius of infection.

            3. Intermediate droplets (∼30 µm) show the highest probability of infection due to a slightly longer evaporation lifetime and low Stokes number.

          2. Gus says:

            Oh ffs sake give it a break . Countless studies have show masks reduce the expulsion of both aerosols and droplets, and the less initial viral load you are exposed to the less severe infection you will get – if anything your post is an argument for better masks, not no masks.

          3. theasdgamer says:

            Gus,

            My argument is:

            1. N95 masks may not work for anybody or maybe will only work for trained professional health care workers

            2. Mask mandates don’t work

            Lol @ “countless” low quality studies.

            Where _some_ masks _might_ work is in indoor applications. Surgical masks won’t prevent aerosolized virus from being inhaled. Cloth masks are equally useless. N95 masks _might_ work for trained professionals if the N95 masks can manage to trap viruses for 8 hours.

            It’s not about droplets–the MIT study reviewed _numerous_ studies to support that claim–it’s about free virus.

          4. chickenlittle says:

            Look at the real world evidence. Infections globally at an all time high… I know the more you count the more you find. But masks are being worn by the vast majority of people and if they worked wouldn’t you expect to see a reduction in infections? Of course real world evidence is often used to “prove” vaccine efficacy. Reduction in deaths in UK and Israel is always brought up by the scientific minded posters here. Strange to think how the deaths receded after the first wave sans vaccines!

          5. theasdgamer says:

            N95 pore size looks to range from 0.1 to 1 micron.

            SARS-COV-2 diameter is 0.12 micron.

            Chain link fence, meet mosquito.

          6. Charlie says:

            The N95 masks are fairly good against SARS-Cov-2 (98-99%)
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7157953/

          7. theasdgamer says:

            Charlie,

            By my rough estimate, N95 masks look to pass 70% of SARS-COV-2 and cause self-infection of the remaining 30%. 60% of breath droplets are caught by the mask, evaporate, then are either inhaled or exhaled. 40% of droplets go in jets towards the ears where 99% of the droplets evaporate and you have free virus.

            The charged fibers in the mask will initially capture a lot of virus, but will eventually be effectively rendered neutral charge (steady state condition) by oppositely charged dust particles. The 0.1 micron holes in the mask will be quickly plugged and the viruses will escape the mask via the larger holes. Brownian motion will fail to affect anything once a steady state condition occurs.

        3. Rastakins says:

          Seems MIT is confused by the difference between small droplets and aerosols. The droplets propagation has a gravity component but the aerosol component will be propagated following inverse-square law. There is nothing magic about six foot social distancing. There still can be risk. Time, crowds, and activity must also be considered.

          Here’s my revised CoViD eXposure risk calculator (April 2020) to determine relative risk:

          (1/D)^2 * T * R * P = Risk (relative)

          D is distance to other persons
          T is time
          R is respiration factor from table below
          P is number of people within distance D

          Respiration factor table (R):
          Sleeping: 1
          Standing: 2
          Walking 3.5 MPH: 6
          Jogging 5 MPH or bicycling 13 MPH: 13
          Fast running 10 MPH or bicycling 20 MPH: 26
          (Source health.harvard.edu)

          Virion propagation by aerosol is assumed. Any units can be used for D and T, as long as they are consistent. I will use feet and seconds.

          Some examples:

          Case 1, Walking 3′ past someone in a supermarket, 2 seconds:
          ((1/3)^2) x 2 x 6 x 1 = 1.3

          Case 2, Standing in line, 6′ apart with one person in front and one in back of you, 15 minutes:
          ((1/6)^2) x 900 x 2 x 2 = 100

          The takeaway: the lines outside supermarkets are 77x more hazardous than a close encounter inside a supermarket. These hazardous lines should be abolished.

          Case 3, Standing in line, 6′ apart with a family of three in front and a couple in back of you, 15 minutes:
          ((1/6)^2) x 900 x 2 x 5 = 250

          The more people that near you, the greater the exposure. Again, these hazardous lines should be abolished.

          Case 4, Full speed on exercise bike in gym, 8′ apart with one person to the left and one to the right of you, 10 minutes:
          ((1/8)^2) x 600 x 26 x 2 = 487

          A vigorous stationary ride at the gym is might be more hazardous than standing in a line outside the gym.

          Case 5, Leisurely bicycle ride, 30′ apart with one person in front of you, 45 minutes:
          ((1/30)^2) x 2700 x 13 x 1 = 39

          Using real bicycles outside, large distances between bikes can make this quite safe. Exposure is probably even lower due to dispersion by turbulence. If riding side-by-side, exposure is likely zero. Get some fresh air. Take a ride!

          1. theasdgamer says:

            Outdoors there are air currents that disperse aerosols. The infection risk is indoors. Individual virions will hardly be affected by N95 masks if the masks rely solely on physical filtration. It’s like trying to protect against mosquitos with a chain link fence. All the nontherapeutic interventions look to be worthless.

      2. Gus says:

        What about the Astra Zeneca ?

  20. Toby Gibson says:

    As mentioned above, vaccinations can be and are at a low rate erroneously injected directly into blood vessels. The control for this is aspiration: pulling back on the plunger to check for blood being brought backwards into the syringe. Aspiration has specifically not been recommended for COVID-19 vaccines.

    I’ve checked the literature but been unable to determine what cell receptor(s) the ChAdOx1 adenovirus vector (or the precursor simian virus Y25) uses to enter cells. But like many adenoviruses, it presumably has broad tissue tropism, a factor which is advantageous for a vaccine vector.

    On the rare occasions when the vaccine is injected into a blood vessel, then the viral particles can essentially invade either the cells in the blood or the cells lining the blood vessels. In principle, those cells can be anywhere in the body, including the brain and the heart. Productive gene expression will lead to Spike protein being expressed on the surface of those cells.

    ACE2 is not the only receptor for the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. Neuropilin-1 is another receptor, binding the CendR motif of Spike protein which is generated following cleavage by Furin.

    Since Neuropilin-1 is present in cells of the vascular endothelium, the question arises: Is this receptor ideally situated to partake in vaccine-induced thrombosis, provided that Spike protein is being expressed in the blood vessels?

    The rare cases of thrombosis are associated with low platelet counts. Since it is the thromboses that cause the symptoms that lead to hospitalisation, another question arises: Are the low platelet counts induced by the vaccine or are they an undiagnosed preexisting condition?

    And a final question: Would the use of aspiration during administration of the adenovirus vaccines essentially eliminate those rare thromboses?

    1. john hewitt says:

      CDAXR receptor for group B coxsackie viruses and subgroup C adenoviruses. CAR protein is expressed in several tissues, including heart, brain, and, more generally, epithelial and endothelial cells.

    2. izmimario says:

      sorry for the elementary question: would endothelial damage from a blood injection be completely reversible? or does it partially stuck?

    3. DRN says:

      hmm… seriously, why aren’t these vaccines given intradermally? I think it wouldn’t affect efficacy much.

    4. A Nonny Mouse says:

      All IM injections should be aspirated as a matter of protocol (according to my son who was taught that). I had my second injection a few days ago and there was certainly no aspiration even though I told him to do it!

    5. Mary Smith says:

      Toby –

      If the vaccine was erroneously injected into the blood vessel, how would the body eliminate the spike in proteins? Could this error occur from using the wrong sized needle?

  21. S. Simons says:

    There is a lot of reassurance given for vaccines due to the fact that vaccines are injected intramuscularly. Were the hamsters and mice in the mentioned studies injected intramuscularly as well or was the injection administered directly into their blood streams?

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      Intramuscular – earlier studies had tried all the different routes, and i.m. was the best, followed by subcutaneous, with i.v. noticeably worse.

      1. S. Simons says:

        So in the study, hamsters and mice were injected intramuscularly and were observed to have significant cellular damage noted due to to the spike proteins. How does this study then provide any reassurance that the same level of damage won’t occur in humans when getting an intramuscular vaccine? Understandably we are different species, but are all mammals with similar circulation systems.

        1. Derek Lowe says:

          No. The study with the Spike protein had it administered into the trachea, and the conference report appears to be i.v. And remember, giving purified Spike protein separately is very different from having it made inside the cell, as the post explains.

          1. Eneida M. Silva says:

            Hi Derek, so given your comment that giving purified spike protein is very different than having it made inside the cells, would it be safer to take an MRNA vaccine rather than say Novavax vaccine (Novavax is just the spike protein), Thanks, Eneida

          2. Ross says:

            Maybe, but two things to consider.

            The Novavax vaccine is delivered with a very potent adjuvant that induces immune cells to engulf the nanoparticles rapidly. (The mRNA nanoparticle vector and adenovirus vector vaccines don’t have a chemical adjuvant, though the vector itself probably acts as an adjuvant to some degree.)

            The spike proteins in Novavax aren’t soluble, so it’s not actually functionally the same as just injecting pure spike protein. They’re embedded in a lipid nanoparticle, and being bunched more closely together than spike proteins on the surface of SARS-CoV-2 possibly affects their binding affinity.

            These direct health effects from spike are – from the available evidence – caused by soluble spike protein in the bloodstream. That happens in a natural SARS-CoV-2 infection when virions break apart, or truncated versions of the protein without the membrane-embedded regions are produced during the very messy business of viral replication. Since the spike in the Novavax vaccine is still embedded, it might not have the same health implications.

      2. DRN says:

        Derek,
        In your other post, “mRNA Vaccines: What Happens”, you mentioned:
        “And here’s a 2017 paper from the same team at Karolinska along with Moderna, looking at LNP-mRNA influenza vaccines in a primate model as well. They didn’t even bother with intravenous dosing by this point – it’s a comparison between intramuscular and intradermal. It looks like the intradermal dose comes on more quickly in antibody production, but in the end, the two are pretty similar.” — so I’m a bit sad with this situation. I would have liked to take the vaccine intradermally, as an experiment, and test my antibody levels afterwards. Biodistribution is the only reason why I’m unvaccinated yet.
        Hmm… could the currently approved formulations of vaccine be used intradermally right off the bat? Maybe I can convince someone to do some sort of clinical trial… xD Anyways we have a “vaccine crisis” in my country, we have excess doses and no one wants to take them…

        1. MisterGoober says:

          Is bio distribution really that much of an issue except for nerve cells and other cells that regenerate slowly? If a cell expresses spike and is engulfed, wouldn’t our bodies just create new cells to replace the old?

          1. Dennis says:

            I imagine that would be more challenging in the case of ovaries.

  22. Daren Austin says:

    If spike protein is binding to ACE2 and internalized, given levels of ACE2 and normal surface turnover rates, there will be rapid clearance. Anyone who’s ever worked on a cell-surface targeting mAb knows this. Even antibodies with FcRn binding and recirculation, can have dramatically short half-lives when there is an abundance of target. The spike protein has a broadly similar molecular weight (too big for renal clearance), but target-mediated clearance will strip it from the circulation very rapidly.

  23. Guest23 says:

    Here’s a tweet from one of the authors of the Circulation Research paper:

    https://twitter.com/manorlaboratory/status/1388717008544419843?s=21

  24. J K says:

    Could the initial infection be so localized that it would help explain some of the span of clinical manifestations of the disease? Nasal mucosa being “hit” først vs deep down the bronchial tree. As to why some get serious pulm tissue involvement and others don’t. Anosmia. Etc.

  25. Alberto J. Villena says:

    Just a conceptual note on the Derek’ sentence “ Now we get to a key difference: when a cell gets the effect of an mRNA nanoparticle or an adenovirus vector, it of course starts to express the Spike protein. But instead of that being assembled into more infectious viral particles, as would happen in a real coronavirus infection, this protein gets moved up to the surface of the cell, where it stays”.
    Actually, the S protein is not expressed on the surface of the mRNA (transitionally) transfected cells. The newly synthetized S proteins are cleaved in the proteasome in short peptides, and these ones are coupled to MHC proteins into the endoplasmic reticulum. Then, the MHC-peptides complexes are moved to the cell surface for antigen presentation.
    So, no or very little amount of full S proteins would be released from the mRNA transfected cell after vaccination.

    1. DRN says:

      This paper seems to contradict your statement:
      https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscentsci.1c00080

    2. DRN says:

      This article (click on my name) seems to contradict your statement.

      1. Ross says:

        No, that paper describes exactly the point he’s making – that there is post-translational modification taking place before the spike protein is displayed on the cell surface.

        I would guess that Derek is aware of the post-translational modification but just left it out of the description for the sake of simplicity of the point that he was making; that the spike protein remains embedded in the cell membrane rather than secreted into the extracellular environment. That it has been cleaved during post-translational modification is an aside.

        1. Halton Arp says:

          What about complete spike proteins in the body of the cell, not yet modified, but released due to the immune response to the modified proteins on the cell surface???

  26. Harlan Easley says:

    Meet the mRNA vaccine rookies aiming to take down COVID-19

    “Upon vaccination, the mRNA vaccine encoding the viral spike protein packaged in a lipid nanoparticle enters the cell. There, it is translated in the ribosome into protein. This protein is either broken into smaller pieces (peptides) by the proteasome or transported via the Golgi apparatus to the outside of the cell. ”

    https://www.cas.org/resource/blog/covid-mrna-vaccine

  27. DRN says:

    Derek,
    Thanks very much for writing this article, as it sheds some light on the issue and I think will lead to some productive discussions. I still have some curiosities, though, as I’m a layman. (the questions are for anyone in this comment section that has expertise with these things, of course)

    1) The report on Moderna’s vaccine mentions that the LNP+mRNA particles enter various organs, including the heart and the brain, crossing the blood-brain barrier. How does the immune system react to this? Does it mount an attack against those cells?
    https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/covid-19-vaccine-moderna-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf (section 2.3.3)
    2) As others have already mentioned, what are the implications when the vaccine is incorrectly administered? Assuming some fraction of the vaccine is injected into a vein, can something like this happen?:
    mRNA/viral vector is uptook by cells in blood/veins –> those cells express the spike protein on their surface –> some of them go through the bloodstream causing toxicity –> the immune system mounts an attack against them (possibly causing clots/thrombocytopenia)?

    4) All things considered, wouldn’t a subunit vaccine be safer, in theory, as it uses directly the antigen as opposed to gene delivery to cells, and is rapidly cleared from the body? Let’s take the vaccine from Novavax for example, which uses 5 μg of spike protein. In the article below we find—although I’m not sure how reliable it is—that at the moment of peak infection, a person that’s infected with COVID should carry around 1-100 μg of virions. So wouldn’t those 5 μg of spike delivered IM be insignificant compared to an infection? And the efficacy seems to be the same as with mRNA vaccines.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7685332/

    Totally anecdotal: my dad took the Pfizer vaccine. I told him to take it in his right arm rather than the left after reading some posts with complaints of chest pains and related issues, thinking it would be good to keep inflammation & vaccine components as far from the heart as possible. Then the reports about an association with myocarditis in Israel came out. My dad had no side effects from either dose yet, and he had his 2nd shot a few days ago. So, I don’t know, would the choice of arm matter when it comes to side effects?
    And seriously, why don’t we receive these vaccines intradermally?

    1. DRN says:

      and follow-up questions:
      I don’t really understand what’s the fate of all those spike proteins/peptides in a human body. So clearly they get expressed on cells’ surface and I suppose they stay more or less in place in a controlled environment. But how strong is the membrane attachment really? What happens when a cell full of spike proteins dies?
      I also suppose there’s a surface limitation to the number of spikes a cell can hold. Can more spikes be produced than a cell can hold? And if yes, what happens in this case?

      1. DRN says:

        and a final note: I read a comment from someone who actually does in vitro transcription of mRNA, and they said they get more soluble spike protein than membrane-embedded. What does this actually mean?

        1. MJ says:

          Excellent questions, this kind of dialogue is exactly what is needed if we want to overcome vaccine hesitancy. Thank you

        2. sgcox says:

          This is a bit confusing.
          Is it about cell free system for spike mRNA ? If yes, all protein made will be of course in solution as no cell membrane is there. Never actually read in literature about such experiments yet… If it is in HEKs, like everybody do, the full length Spike will be on membrane and later solubilised by detergent during standard lysis and membrane protein extraction procedures, Not much secreted Spike in living HEK cultures as far as I know. Probably some inside cell cytosol if not inserted yet. Truncated Spike without TM is of course all in cytosol.

  28. Christian says:

    Check this if you want learn more: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-approval-of-pfizer-biontech-vaccine-for-covid-19/summary-public-assessment-report-for-pfizerbiontech-covid-19-vaccine

    3.3 Pharmacokinetics -> Absorption -> Distribution -> Metabolism -> Excretion

    1. Daren Austin says:

      Did you read the assessment – it details the pharmacokinetics of the lipds not the produced spike protein.

      “Pharmacokinetic studies have not been conducted with COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 and are generally not considered necessary to support the development and licensure of vaccine products for infectious diseases (WHO, 2005; WHO, 2014).”

      They did confirm spike protein production in the liver (of rats).

  29. Erast van Doren says:

    This is all BS, of course. Protease gets only a small proportion of proteins, and it also isn’t virus specific. Most of the spike-protein will be secreted into the blood, where it causes exactly the effects we are seeing, such as thrombosis.

    1. theasdgamer says:

      Wait, I thought that the spike protein was somehow targeted to be inserted into the cell membrane. Do you have any evidence that this isn’t the case?

    2. Michele says:

      Agree. His argument that the vaccine stays local to the injection site, and therefore inoculated cells won’t migrate and travel throughout the body, interacting with other tissues, is just flat out false information.

  30. J Curwen says:

    There are 10 nanograms of DNA allowed in the “RNA vaccines”, corresonding to 3.03 x 10^10 300 bp DNA fragments. Their potential for genomic integration in combination with the new LNPs has never been tested.
    Now it turns out that the quality control system for measurement of residual template DNA is done by quantitative PCR with two (2) primers, so only full length inserts are detected, no fragments (after DNAseI digestion!). Therefore the amount of DNA is completely underestimated.
    How can the EMA allow this? Every student knows that absolute DNA quantification is done by acid hydrolysis followed by mass spec.

    1. limpet says:

      Hey,

      Would be really interested to see some info about this.. Do you have any links?
      I’ve not been able to find anything except an EMA document which acknowledges the existence of DNA contaminants and just wondering where you found info about the accepted limit and about the checking process only looking for whole DNA sequences. just want to dig a little more into all of this and not having much luck with this specific thing.
      Cheers

  31. Kathy Dopp says:

    So if this article is correct, then why do so many persons report getting bad headaches for two days following the mRNA vaccines. (every person I’ve asked about it and every person one of my friends asked, reported having bad headaches lasting about 2 days following the shot.

    1. Adam S says:

      I’m thinking most readers have a pretty sound hypothesis as to why your friend’s have headaches after reading your comments on this post.

  32. Arthur Anderson says:

    My expertise is in chemistry, not in molecular biology. Can someone inform me of why we are not simply expressing the spike protein, then creating a vaccine based on a denatured form of the spike protein vs using mRNA vaccines?

    Yes, I know it’s easier to mass produce mRNA vaccines, but why is it impossible to create a more conventional, less intrusive vaccine?

    1. DRN says:

      That’s what Novavax is doing… but unfortunately they move really slow.

  33. Omar Stradella says:

    Before the pandemic, the comment section of Derek’s blog used to be interesting and enlightening. Since then, it’s been flooded with ignorant, anti-vaxx drivel. I can’t wait for the pandemic to be over so we can go back to the nice discussions about drug discovery and development. “Let’s make In the Pipeline great again” 😉

    1. Gus says:

      The thing is – its an excellent place to discredit their bullshit. I know its tiresome – but you cant just be ivory tower academics – if this vaccination drive is going to work you have to engage with the public too – not gloss over potential problems and give it to them straight based on facts – otherwise these anti-vax nutjobs will have a field day and there’s a lot of people who will not take the vaccine because they will believe their crap.

    2. Jon Duran says:

      Speaking for myself and others I know, we’re thrilled that us and our children are vaccinated from polio, measles, etc. No “anti-vaxxers” here. Tetanus shots are a great thing when you step on a rusty nail. Etc.

      We’re also extremely curious and skeptical of new vaccine technology that hasn’t been robustly trialed, especially when how it interacts with the human body is being learned about in real-time.

      Being denigrated and mocked like some wild-eyed maniac in response furthers that skepticism, not that I think you genuinely care.

      1. theasdgamer says:

        There’s no bigger fool than someone who is wise in his own eyes. Your common, everyday fool has a better chance of learning something.

        I learn stuff here on occasion–especially from those with opposing views. Those on the opposite side never seem to learn much.

      2. Gus says:

        None of us are naive about this. But ALL vaccines went from stage 4 trials to massive public use at some point. These are new there’s no doubt about it, and yes it’s natural to be cautious, they are instructing our cells to make spike proteins etc but as a species out back is up against the wall here. Do you really think the Israelis, a nation that has aggressively asserted Jewish interests globally would poison their own populace if they thought there was a serious worry or less risk from letting covid run wild. The fact is neither of us are qualified to assess the safety of these vaccines. But one thing I do know is that not all people who ARE qualified to comment are evil Satan worshipping monsters out to cull the human race. Most people working in science, as you know, are decent folk and unless the people who REALLY know what they’re talking about sound the alarm en masse then I’m going to trust them more than some crap someone mate read on bitchute. And yes there will be problems with vaccines but that doesn’t mean we have to blow every potential problem up like to some silly scifi horror movie. That’s going to make them stop wanting to inform the public at all. If you have serious worries about these vaccine then feel free to share papers from hi impact peer reviewed journals.

        1. theasdgamer says:

          My view of Qanon is that it was a deep state operation aimed at feeding conservatives a mixture of truths, half-truths, and fantasy in order to poison the well against pedophilia ring truth and against election fraud truth. The pedophilia rings in Washington are no surprise and that was the truth mixed in with nonsense. Pedophilia rings are standard in the halls of power everywhere.

          But what of the Army and Gates Foundation sponsoring a study back in 2013 on using mosquitos to deliver a vaccine? With Gates’ history with the tetanus vaccine in Africa being used to reduce births, that’s concerning. Gates was friends with Epstein (not Qanon fantasy) and Gates is looking more and more like a James Bond villain.

          1. Gus says:

            Nah,
            Bill Gate is just a nerd that made it big and wants to do his bit to help humanity. The thing is if he makes a mistake (as all humans do) it will have a lot more impact as he has more power – but he is no villain, apart from Windows 10 of course – he should go to jail for that shit. I digress. I suspect most people with that much money ran into Epstein at some point. As for the rest of your post – its so far off-topic , I suspect that any serious scientific minds will have abandoned this comments section now – which is sad because some of us normal members of the public are trying to find evidence-based answers.

          2. theasdgamer says:

            gus,

            You’re likely unaware of Gates’ mission to reduce the human population.

            Gates met with Epstein “many times”. Now I know that the New York Times is part of the fake news media, but maybe this is a case of a broken clock being correct.

            https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/business/jeffrey-epstein-bill-gates.html

          3. Gus says:

            You accuse Bill Gates of all sorts of nonsensical conspiricy theories and yet you let him get away scott free for his REAL crime against humanity: Wiindows 10….

      3. Christina Hall says:

        Agree.

  34. JohnR says:

    Severe cases of Covid-19 are associated with extensive lung damage and the presence of infected multinucleated syncytial pneumocytes. The viral and cellular mechanisms regulating the formation of these syncytia are not well understood. Here, we show that SARS-CoV-2-infected cells express the Spike protein (S) at their surface and fuse with ACE2-positive neighboring cells. Expression of S without any other viral proteins triggers syncytia formation. [1]

    [1] Syncytia formation by SARS-CoV-2-infected cells.

    Like other fusion proteins that are active pH independently, S protein mediates not only fusion between the viral and the cellular membranes during particle entry but also fusion of infected cells with uninfected cells. This process is mediated by newly synthesized S protein accumulating at the cell surface. The resulting syncytia are giant cells containing at least three, often many more nuclei. Cell-cell fusion is used by viruses such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), measles virus (MV), or herpes virus to spread in a particle-independent way. The resulting syncytia are documented as pathological consequence detectable in various tissues such as the lung (measles virus), skin (herpes virus), or lymphoid tissues (HIV). In the brain, cell-to-cell transmission via hyperfusogenic F proteins constitutes a hallmark of MV-caused encephalitis as a fatal consequence of acute MV infections manifesting years later (from one day to 15 years). [2]

    [2] Quantitative assays reveal cell fusion at minimal levels of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and fusion from without.

    1. DRN says:

      For anyone wondering, seems like JohnR took the paragraphs from this study:
      https://www.embopress.org/doi/full/10.15252/embj.2020106267

      I’d like to highlight: “Here, we show that SARS‐CoV‐2‐infected cells express the Spike protein (S) at their surface and fuse with ACE2‐positive neighboring cells. Expression of S without any other viral proteins triggers syncytia formation.”
      I think this needs some discussion in our context. Anyone competent can comment?

      1. From Here says:

        Actually, JohnR took the paragraphs from this page,

        preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1184

        but wasn’t too sure if I should link to it.

        1. Gus says:

          You should have done – now I know I cant trust a word he types.

          1. peter says:

            Oh really!?

            It was amazing.

            Just to get the Amnesty International Reports on Covid-19 and Care Homes made it worth a look.

            The section on vaccines is excellent as well.

            Well worth a read.

    2. umuroff says:

      Thank you, so this is likely to happen at IM injection sites. Such atypical cellular masses may indeed allow DNA integration, DNA which is present in vaccines. Germ line cells are located far away so i don’t think there is a major threat to humanity. However unknown effects can certainly be expected when we are armed with this knowledge about cell membranes expressing spike protein and ACE2 is abundantly expressed in the microvasculature.

      1. theasdgamer says:

        “We demonstrate for the first time that ACE2 and the entry-facilitating transmembrane protease TMPRSS2 are expressed on very small CD133+CD34+Lin-CD45- cells in human umbilical cord blood (UCB), which can be specified into functional HSCs and EPCs. The existence of these cells known as very small embryonic-like stem cells (VSELs) has been confirmed by several laboratories, and some of them may correspond to putative postnatal hemangioblasts. Moreover, we demonstrate for the first time that, in human VSELs and HSCs, the interaction of the ACE2 receptor with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activates the Nlrp3 inflammasome, which if hyperactivated may lead to cell death by pyroptosis. Based on this finding, there is a possibility that human VSELs residing in adult tissues could be damaged by SARS-CoV-2, with remote effects on tissue/organ regeneration.”

        So stem cells are potential targets of spike proteins from SARS-COV-2 and from vaccine-generated spike proteins in cell membranes.

        Do VSELs have the potential to incorporate SARS-COV-2 RNA into their DNA? And could the vaccine cause a reduction in VSELs?

        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32691370/

  35. Linda says:

    This is simply incorrect in a very important point. With natural Covid-19 infections, the SARS-CoV-2 virus (with its spike protein) rarely enters the bloodstream. Covid-19 is a respiratory virus, like an extremely severe cold. It is NOT a systemic infection, like the measles. Severe Covid-19 is caused by an over-reaction of the immune system, not by the virus itself. In fact, most people who develop severe Covid-19 have a low viral load by the time the end up in the ICU.

    This is important because, in contrast to the natural infection, the injection DOES cause spike proteins to end up in the bloodstream, and in particularly, they migrate in to the heart. That causes inflammation, which is NOT GOOD.

    1. stewart says:

      It’s long been clear (see coagulopathy symptoms) that COVID-19 is not purely a respiratory disease. More recently people have been saying that it’s better characterized as a vascular disease rather than a respiratory one.

      https://www.euronews.com/2021/05/06/covid-19-is-a-vascular-disease-not-a-respiratory-one-says-study

      For transmission SARS-COV-2 may like a respiratory disease, but so does measles.

    2. theasdgamer says:

      Stewart is correct. Covid is a coagulopathic disease which has an immune component and can result in cytokine storm in the lungs in some people, although that isn’t the primary cause of death from covid. The primary cause of death is systemic organ failure from the microclotting that occurs in capillaries. The microclotting produces hypoxemia, which is deadly if it goes on long. Another cause of death from covid is strokes and heart attacks.

  36. Gus says:

    “Notably, the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is producing wild-type Spike”

    Hi as someone who is definitely pro-vaccine – What are the potential implication of this? Also – as someone in his 40s who had his first jab, shortly before it was banned for the under 60s in my country – I keep hearing that with the RNA vaccines they are out your system fairly quickly – is the same true with the Astra Zeneca – and I know there’s a load of anti-vax nutjobs here – so you might be reluctant to answer this – are there any potential long term issues you can think of with the Astra Zeneca – or is it a case of – once a couple months have gone by it too is out your system and unlikely to cause any harm in the future? Please only answer if you an expert in vaccines, ie Derek or another PhD level researcher – I don’t want to hear from anti-vaxxers.

    1. theasdgamer says:

      You think Derek is an expert in vaccines???

      I’m rusty in physics and chemistry, but at least I know my limitations. One of those limitations is _not_ the inability to read journal articles out of field.

      I have read over a hundred–probably closer to two hundred–covering a wide array of aspects of covid and non-therapeutic worthless interventions.

      1. Gus says:

        He seems to know his shit and his profile says “Derek Lowe, an Arkansan by birth, got his BA from Hendrix College and his PhD in organic chemistry from Duke before spending time in Germany on a Humboldt Fellowship on his post-doc. He’s worked for several major pharmaceutical companies since 1989 on drug discovery projects against schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, osteoporosis and other diseases.”
        Which admittedly is not a PhD in vaccinology but feel free to direct me to a better informed blog if you know of one (not an anti vax nut job site or buttchute please)

        1. theasdgamer says:

          Derek writes well and uses the right jargon. His analysis of the RECOVERY trial sucked badly. Derek does better when he’s discussing medicinal chemistry.

          I’m retired and have the time to read journal articles in depth.

          It’s smart to be cautious about the mRNA technology.

          1. Gus says:

            Yeah it would be really nice if someone who knows what they’re talking about could just answer the damn question instead of detailing it with ad hominen attacks.

          2. theasdgamer says:

            Gus,

            You started with the ad hominem and now you complain about it?

  37. Gus says:

    I’m sure there’s a really obvious answer to this – but why would Astrazeneca potentially cause thrombosis in a tiny amount of people after the first jab – but not the second?

    1. Bossman says:

      You think that thrombosis is limited to AZ? Do some searching

      1. Gus says:

        No but I’m asking about astrazeneca. Why is it only the anti vax nutters are answering my questions. Comon guys humor my ignorant layman’s ass.

        1. arcsix says:

          Completely not an expert here – but my guess is that if an individual’s immune system is going to react improperly to an antigen, it’s much more likely to happen with the first exposure. So if you get past the first dose with no problem then that is an indication that you are much less susceptible to this particular immune pathology.

          1. theasdgamer says:

            I have a relative who got the first dose of Sinovax, then covid a couple of weeks later. His pO2 dropped to 90, but he has recovered after a couple of weeks. By way of comparison, my wife, who is 65+ only had a mild case (ILI symptoms) even with more comorbidities than the first relative and recovered within two days of symptom onset. And she had a second case and recovered within 12 hours of symptom onset the second time, which indicates a robust and diverse immune response to covid with no lingering effects.

            In my household, we supplemented with zinc and vitamin C & D quickly after symptom onset and with elderberry concentrate, which contains high levels of quercetin. I was prepared and had everything on hand.

            No one in my household has had any vaccines.

            Two other relatives I know of have caught covid and one died.

          2. theasdgamer says:

            IIRC,

            Allergic reactions can happen anytime. A small exposure may trigger a severe allergic reaction, but a large exposure may overwhelm the immune response and the allergic reaction might not occur. And the first exposure to an antigen sets up the later immune response which can trigger an allergic reaction upon second exposure.

            There’s the very, very basic nuts and bolts of allergies.

          3. da boss says:

            It is well known that penicillin allergy and bee stings can be much worse on second exposure.

    2. Jeffo says:

      Just a completely uneducated guess but maybe it’s because the first jab had already made sufficient antibodies that blocks spike proteins produced by the 2nd jab from binding to ACE2?

    1. Kenneth N Shonk says:

      Link is too long to work according to google.

  38. What about m6a RNA messenger and DNA alterations. It is 100% possible and like with the mRNA vaccines. Eua vaccines are winwin for eugenists.

    1. theasdgamer says:

      You might not have a choice:

      “Immunization Via Mosquito Bite With Radiation-attenuated Sporozoites (IMRAS)”

      from 2013

      sponsored by the Army

      funded by Gates Foundation

      completed

      https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01994525

      What could go wrong?

      1. Janet Love says:

        What could go wrong ?

        In a word, Everything. Would you really trust your life to the source philosophy that generated Windows Operating Systems ?

        I rest my case.

      2. Janet Love says:

        Everything…. could go wrong. Swatting a pesky mozzie at night is… well, good luck with putting that Genie back in the bottle…

      3. Augustine Leudar says:

        Has it occurred to you that Bill Gates intentions are actually good and he’s trying to help humanity?

        1. pablo says:

          Is that why he opposes the liberation of patents? because clearly there are state of the arts labs ready to manufacture vaccine in the third world

  39. Skeptical says:

    Intramuscular injection of mRNA nanoparticles is targeting tissue macrophage/dendritic cells. These cells are phagoctytic and thus are able to take-up the the lipid nanoparticle formulation. The targeting of vaccines intramuscular versus intradermal minimizes the magnitude of the immune response. The skin is much more macrophage rich and hence a more robust response. As far as I can tell no one has measured circulating levels of spike protein. No surprise here as protein/peptide drugs are rapidly degraded in the plasma. This point is well known to many chemists who have spent the last 30-40 years trying to make stable peptides.

  40. Janet Love says:

    No Daniel, ‘Dictionaries do not “need” – and must NOT alter their definitions of “Vaccine” to suit a particular… variant. ‘Vaccine’ has for considerable time been defined, Used, and UNDERSTOOD by the general populace to be a certain product which works in a known way.
    To apply the old meaning… to a different mechanism is deception, as it will be perceived by the old, traditional terms.
    Besides, mRNA has even less to do with cows…

    1. MisterGoober says:

      The “old” meaning isn’t that old. As we learn more, we’ll continuously be finding new and better ways to prevent humans from succumbing to contagious diseases. Why would you limit the definition to technology and knowledge from the late 1700s or 1800s?

  41. FrankN says:

    Derek: Sorry to get OT now, but it might interest you that EMA is now looking into a possible relation between AZ vaccination and the Guillaume-Barre Syndrome – a possible side effect already announced by you several months ago.

    Link (unfortunately in German)
    https://futurezone.at/science/impfstoff-gegen-das-coronavirus-und-covid-19/401027699

  42. Peter Waldo says:

    “Deny any part of reality, and you will lose your awareness of all of it” (E. Cronkhite)
    That so many of the brightest minds in science could be so duped is astounding. Instead of healthy doubt and honest questioning this is simply a dangerous example of the power of dogma and blind faith in a broken belief system (“science”). Atop a mountain of denial you’re deceiving yourselves at the cost of human suffering. All in support of some nefarious agenda that a child could accurately identify. As the Hindus believe the “sum” of a person’s actions weigh heavily on their fate and future. Karma is real, please wake up and find the courage to do the right thing.

  43. Richard Koenig says:

    Derek,
    I’m no scientist and no anti-vaxxer, but I have this question:
    You take an mRNA vaccine. Some of it gets into the bloodstream. The nanoparticle gets entry to various tissue types–heart, lung, brain–at least for a brief time, as the European preclinical review, if I understand it, explains. Is the antigen then expressed on the membranes of cells in those tissues? If yes, then is it presented to immune-system cells? If yes, for how long? If for any length of time, then why would this process not trigger an autoimmune response?

    1. da boss says:

      Several naturally occurring proteins share similar epitopes to the spike protein, hence we have people all sorts of weird and not so wonderful side effects like people going blind and being paralysed etc. It’s all for the greater good though so ho hum, mustn’t grumble and carry on! Stiff upper lip from the Oxford boffins except when you get Bell’s Palsy of course.

  44. WHAT COULD GO WRONG? says:

    @ DRN; 7 May, 2021 at 6:00 am

    “Here, we show that SARS‐CoV‐2‐infected cells express the Spike protein (S) at their surface and fuse with ACE2‐positive neighboring cells. Expression of S without any other viral proteins triggers syncytia formation.”

    And no one thinks that this is important enough to comment on?

    What is going on ?????

    LET ME SPELL IT OUT.

    The aim of mRNA vaccines is to have the spike protein expressed on the surface of your cells.

    Expression of the spike protein without any other viral proteins triggers syncytia formation.

    Infected cells fusing with many non-infected cells.

    WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

    1. what could go wrong says:

      To clarify things, the second to last line should have been:

      Vaccine infected cells fusing with many surrounding cells.

      1. Not a clue, but interested says:

        Not that I am by any means a scientist but doesn’t the spike protein in mRNA vaccines have a modification in order to allow upon injection that it keeps its “spike like profile”. Wouldn’t this mean it could act differently than the wild type spike mentioned in the paper you are referring to?

    2. theasdgamer says:

      So, the spike protein is expressed at the cell membrane in a different orientation than if the cell had been infected from the outside and fused at a cell’s ACE2 or TMPRSS or npilin receptor and this different orientation allows fusion with these other receptors in other nearby cells? I’m trying to understand how other cells with ACE2 and other receptors might get near enough to a spike protein on cell membrane cell (let’s call it SPCMC) to bond. I think that there has to be another element somewhere to explain the SPCMC “special effects.”

      1. theasdgamer says:

        Ok, ACE2 in SPMPC can fuse to CD147 in T cells. That might possibly result in a rupture in the SPCMC cell membrane. If the SPCMC is a vascular endothelial cell, platelets might begin to form a clot. If the clotting occurred in the vasculature of the dura membrane, then the dura would become inflamed and people would experience headaches. This would resolve as the clots were dissolved.

        I’m still looking for a journal article showing that free vaccine-generated spike proteins can be released into extracellular space. Or possibly if you know someone working on this question, you might ask them to comment.

        1. theasdgamer says:

          Correction:

          “Ok, ACE2 in SPMPC can fuse to CD147 in T cells.”

          should be

          “Ok, the spike protein in SPMPC can fuse to CD147 in T cells.

    3. DRN says:

      I’ve dug a bit and it seems the stabilized configuration of the protein takes care of that, at least in part (prevents fusion).

      1. theasdgamer says:

        So the spike protein on a cell membrane which has been generated by a vaccine will somehow not bond to neighboring cells but will bond to B cells to generate an immune response? Are T Cells and VSEL stem cells also potential targets?

        Can you please link a journal article?

        1. DRN says:

          I don’t know the answer to your other questions, but here’s one article on the stabilized S protein of MERS virus: https://www.pnas.org/content/114/35/E7348
          The relevant part: “The rigidity of the helix-loop-helix afforded by the prolines impairs or (perhaps) abolishes the membrane fusion activity of the S protein, as evidenced in Fig. 2A.”
          Funny that I found it on the “conspiracy” website that was linked in some other comment.

  45. Deva says:

    @cassandra – Also for all of those saying lockdown. Take a look at Haiti. When I look at what has happened there that completely defies any narrative we are hearing. Very low deaths due to COVID. No enforced lockdown, social distance, masks, etc. of any kind. When I checked the other day they didn’t yet have any vaccine available. Yet why would they need it considering their circumstance? Now when you consider Haiti and their off and on health system problems it is very surprising to me to see how well they are doing. Now I did mention this elsewhere yesterday and someone came back with a quip about India. India and Haiti are very different but I went ahead and looked. At the time 160 million doses of vaccine had already been provided in India. They had many of the standard things people are doing to mitigate and stop the problem (at least that is the narrative). Haiti has not been. Yet it is doing amazingly well. I think finding out why could be a pretty important thing.

    I came here because I keep encountering people that are unvaccinated that are experiencing numerous issues after spending much time around people vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines. I personally only know people who have taken the Pfizer variant. It is indeed odd and growing in number and that made me wonder if anyone had studied the effects the spike proteins being expressed have upon the unvaccinated?

    1. Gus says:

      Has it occurred to tlyou that in HAITI they are just not bothering to test or register covid deaths because they can’t afford the tests or to have a lockdown because they are one of the poorest nations on Earth?
      Lockdown is common sense. If you don’t see people you can’t catch a virus from them. Even someone with a single functioning brain cell can work that out. I’m actually amazed some people posting here can get past the captcha.

    2. Gus says:

      This is an I teresting article on Haiti, its clear that’s what’s works. In HAITI isn’t necessarily going to work in the states. They’ve an average age of 23 for starters….

      https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/05/04/992544022/one-of-the-worlds-poorest-countries-has-one-of-the-worlds-lowest-covid-death-rat?t=1620474234634

  46. Edward Lye says:

    Thanks for an erudite exposition. I encountered more in this article{including comments} than in all the webinars and articles from both sides of the divide that I have come across. It is a pleasure to read this open discourse without censorship and encounter the hard questions often left unanswered. If COVID-19 is that {think Train To Busan} infectious and deadly, I would now be the King of Sweden simply by sailing there and being the first to set foot just as the last citizen drops dead. Since I have yet to receive congratulatory messages from Heads of Government around the world, I have to conclude that the truth is still out there. My only contribution to this discussion is a novel suggestion that the Covid vaccine is the perfect Trojan Horse. A clear colourless liquid that could contain virtually anything. A perfect means to disable or liquidate political dissidents. No fancy Ricin pellet delivered by umbrella. Just switch vials. Any third-rate magician could do it. With a mask on, who can tell? It is not inconceivable. The NSA intercepted a shipment of Cisco? routers/switches? and loaded their own firmware, resealed the boxes and let the shipment continue. If you wanted to conduct drug trials, X percentage of vials could be replaced. Just monitor the news/VAERS for results. Vaccine sales lagging? Replace the vaccine with pure virus of another strain. This will offset the cost of owning that CRISPR contraption. Untraceable. Undiscoverable. It is a pity James Bond has retired. We could do with his help. It was unsettling when I saw a documentary which showed news readers from various TV stations reporting word-for-word that jet fuel melted the steel beams leading to the collapse of you know what. I just saw a similar compilation of world leaders selling the idea of “Build a Better World”. That sent a chill straight up my spine. My Spidey Sense spiked.

  47. Simon from Florida says:

    Even optimistically assuming only 1% of spike proteins reaches your circulatory system That surely is not uniform for all unwitting recipients ie there is a bell curve of distribution and that applies for every additional dose going forward every year with extreme risk of negligent intravenous injection failure to spin the revolver cylinder again (the deer hunter movie 1978 ) result in cancellation of your vaccine passport with all its linked benefits see Israel green passport and Chinese social credit score for details
    So apart from the super risk takers what protection exists for those who believe in my body my choice who receive blood spit semen organs sweat etc from the ever giving distribution from the booster receivers bearing in mind there will be an unknown partial distribution in all those sites each time?

  48. Dan says:

    As I read about all this: So what is the “spike protein” being used? What Coronavirus natural and or manmade? (which variant?)
    (Salk article: “pseudo virus”?)

    Would the adverse reactions be stats based on the millions being given the “shot”? Failure to keep (accurate/available to all) records!
    Could a part of the problem be the process and added ingredients?
    (sad that some must (suffer/die) for the many? hope you are not that one?)

    signed: a cynic! (a chance to live longer, maybe not)

  49. Christian says:

    Here is something you may did found which is interesting:

    This was known in Oktober 2020 bye the “german CDC” which is so called PEI (Paul-Ehrlich-Institus) https://www.cell.com/iscience/pdf/S2589-0042(21)00138-3.pdf?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS2589004221001383%3Fshowall%3Dtrue

    The Study found that spike proteins are able to do a so called “”Fusion-from-Without” with other cells and this results in cloths (only the S-Proteins is able to do so) but there is a difference between Vector and M-RNA as i found.

    The M-RNA is only using Pieces from the Spikes and not the whole spike! (Thats what i read in different papers about it)

    But Astra is using the whole protein as you can see here (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscentsci.1c00080) they did picture this under a so called CryoET. You can see the whole S-Protein.

    There are 3 Facts that speaks against the Spike-Protein Thesis when it comes to M-RNA (Biontech/Moderna)

    1. The MRNA is injected into the Delta Muscle, which means: The proteins produced would be stored in the shell of muscle cells and presented to the immune system. “Then this cannot lead to clumping, since the‘ glue points ’cannot move freely.”

    2. The cells could also release the proteins, but even then they would still have too few “glue points” – “For the ‘clumping’, however, you need many of these points, which are firmly connected so that the cells can be clumped together”,

    3. “The proteins are cut into small pieces and shown to the immune system by ‘presenters’, so only small pieces of them. The sticking does not play a role here.”

  50. Christian says:

    Here is something you may did found which is interesting:
    This was known in Oktober 2020 bye the “german CDC” which is so called PEI (Paul-Ehrlich-Institus) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004221001383
    The Study found that spike proteins are able to do a so called “”Fusion-from-Without” with other cells and this results in cloths (only the S-Proteins is able to do so) but there is a difference between Vector and M-RNA as i found. The M-RNA is only using Pieces from the

    Spikes and not the whole spike! (Thats what i read in different papers about it) But Astra is using the whole protein as you can see here (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acscentsci.1c00080) they did picture this under a so called CryoET. You can see the whole S-Protein. There are 3 Facts that speaks against the Spike-Protein Thesis when it comes to M-RNA (Biontech/Moderna) 1. The MRNA is injected into the Delta Muscle, which means: The proteins produced would be stored in the shell of muscle cells and presented to the immune system. “Then this cannot lead to clumping, since the‘ glue points ’cannot move freely.” 2. The cells could also release the proteins, but even then they would still have too few “glue points” – “For the ‘clumping’, however, you need many of these points, which are firmly connected so that the cells can be clumped together”, 3. “The proteins are cut into small pieces and shown to the immune system by ‘presenters’, so only small pieces of them. The sticking does not play a role here.”

  51. Shove yer vaxy up yer jacksy says:

    This is all a zero sum game. A huge proportion of global population in the first world are taking experimental vaccines and risking their lives. Apparent that short term side effects and deaths are happening as well as rapidly escalating breakthrough infections with alarmingly high hospitalisation and death rates (CDC). Logically we already know these vaccine campaigns are a completely futile exercise. How? Just take a look at Manaus, nice sample size of a couple of million people, it’s a fact that over 70% of people there were infected in first wave and the region was decimated again. Herd immunity is a complete fallacy. Manufacturers of vaccines know as much – why are they planning on manufacturing billions of doses into 2023/2024?
    For obvious reasons I really don’t believe a crude spike protein vaccines can provide as much protection as natural infection? How could it?
    How are so many supposedly educated and enlightened people swallowing this utter nonsense? Most of the world seem to have lost the capacity to think for themselves, leaving the bumbling idiots in the WHO and Bill Gates to make up their destiny. Bill’s track record of funding clinical trials is unsavoury, now we have the biggest human experiment ever conducted running out of control. We are prepared to put this junk into our citizens and children in a huge act of misplaced blind faith. Nobody here can provide any coherent arguments back for these truths which are recorded in the comments section for posterity. I really do worry about the consequences, anything can happen, and going by the shambolic and reprehensibly selfish roll out of the snake oil to date, it most likely will. Nature is an irresistible force in levelling inequality, our meddling here will end in tears.

    1. Gus says:

      Sigh. I see the actual scientists here are adopting the ignore it and it will go away stance. I will take the bait one last time.

      “How are so many supposedly educated and enlightened people swallowing this utter nonsense?”

      Because it isn’t nonsense and educated people know this. It is in fact you that is swallowing nonsense and anti science propaganda on dodgy websites such as bitchute. Undermining public confidence in science is an initiative mainly I suspect to undermine climate science by certain wealthy interest groups. Note how many anti vaxers are also anti climate science, the connection cannot be ignored.

      1. Shove your vaxy up ur jacksy says:

        You have answered nothing, absolutely nothing – nor are you capable of answering the questions I posed. Let’s see this science in action Gustavo, it will unfold and shall be an education for you and others incapable of thinking! As a sentient being I can read, understand, assimilate and predict obvious outcomes based on my interpretation of the facts – as a scientist these sources are often scientific literature and trusted sources such as the CDC, which I referenced (although I’m very skeptical that they are now being transparent with what they know). You’ll find out the hard way that the world has been sold a lie.

        1. Gus says:

          Automatically adopting the opposite of the mainstream narrative, cherry-picking academic studies that fit your bias and that you are not qualified to assess properly and believing everything you read on bitchute – does not qualify as “thinking for yourself” or make you some kind of renegade free thinker battling the forces of evil. I hope to God you don’t “learn the hard way” but then I am not as keen as you to see other people suffer to prove I’m correct.
          As for the answers to your questions – google them – in terms of herd immunity- it’s probably correct for some diseases and not for others (eg dengue) and as to why a vaccine might offer better protection than natural protection – google it! There’s plenty of articles about this very subject including in this week’s New York Times – I’m not doing your homework for you. Of course, this is a new disease so there is plenty the real experts simply don’t know.

      2. theasdgamer says:

        What do covid and climate science have in common?

        Massive panic-mongering.

  52. John says:

    What’s with the many Mantis toboggan comments on “Spike Protein Behavior” under “Recent Comments” that never turn up?

  53. Nostradamus says:

    Bravo. The populist belief can cause mass acceptance of religion, naziism and now covid vaccination. Heretics, Non-Aryans in the third reich and Antivaxers have much in common. The justification comes with time and much unfortunate suffering.

  54. John says:

    I have never seen a paper claiming this. I reckon he got the idea from this part of the preearth article.

    preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1184

    Is the spike protein always dangerous?

    By itself, the Covid spike protein should be less dangerous than the virus. For many the Covid virus causes little harm, but for others it is fatal. So for many, the Covid spike protein, by itself, will cause little harm, but for others it may prove fatal. So why not cripple it in some way, while retaining its original conformation? This appears to be what Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have done, although they do not claim this.

    The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines produce a spike protein (denoted S-2P) with two amino acid changes from the wild-type. The two changes, K986P and V987P, are to stabilize the pre-fusion form of the protein. This stabilization is necessary to make sure that antibodies are made against the pre-fusion, and not the post-fusion form. A 1967 trial of an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine was a disaster as the vaccine induced antibodies that bound to the post-fusion form of the RSV-spike protein, but did not prevent infection, which lead to inflammation, clogged airways, and more severe disease than with no vaccine at all. [7][8]

    The idea of stabilizing the pre-fusion form comes from previous work on HIV, RSV, SARS and MERS. The equivalent changes, V1060P and L1061P, that stabilize the pre-fusion form of the MERS spike protein are claimed to significantly impair cell fusion. So, it is probable that the changes, K986P and V987P, do likewise for the Covid spike protein.

    The phrase “stabilizing the pre-fusion form” implies that the pre-fusion form can still change to the post-fusion form, that is, that the Covid spike-2P protein can still cause cell fusion, but probably not to the same extent. One guesses that syncytia are still formed, but they are fewer and smaller. Still, it seems that enough cells die to trigger an immune response without an adjuvant.

  55. stefano says:

    So all the clotting disorders that are documented are to be disregarded.

  56. Jorge Bizarro says:

    I’m baffled by the lack of questioning about the reaction of the immune system and platelets to the spikes on membrane walls. Could they not irritate circulating platelets and cause local thrombosis? – Will the immune system attack cells with that foreign protein, which is by the way seems quite similar to a ‘prion-type’ protein?

    1. John says:

      This brief article looks at the spike, platelets, etc.

      Dangerous side effects of genetically induced production of SARS CoV-2 spike proteins

      https://www.wodarg.com/english/

    2. Derek Lowe says:

      A strange thing to say – the Spike protein has nothing in common with prions. And the clots are not caused by “irritation” of platelets – it’s an antibody binding event.

  57. anon2938 says:

    Injecting a liquid into a muscle does not prevent it from entering the bloodstream. The dispersion is slower than with a direct injection into an artery but the end result is about the same.

    If a coral snake bites you, you’re in trouble no matter where it bit.

    1. theasdgamer says:

      Extracellular fluids make it into the lymph system and from there into the blood.

  58. TY Tang says:

    I recall reading other articles that mentioned the spike proteins will be released by the cells that produce them. Is there clear data showing that the spike protein stays on the surface of the cells? thanks

  59. Some dude says:

    The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine has not been approved or licensed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to prevent COVID-19 for use in individuals 16 years of age and older. The emergency use of this product is only authorized for the duration of the emergency declaration unless ended sooner.

  60. The Dude says:

    “Janci Chunn Lindsay: Covid vaccines could induce cross-reactive antibodies to syncytin, and impair fertility as well as pregnancy outcomes

    First, there is a credible reason to believe that the Covid vaccines will cross-react with the syncytin and reproductive proteins in sperm, ova, and placenta, leading to impaired fertility and impaired reproductive and gestational outcomes.”

    1. John says:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vj3xGT6izE

      Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay – CDC ACIP public comment – April 23, 2021

      Doesn’t sound good.

      I thought youtube censored all this sort of stuff? What’s up?

    2. Cassandra says:

      Didn’t the recently single computer nerd say that he wanted to stope people reproducing?

  61. John says:

    What do you think about this?

    The Amnesty International Reports: Covid-19 and Care Homes.

    The report on the United Kingdom. Some passages:

    Covid-19 has had a devastating impact on older persons living in care homes in England. 28,186 “excess deaths” were recorded in care homes in England between 2 March and 12 June, with over 18,500 care home residents confirmed to have died with Covid-19 during this period. UK government decisions and failures resulted in violations of the human rights of people living in care homes, notably the right to life, to health and to non-discrimination. From discharging 25,000 patients, including those infected, into care homes; to denying care homes residents admission to hospital and imposing “do not attempt resuscitation” orders on them without due process, to failing to provide PPE (personal protective equipment) and testing to care homes. Older persons living in care homes were abandoned to die.

    I guess; “people in care homes had their right to life violated”, sounds better than; “people in care homes were murdered,” but it is less accurate.

    The following was so deceptively worded that I have added explanation (in brackets).

    The Department of Health and Social Care…. adopted a policy,… that led to 25,000 patients, including those (known to be) infected (with Covid-19, and also those who were) possibly infected with Covid-19 (as they) had not been tested, being discharged from hospital into care homes between 17 March and 15 April—exponentially increasing the risk of transmission to the very population most at risk of severe illness and death from the disease. (This, while being denied) access to testing, (being denied) personal protective equipment, (while having) insufficient staff, and limited (and confusing) guidance. (As expected) care homes were overwhelmed.

    Care home managers have reported to Amnesty International, as well as to the media, that they were pressured in different ways to accept patients discharged from hospital who had not been tested or who were Covid-19 positive.

    I was contacted by concerned residents, saying surely we wouldn’t put Covid-19 patients in care homes where the most vulnerable are? But commissioning [the council commissioning department] said, yes we are….

    They endangered older people by discharging infected patients into care homes, without even providing tests and personal protective equipment.

    Baroness Ros Altmann said: “care homes were left behind in the scramble for PPE, for emergency admission, ventilation and for testing… It’s almost as if the system is stacked against them.”

    Care England has also reported incidents of supplies ordered by care homes being requisitioned for the NHS (National Health Service).

    Our local hospital always had over 500 empty beds and so staff were not under pressure and they had lots of PPE. (However) we had 45 percent of the staff self-isolating and were scrambling to get PPE and even food.

    By barring both oversight and family visits, the government increased the risk that care home residents would be exposed to abuses that would not be identified, reported and investigated.

    It was the same in Italy. Some passages from the Italian report:

    We can distinguish the transfers of Covid-19 positive patients discharged from hospitals to care homes:
    1) patients from hospitals who were no longer acute but still Covid-19 positive.
    2) patients from hospitals who were assumed non-Covid-19 positive, but were not tested,…

    Infected patients discharged from hospitals also arrived in the same facilities. Some had not been swabbed at all (i.e., were not tested), but others had been determined positive for Covid-19 in hospital and had been sent to care homes without verifying the homes ability to assist these people safely.

    The transfers of patients from hospitals to nursing homes took place continuously, without warnings, instructions or discussions.

    The sending of positive Covid-19 patients discharged from hospitals to care homes…. where there were inadequate supplies of nasal swabs, and PPE, endangered the lives of residents and staff.

    The managers of a care home reported that it has not been able to obtain any PPE from local health authorities for several weeks and that the small quantity that they eventually managed to buy, independently, was requisitioned by the customs authorities and redirected to hospitals.

    Hundreds of patients had died, but in many homes, in Lombardy and elsewhere, swabs were rare, mostly not available at all. In many facilities, the first swabs (both for residents and operators) arrived only in the month of April, when the peak of infections and deaths had passed and thousands of residents had died. In other homes they arrived weeks later than this.

    In Lombardy the situation was completely lost: we were abandoned like ships at sea without fuel, a total abandonment, they didn’t even answer the phone.

    Nobody is going in [to care homes], so there are no witnesses to whatever is going on.

    Amnesty International report: United Kingdom (English)
    Amnesty International report: Italy (Italian)
    Amnesty International report: Spain (Spanish)
    Amnesty International report: Belgium (French)

    It is interesting that the United States branch of Amnesty International did not see fit to publish anything on the situation there.

    preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1184

  62. SD says:

    “Fortunately, the answer [b]definitely seems[/b] to be “no” – in fact, the pseudovirus paper notes…”

    Which one is it? “Definitely” or “seems” ?

  63. Christian says:

    Found something related to the topic which is really interesting: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/04/vaccine-related-blood-clot-mystery-must-be-solved/618623/

    Problem what I have with this is that I’m 31 and I got my first Pfizer shot 8 Days ago. I have the 2’nd in 2 weeks.

    I don’t know if I should take it or not. I hope there will be some new recommendations during the next week. I’m a bit afraid because of this.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      I am not a physician, but I recommend you get it (I did). The mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer’s) have not been associated with the unusual blood clots seen with some of the adenovirus ones.

  64. Cassandra says:

    Is this case just coincidental bad luck after Pfizer vaccine?
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/12431/
    Just informing

  65. Jason says:

    Here’s my anecdotal two cents. Had Covid a year ago and it took months to resolve the fatigue and neurological symptoms. One week after first Pfizer shot began experiencing the same exact symptoms and they have not abated over two weeks later.
    I believe the author downplays The danger of the spike protein as expressed by the vaccine.
    My belief is there are many people who are being affected subclinically by both the virus and the vaccine and their symptoms/events may not manifest for months or years to come.
    It is now proven conclusively that the spike protein by itself damages the endothelial cells lining the vascular system. It creates an inflammatory cascade and damages mitochondria. That’s a big deal.
    For someone like myself a confusing question is will getting the second shot make things better or be a big mistake.

    1. Doug H MD says:

      why would you get a second shot when all the data shows that previously infected individuals mount a very high immune response to one shot?

      1. Jason says:

        I wasn’t going to get the second shot but heard of people with longhaul Covid whose symptoms were exacerbated after the first shot and then resolved quickly after the second shot. That is the only reason I would consider the second shot.

      2. Redeemed says:

        Those darn liars! Those vaxxeeen guys told me that the shot protected against death from all causes, no matter what, for a period of at least ninety days! They told me it would protect me from meteors, car accidents, flocks of angry budgies, runaway wheel chairs, flower pots falling off of window ledges, mobs of angry townspeople with torches, everything! That poor man died of a myocardial infarction – clearly covered by the vaxxeeen warranty.

      3. theasdgamer says:

        If previously-infected individuals mount a very high immune response to one shot, why would they even need the first shot?

  66. DRN says:

    I’m back with some extra info, as I looked a bit more into the EMA report for Comirnaty (which Derek linked in the article). Here are some relevant paragraphs (sect. 2.3.5):
    “The general immune activating mode of action of LNP-formulated RNA vaccines have been described in the literature. The administration of LNP-formulated RNA results in transient local inflammation that drives recruitment of neutrophils and antigen presenting cells (APCs) to the site of delivery. Recruited APCs are capable of LNP uptake and protein expression and can subsequently migrate to the local draining lymph nodes where T cell priming occurs.”

    “Whether other cells than professional APCs may transiently express the vaccine derived spike protein and therefore from a theoretical point of view, as compared to SARS-CoV-2 infected cells, also could potentially be targets for previously primed spike protein reactive cytotoxic T cells, if present, is not known. However, no overt signs of such adverse pharmacological responses have been recorded in the repeat dose toxicity study or in the clinical trials. In the clinical trial, a second dose was administered to patients who had been immunologically primed by the first dose. Moreover, in the clinical trials it
    appeared around 270 patients that was shown to have been seropositive for SARS-COV-2 before vaccination. In these cases, the expression of the spike protein on host cells occurred in the presence of a primed immune response to the spike protein but no overt adverse pharmacological response has been observed. The low amount of vaccine product in a single dose may limit the distribution of modRNA/LNP mainly to the injection site and to migrating APCs. Due to the transient expression of the modRNA, no persistent expression is expected”

    So, if I understand correctly, the LNPs are actually designed to target antigen-presenting cells. But I’m baffled that we don’t know if the other cells are marked for cytotoxic attack and we just rely on the empirical evidence. I’m definitely going for a subunit vaccine if I need a booster shot.

  67. Dave Stenhouse says:

    The hopeful opinion that an IM vaccine’s contents will avoid the bloodstream entirely is a hugely misguided assumption. Muscles require large vascular networks, which include tiny capillaries moving oxygen and nutrients for activation/repair and also waste products. To assume that vaccine contents avoid this vascular network is either magical or disingenuous.

    1. theasdgamer says:

      The narrative must not be questioned. If you question the narrative, you will be labeled a crank, or worse, a conspiracy theorist. Science is no longer evidence-based, it is eminence-based. Fauci said it, I believe it, that settles it. That’s hyperbolic for some, but hardly for all.

      😜😜😜

  68. Majia Nadesan says:

    I was reluctant to get any of the covid-19 shots because I have a history of anaphylactic reactions, which were worsened by my December 2019 illness with what I strongly believe was Covid-19 (entire family infected) followed by Valley Fever (diagnosed) in Nov 2020.

    However, the increasingly contagious and more lethal variants, coupled with not-so-subtle COERCION by my employer, led me to get my first Moderna shot on Tuesday 4/6. No immediate effects.

    Wednesday 4/8 In addition to the expected sore arm, I experienced unusual tightness in my lungs while exercising and had trouble with deep breathing, but those symptoms resolved within 12 hours.

    Thursday 4/8 sore arm worsened. Took Zyrtec, an allergy medicine, as precaution and because my spring allergies are bothersome, although no problems breathing.

    Friday 4/9 Terrible stomach pain, diarrhea, and pain in my gall bladder area.

    Called the allergist office who administered the shot Friday at 2:30 pm. Office closed. No one taking calls. Not able to leave message because the messaging system was not functioning properly.

    Looked online at CDC and FDA site for information about extreme pain but found nothing specific beyond this link which suggested these symptoms were allergic related https://www.goodrx.com/blog/what-to-look-for-when-monitoring-covid-19-vaccine-side-effects/

    Pain in GI was extreme and persisted for about 16 hours. Took Pepcid. No help. Took 25 milligrams of Benadryl in the afternoon and that seemed to help a bit. Took another 25 milligrams of Benadryl later that evening and it also seemed to help.

    But still in distress from pain. 11:30 pm called United Health Care’s Nurse line and spoke to a nurse who was absolutely less than helpful. In fact, worst experience with nurseline in 26 years.

    Saturday 4/10 Stomach and gall bladder area are still sore but improved. I think I’m through the worse. What would have happened had I not loaded up on antihistamines?

    My experience was that when I had ADVERSE REACTIONS there was no one or site that I could go to get reliable information about whether my reaction was allergy-based and whether it risked escalating.

    Doctors were unresponsive and the nurse line patronizing.

    I am pretty confident that my GI problems were allergic related since the Benadryl offered so much relief but there is of course the possibility that I unknowingly ate some food or food preservative that elicited the reaction.

    Was it an antibody enhancement effect from my previous Covid-19 infection or did a preservative in the vaccine trigger this extreme reaction?

    1. Cassandra says:

      Oh Dear, what an asshole of an employer. Thanks for sharing the real world effects of what’s a useless and futile attempt at vaccination. Harm caused has no chance of intended effects either, antibodies to a relic of a viral spike protein are what these vaccines produce. What oh what are cases increasing when people are “immune”? Global idiocy, looks like antivaxxers were correct. Bone headed WHO led you all down the garden path

  69. Sue says:

    The deltoid muscle IM site is used as an injection site precisely because it has increased vascularity and blood flow. If you want an injected fluid to stay in the area, you use the subdermal fat layer just under the skin, which has less blood flow. * For example a TB test, with a little wheal or lump under the skin is given in the fatty layer just below the skin ,intradermally.
    Intramuscular injections into the deltoid muscle are specifically used to disperse the product through the body quickly, and thus reduce the risk of a local reaction.
    Any textbook or article on injection routes and their uses can verify this.( I previously tried to provide a link ,but the comment was not accepted.
    Even a recent ABC article entitled
    ‘Why vaccines are injected in your upper arm muscle, and not in your veins” states
    “First up: unlike the layer of fat just under our skin, muscle has an excellent blood supply to help disperse the vaccine, says Joanna Groom, an immunology researcher at the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute.”
    Dave Stenhouse also points this out in his clearly written comment above.
    Maybe it is time for us to finally focus on treatments and therapeutics as the way forward.

  70. Sam Miller says:

    I understand that the vaccine itself (e.g., mRNA) is clear out the body within a few days. But, as someone else asked, how long does none-replicating coronavirus spike protein typically last in our system? It would seem to me, like with most other foreign proteins, such as allergens, it too would be cleared within a few days. If anyone has an article, ideally a scientific research summary, that explains the vaccine pharmacokinetics of the Sars-cov-2 spike protein, particularly its metabolism and/or excretion, please let me know. Fascinating article/topic by the way.

    1. Lawyermom says:

      I believe this was answered (by Derek Lowe and another commenter) in the comment section of one of the other vaccine posts here- probably the “mRNA:What happens” post. Answer was 10 days, I believe. There was a link.

  71. Lorenzo says:

    I would like to ask Derek to read and examine this study
    (author: Suzuki, Georgetown University), which is much more substantial on the potential danger of spike proteins, and comment on it.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7827936/

    A little recap of main points from the article (I quote):

    Previous Suzuki study:
    “Treatment of cultured primary human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells (SMCs) or human pulmonary artery endothelial cells with the recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit is sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the viral components”. So: Spike protein —> Cell signaling

    This study:
    “Two recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins, both of which contain the RBD, were studied. The full-length S1 subunit protein contains most of the S1 subunit (Val16–Gln690), while the RBD S1 subunit protein only contains the RBD region (Arg319–Phe541)
    Cultured primary human pulmonary artery SMCs and human pulmonary artery endothelial cells were treated with these proteins for 10 min.
    We found, using the phospho-specific MEK antibody, that the recombinant full-length S1 subunit of SARS-CoV-2 alone at a concentration as low as 130 pM activated MEK, the activator of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) and a well-known signal transduction mechanism for cell growth”.
    So again: Spike protein —> Cell signaling

    (“By contrast, such activation of cell signaling by the spike protein did not occur in rat pulmonary artery SMCs”)

    The article then discusses Kuba et al. study:
    IN VIVO
    Mice. “The spike protein of SARS-CoV-1 (without the rest of the virus) reduces the ACE2 expression, increases the level of angiotensin II, and exacerbates the lung injury”.

    The article then discusses Patra et al. study:
    TRANSIENT TRANSFECTION
    “The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein without the rest of the viral components has also been shown to activate cell signaling by Patra et al. The authors reported that the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein expressed by the means of transient transfection, either in the human lung alveolar epithelial cell line A549 or in the human liver epithelial cell line Huh7.5, activated NF- B and AP-1 transcription factors as well as p38 and ERK mitogen-activated protein kinases, releasing interleukin-6. This cell signaling cascade was found to be triggered by the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein downregulating the ACE2 protein expression, subsequently activating the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. ”

    The authors say:
    *** “These experiments using transient transfection may reflect the intracellular effects of the spike protein that could be triggered by the RNA- and viral vector-based vaccines “. ***

    “RBD Only-Containing SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Does Not Elicit Cell Signaling in Human Cells. […] It is possible that the RBD-based vaccines are less immunogenic, but may not affect the host cells. Thus, they may be less risky considering potential long-term adverse effects.”

    (This means that the BNT162b1 Pzifer vaccine, instead of the Cominraty BNT162b2 Pfizer vaccine, could be safer but potentially less effective.
    Am I correct? Do you know if it is available for vaccination anywhere?)

    SO, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY:
    Can you help me understand the implications of this article? I quote again:

    *** “These experiments using transient transfection may reflect the intracellular effects of the spike protein that could be triggered by the RNA- and viral vector-based vaccines “. ***

    Your post here discusses the difference between a viral infection and a vaccine.
    I get it, but that is not the issue.

    As the authors put it (in the Discussion section):
    “It is generally thought that the sole function of viral membrane fusion proteins is to allow the viruses to bind to the host cells for the purpose of viral entry into the cells, so that the genetic materials can be released and the viral replication and amplification can take place. However, recent observations suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can by itself trigger cell signaling that can lead to various biological processes. It is reasonable to assume that such events, in some cases, result in the pathogenesis of certain diseases.”

    The issue is that IN THE STUDIES (in vivo too, with mice and hamsters) the SPIKE PROTEINS ALONE, without the virus, might create vascular disease.
    Is it the same as when you create those SPIKE PROTEINS WITH THE VACCINES? ***This is my question.*** How is the injection of spike proteins in mice different than a injection of the code for spike proteins in the vaccines? Does it really make a difference?

    When you inject spike proteins intramuscolarly, is it the same as putting spike proteins in cell culture? If not, why not? Can we be sure?
    If it is not the same thing, then why is that in the IN VIVO study also produces vascular cell damage?
    The way that mice and hasters were injected with the spike proteins is it very different from receiving a vaccin shot? I don’t think so… Can you elaborate on this?

    Thank you for reading all this!

  72. Lorenzo says:

    Why is my comment not getting published?

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      It went into the Spam folder – I just rescued it.

  73. Lorenzo says:

    This study (author: Suzuki, Georgetown University) describes the potential danger of spike proteins.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7827936/

    A little recap of main points from the article (I quote):
    Previous Suzuki study:
    “Treatment of cultured primary human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells (SMCs) or human pulmonary artery endothelial cells with the recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit is sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the viral components”. So: Spike protein —> Cell signaling
    This study:
    “Two recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins, both of which contain the RBD, were studied. The full-length S1 subunit protein contains most of the S1 subunit (Val16–Gln690), while the RBD S1 subunit protein only contains the RBD region (Arg319–Phe541)
    Cultured primary human pulmonary artery SMCs and human pulmonary artery endothelial cells were treated with these proteins for 10 min.
    We found, using the phospho-specific MEK antibody, that the recombinant full-length S1 subunit of SARS-CoV-2 alone at a concentration as low as 130 pM activated MEK, the activator of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) and a well-known signal transduction mechanism for cell growth”.
    So again: Spike protein —> Cell signaling
    (“By contrast, such activation of cell signaling by the spike protein did not occur in rat pulmonary artery SMCs”)

    The article then discusses Kuba et al. study:
    IN VIVO
    Mice. “The spike protein of SARS-CoV-1 (without the rest of the virus) reduces the ACE2 expression, increases the level of angiotensin II, and exacerbates the lung injury”.
    The article then discusses Patra et al. study:
    TRANSIENT TRANSFECTION
    “The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein without the rest of the viral components has also been shown to activate cell signaling by Patra et al. The authors reported that the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein expressed by the means of transient transfection, either in the human lung alveolar epithelial cell line A549 or in the human liver epithelial cell line Huh7.5, activated NF- B and AP-1 transcription factors as well as p38 and ERK mitogen-activated protein kinases, releasing interleukin-6. This cell signaling cascade was found to be triggered by the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein downregulating the ACE2 protein expression, subsequently activating the angiotensin II type 1 receptor. ”

    The authors say:
    *** “These experiments using transient transfection may reflect the intracellular effects of the spike protein that could be triggered by the RNA- and viral vector-based vaccines “. ***

    “RBD Only-Containing SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Does Not Elicit Cell Signaling in Human Cells. […] It is possible that the RBD-based vaccines are less immunogenic, but may not affect the host cells. Thus, they may be less risky considering potential long-term adverse effects.”

    (This means that the BNT162b1 Pzifer vaccine, instead of the Cominraty BNT162b2 Pfizer vaccine, could be safer but potentially less effective.
    Am I correct? Do you know if it is available for vaccination anywhere?)

    SO, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY:
    Can you help me understand the implications of this article? I quote again:

    *** “These experiments using transient transfection may reflect the intracellular effects of the spike protein that could be triggered by the RNA- and viral vector-based vaccines “. ***

    Your post here discusses the difference between a viral infection and a vaccine.
    I get it, but that is not the issue.

    As the authors put it (in the Discussion section):
    “It is generally thought that the sole function of viral membrane fusion proteins is to allow the viruses to bind to the host cells for the purpose of viral entry into the cells, so that the genetic materials can be released and the viral replication and amplification can take place. However, recent observations suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can by itself trigger cell signaling that can lead to various biological processes. It is reasonable to assume that such events, in some cases, result in the pathogenesis of certain diseases.”

    The issue is that IN THE STUDIES (in vivo too, with mice and hamsters) the SPIKE PROTEINS ALONE, without the virus, might create vascular disease.
    Is it the same as when you create those SPIKE PROTEINS WITH THE VACCINES? ***This is my question.*** How is the injection of spike proteins in mice different than a injection of the code for spike proteins in the vaccines? Does it really make a difference?

    When you inject spike proteins intramuscolarly, is it the same as putting spike proteins in cell culture? If not, why not? Can we be sure?
    If it is not the same thing, then why is that in the IN VIVO study also produces vascular cell damage? The way that mice and hasters were injected with the spike proteins is it very different from receiving a vaccin shot? I don’t think so…
    Can you elaborate on this?

    Thank you for reading all this!

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      Are we seeing signs of pulmonary hypertension in the vaccinated population? To the best of my knowledge, no, nothing of the kind. The word “might” is doing a lot of lifting in your comment, and in the paper it references.

      1. Lorenzo says:

        Thank you for your reply, Derek!
        But the authors discuss the possibility of *long term* effects. How do we know after just a few months? Isn’t the evidence reported the paper concerning in vivo and in transient transfection already enough to warrant caution? I wish you could tell me that spike proteins injected into mice or in transient transfection is not the same thing as getting spike proteins from a vaccine…

        1. Derek Lowe says:

          To me, that’s what this post is trying to to (answer your last question). But I’m getting so many questions from people who are nervous and skeptical about taking the vaccines, and these seem to be coming from several different sorts of people. Some of them are looking for ways to feel better about making the decision to get vaccinated, while others are looking for reasons *not* to take it. And addressing all these objections as a series is not necessarily doing much good.

          I’m fond of saying that you can’t use reason to argue someone out of a position that they did not arrive at by reason. And some of the objections I’m getting are coming more from the emotions, and can’t really be dealt with by a step-by-step quoting of medical rationales with recourse to literature references. It’s the wrong tool for the job.

          If you’re looking for complete assurance that nothing bad will happen, I can’t give it to you. But that goes for any medical intervention at all. Take antibiotics: if you have never taken a beta-lactam, I cannot assure you that you will not be one of the rare people who will have a strong (possibly fatal) anaphylactic reaction to them. If you take a fluoroquinolone instead, I cannot promise you that you will not be one of the people who have a bad reaction in the joints and tendons. If you opt for clindamycin instead, I cannot promise you that you will not then get a strong (perhaps deadly) C. difficile infection in your gut – that happens, too, on rare occasions. The same goes for any other therapy, for any other disease.

          But the paper you cite isn’t talking so much about rare idiosyncratic side effects, as much as something that should affect (unless I mistake their language) a large number of people taking any of the Spike-protein-producing vaccines. But the real-world data aren’t showing it. Now, one response to that it “Well, you haven’t waiting long enough”. But from what we know about the pharmacokinetics of the vaccines, the people who were vaccinated earlier this year should be *long past* producing Spike protein by now. And we’re seeing no such effects in them. The authors say “long term” effects need to be watched for, but “long term” is in the eye of the beholder. Coronavirus infection itself can bring on lung trouble far more quickly – shouldn’t we have seen something by now? I find it very difficult to believe that a one-time pulse of Spike protein alone sets people on an irreversible course towards pulmonary hypertension, etc.

          So I think that the hypothesis advanced in the paper has not panned out. Most medical hypotheses don’t, even ones that are backed up by far more reasoning and far more data than this one. It’s not a crazy paper, but it’s not irrefutable either, not by a long shot. Over the last 30 years, I have learned that even my best ideas get brushed aside by real-world data, and I don’t take it personally. But this argument will not be persuasive to someone who is worried about the idea of getting a coronavirus vaccination in general. They either will not accept this response, or will wave it aside and move on to the next objection: “Well, what about this? Can we be sure that this other thing won’t happen?” It never stops.

          If we continue to see no signs of lung damage for another month, will that put you more at ease? Three months? Six? A couple of years? You will need to pick the point at which you will feel convinced. For some people there isn’t one. For my part, I found the clear and present danger of the coronavirus outweighed any objections to the vaccines that I could come up with.

          1. Fraud Guy says:

            The Dark Horse podcast people should read this response and be ashamed, because they are making vague statements that you “hope” the vaccine will be safe without any science behind your claims.

  74. galen87 says:

    Thanks for the great commentary Derek! Just one brief questions
    Assuming that the vaccine-produced S-protein remains anchored at the membrane of the muscle cell, close to the site of the injection, wouldn’t we expect more prominent (and longer-lasting) local side effects due to the immune response?
    Indeed, such major local side effects are seen in some cases after vaccination. However, in most cases, we only see some mild pain, for a few hours after the injection, similar to what we get after the influenza vaccine.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      I think this would indicate that the side effects of expressing Spike protein locally really aren’t that huge. Most of the “reactogenic” effects are driven, I believe, by the innate immune system rather than the antibody response, which only really comes on after several days. It’s the “self-adjuvant” nature of the mRNA and adenovirus vaccines causing many of these.

  75. Joel D says:

    I just have a question on the short term side effects and how they apply to the vaccinations. I took Pfizer (both shots) and my 2nd shot was last week on Thursday.

    (side effects) (both shots)
    — Extreme Dry Mouth for approx. 24-36 hours
    — Headache (top of the head only) for approx. 7 hours. intermediate
    — Arm pain at the injection spot (onset occurred 8 hours later)

    (side effects) (2nd shot only)
    — Extreme exhaustion and tiredness (felt like I could sleep for days)
    — Elevated Sugars (bgs) for 13 hours (could have impacted the sleepiness feeling above)
    — Palpitations (still ongoing) but Sinus Pause only – micro events
    — Tinnitus (very loud ringing in my ears) – loudness comes in waves but is constant now.

    Not sure if I need to do anything related to Tinnitus or the Palpitations. Just curious regarding any research on similar side effects and whether or not they can be expected to go away.

    I am also a firm believer in taking the vaccine and don’t regret my decision at all.

  76. Fraud Guy says:

    There is now a couple of youtube videos claiming Derek is basing this post on “hope” and not the science, and that he has a political agenda for doing so:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDu8mUji6Ww

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMjPtDK8evg

    What disingenuous claptrap.

    1. R says:

      Info from two evolutionary biologists. Great. Disingenuous claptrap indeed. Why not get info on heart medication from a psychiatrist.

  77. Terry says:

    I received the Moderna vaccine in the beginning of April . I had a sore left arm for about a day . Fever, chills, body aches , HA and ring in my ears for about a week. I had SOB for a couple of weeks. I received my 2nd injection at the en of April in left arm. I had immediate pain in my arm and shoulder and left chest. Then chills, fever, Ha, body aches, chest pain and tightness and severe fatigue . The shortness of breath was so bad. I went to the Hospital and the X-ray showed I had chest congestion in my lungs . I had breathing treatments for 2-3 days. They had to increase my BP medicine and now I am waiting to see a Pulmonologist because I need a inhaler because of sob on exertion.

  78. Dominik says:

    So what about this now? Sounds like there is some spike protein free floating after vaccination.

    Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Antigen Detected in the Plasma of mRNA-1273 Vaccine Recipients

    “We hypothesize that the cellular immune responses triggered by T-cell activation, which would occur days after the vaccination, lead to direct killing of cells presenting spike protein and an additional release of spike into the blood stream.”

    https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075

  79. Anne says:

    Could you please speak to the theory that the spike protein is expressed in epithelial cells and can be transmitted to others via saliva and sweat.

  80. Joseph says:

    Don’t forget that the same thing that keeps spikes attached to the coronavirus core, also allows plenty of spikes to break free and to reach the brain, as studies have shown.

  81. Nancey Dave says:

    I SUFFER FROM COLD SORES – THERE I’VE SAID IT, AND I HATE THEM. I AM LUCKY THAT I DON’T SUFFER THAT OFTEN (AND I KNOW SOME OF YOU ARE A LOT WORSE OFF AND GET THEM ALL OF THE TIME) SO HERE IS MY RVIEW OF TREATMENTS AND DRUGS THAT REALLY WORK YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE ON https://drwondersherbalhome.com/ YOU CAN CALL OR WHATSAPP OUR NUMBER ON +1(319)559-3535

  82. R says:

    @Derek Lowe

    The most abundant cells in the human body and blood stream are red blood cells – incapable of expressing anything. The mRNA vaccines are encased in lipids to allow entry into cells for expression. I’m curious whether the mRNA vaccines that escape intramuscularly into the blood stream would just fuse with RBCs and waste their payload, but also have no effect with respect to endothelial expression of the spike protein? Or is there something special about these lipid delivery vehicles that preferentially target them to cells other than RBCs?

  83. Alexander Pappas says:

    does the protein spike S that is produced by the RNA of the vaccine has its own RNA so when it attacks a human cell will use the cell mechanism to replicate itself further?

    1. R says:

      No, it’s just a protein.

  84. jam says:

    “does the protein spike S that is produced by the RNA of the vaccine have its own RNA so when it attacks a human cell will use the cell mechanism to replicate itself further?”

    Not exactly. If a lipid nanoparticle infects a cell, the cellular machinery cranks out naked copies of the spike protein. The naked spike protein is further processed by the cell (glycosylation, cleavage, etc) and is packaged for transport to the plasma membrane, where it ends up.

    Once on the cell surface it can drift around somewhat. If it comes across an ACE2 receptor on a neighboring cell it can induce fusion of the two cells. This means that the spikes on the original infected cell can now migrate over the surface of the previously uninfected cell and induce fusion further afield. One assumes that the original infected cell will continue to add to the number of spikes on the now fused cells. In this way uninfected (by the vaccine) cells some distance away from the infected cell can be affected.

  85. How would you integrate this in your soothing narrative?

    SARS-CoV-2 proteins were measured in longitudinal plasma samples collected from 13 participants who received two doses of mRNA-1273 vaccine. 11 of 13 participants showed detectable levels of SARS-CoV-2 protein as early as day one after first vaccine injection. Clearance of detectable SARS-CoV-2 protein correlated with production of IgG and IgA.

    https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075

  86. Ade says:

    Interesting blog and discussion.
    I came to this page as a layman who has a hereditary blood clotting disposition, namely protein s deficiency. I have a history of DVT and PE and take lifelong warfarin. Does taking anticoagulants offer protection against these clotting side-effects of the AZ vaccine? I had my second AZ a couple of weeks ago and was quite rough with side effects. Chest tightness and mild shortness of breath alongside other flu-like symptoms. I just wonder if they do rollout a top-up vaccine later in the year, I’d be better off taking the biontec/Pfizer instead. Thanks for your views.

  87. bewd says:

    COVID vaccine blood-clot mystery solved; scientists claim rare condition can now be fixed

    https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-558954/v1

  88. Jessie says:

    Thanks so much for this. I am not at all science minded but I am getting Pfizer tomorrow and am a bit scared- of course I am going to get it, but it was really reassuring to broaden my understanding of spike proteins in relation to this vaccine. I had an irrational concern that they were going to produce en masse in my body and I didn’t know how long this would continue for (hahaha, i feels so silly writing this). Really appreciate helping explain things to this pro vax/nervy person.

  89. Dfran says:

    Im no anti vaxxer but i did have a long lasting (2 months and counting) reaction to moderna with no prior covid infection. Mental fog, dizziness when walking, inability to properly regulate my autonomic system (heart rate spikes, adrenaline dumps). 3 weeks prior to onset i was training for a triathlon. Im now unable to do many things. The spike protein seems a prime suspect. I also think its interesting the Chinese went a route of vaccination away from the spike. I have a biochem degree, and i am pro vaccine, but something is wrong. I had an extended workout session right after the vaccine, this may have attributed to my neuro and cardiac issues.

  90. Chester says:

    Hello, I’m curious about the substitution of 1-methyl-3-pseudouridylyl in Pfizer’s vaccine as opposed to pseudouridine that has been used in so many previous trials. The use of pseudouridine leads to read through of stop codons so maybe the modified version doesn’t? Interestingly, they used 2 stop codons in a row for the vaccine. If they don’t have faith in one, will doubling up even be useful? What would be the implications of massive scale read-through? Just really long proteins? Misfiled proteins? Or just nothing?

    1. R says:

      Multiple stop codons usage is somewhat typical in synbio. I’m not exactly sure why, but it may help suppress replication errors that could knock out one of the stop codons during generation of the mRNA from the DNA template or during initial replication of the DNA template.

      1. sgcox says:

        Probably just in case, because why not ?
        It does not hurt. If I was truly paranoid, would insert one with +1 frameshift and then another with with +2(-1) too.

  91. Peter says:

    New research has discovered spike protein in systemic circulation after vaccination for up to 2 weeks after the first dose:

    https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075

    How does this change the analysis? Is it enough to cause damage? Is it no longer found because the antibodies cleared it or because it has already bound to cells?

    1. Charlie says:

      The paper says that there is a direct correlation between raise in the antibody levels and the decrease in spike protein levels in the plasma, starting with day 5 when the immune system starts to work. That seems clear especially when combined with the fact that after the second dose no spike protein could be found in the blood.
      With regards to the question if the spike protein floating in the blood caused some damage or not, that is not yet known, I believe. The myocarditis cases are still investigated.

  92. Berty says:

    Antibodies against NTD of spike protein have now been shown to enhance infection. Could have something to do with massively high death rates in the most vaccinated countries in the world?
    https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-05/ou-ate052421.php
    Unstudied vaccines, what could go wrong? Never should have been approved.

    1. WST says:

      “massively high death rates in the most vaccinated countries in the world”
      Like Israel, with 58% vaccinated over 10 years and round 85-90% over 18 years; one death last week and Mays average is 1.

      UK 74% over 18 years vaccinated , deaths 7 day average is 5.4

      Dear Berty, please leave your scary alternative reality cave.

      1. Berty says:

        Israel is the exception. They also had practically no deaths last May June and July. But you can’t claim a vaccine triumph for that can you?
        Read this and explain why more vaccines equate to more deaths… curious indeed
        https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/05/29/some-countries-with-the-highest-vaccination-rates-are-facing-a-surge-in-covid-deaths-and-infectionsexperts-say-complacency-is-partly-to-blame/?sh=1f0643724457

        1. WST says:

          May, June, July 2020, there were 287 deaths in Israel, 3 day in mean, due to a really tuff lockdown.
          In order to understand what happens now in Israel you should look deeper into statistics of sever cases and new cases in elderly.
          The overall case number went down really in April, but deaths dropped already in mid March. The removal of the synchronisation of case number and deaths following in next 4 weeks is the sign of vaccine effects on protecting vulnerable and elderly.

          Seriously, did you read the Forbes article ? It does not say that “more vaccines mean more deaths”, it’s utter nonsense.

          Countries with 50% of vaccinated population have also 50% susceptible to sever covid and death. Some of the mentioned countries are so small that very few extra deaths, which are really random events, can put them at the top of statistics, this does not say much. Otherwise Forbes article lists reasons of the epidemic in the unvaccinated part of the population.

      2. sgcox says:

        Could not agree more, in a few weeks all restrictions will be lifted in UK, unless BoJo find some excuse.
        What I really do not understand is the situation in Chile. Most of the country is vaccinated but it is of no help.
        Is it because it was done with bogus(?) China vaccine or something else.

        1. Berty says:

          The vaccine equation has shifted dramatically. In the absence of efficacy there is no benefit and that leaves only risk. Clear failure in 4 experimental countries, significant sample size, the rest to follow, hang onto your hats.

          1. sgcox says:

            There is a very clear, obvious and undisputable efficacy of vaccines used in UK, US and EU.
            Some people will continue to argue otherwise of course but who cares, caravan moves on…
            But then again, what is going on in Chile ?
            Makes no sense.

          2. WST says:

            “But then again, what is going on in Chile ?
            Makes no sense.”

            I beg to differ. The new cases explode, since mid March > 6k a day, but daily average deaths have stabilised since 1st of February round 80-100 and don’t follow peaks, are almost flat, this is a sign that vaccines protect the vulnerable and the elderly but there are still many susceptible to infection.

            Vaccines have changed the character and lethality of covid.

          3. sgcox says:

            May be, but I not convinced.
            Statistics in Israel and UK showed very fast and stiff drop in hospitalization and mortality among vaccinated people. As I understand, both countries followed logical old-to-young approach, inoculating older people first as a priority. Not sure how it was done in Chile, if it was more uniform across ages, then yes death rate would not drop as fast as in Europe.
            Chile is relatively prosperous and well run country, better than some Europeans, but I better shut up now…
            Their statistic is completely trustworthy and puzzles me. I was expecting much stronger effect.

          4. WST says:

            sgcox says:
            30 May, 2021 at 9:26 am
            “May be, but I not convinced.”

            I tried to figure out if one can see the vaccination effects in Chili in data. The hypothesis is: if covid is less lethal due to vaccination, then the CFR should go down. One should have roughly one CFR before the vaccination and one once the vaccination start showing effects (and have a decreasing trend) . Of course this is a very rough calculation that assumes that testing strategy and volume was more or less the same etc.. But at least one should see a trend…and there is one!
            Really, several months of CFR (as deaths per 100,000 positive) oscillating between 400-500 and then from 15/3/21 stabilising round 250 and going down.

            Interesting peak points (smoothed 7 days averages)

            16/6/20 6000 cases, CFR = 472
            4/4/21 7138 cases, CFR = 213

            Q.E.D.

        2. Berty says:

          “There is a very clear, obvious and undisputable efficacy of vaccines used in UK, US and EU.”
          I dispute this. These countries may only be in the trough of a wave. Israel had no vaccine last summer and their cases were equally low. Look at the graph.
          Too soon to make a decisive conclusion the premature victories have quickly turned into hasty retreats or abject failures … see Uruguay, Maldives, Seychelles, Hungary, Chile, Bahrain. This list provides very clear, obvious and undeniable evidence to the contrary.

          1. sgcox says:

            OK, I was probably too assertive here, I admit.
            It is indeed hard to split effect of vaccines from lockdowns and also natural course of epidemics (nothing goes exponential forever).
            My point is that Israel, UK and yes, even Hungary statistics looks very encouraging and decline in hospitalization and deaths are is better than expected.
            Outside of Europe – hard to judge, we really need to take look what vaccines have been used and how.

          2. theasdgamer says:

            sgcox,

            There is also the impact of seasonal effects to consider. Winter ending when vaccination gets into full swing. We’ve seen a small percentage of breakthrough cases. With the reduction of Ct for breakthru testing in the US, we can’t really compare it to the US unvaccinated which is over 1k amplification relative to breakthru, can we?

        3. Mariner says:

          I don’t think restrictions will be lifted and, to some degree, should be rowed back now.

          We’ve let the Indian B.1.617.2 variant get widely seeded in the country with our wide open borders and it has become the dominant variant in just a few weeks. Doubling, approximately weekly under the same conditions that were seeing B.1.1.7 infections reduce. It seems likely that the spread will take off if we reopen. Latest figures from PHE seem to indicate it could be 67% more transmissible than B.1.1.7 (which was already more 50% transmissible than the earlier virus, let’s not forget). Figures from PHE also indicate that one dose of the AZ vaccine appears to be around 30% effective at preventing symptomatic infection with B.1.617.2 (~60% after 2 doses of AZ), greatly reduced from the efficacy against B.1.1.7 and earlier variants. A recent preprint finds antibody efficacy for the AZ vaccine is comparably poor to efficacy against B.1.351 so that shows some vaccine escape:

          https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.26.445838v1

          With less than half of the UK adult population fully vaccinated along with very few under-18s, there is still a very big reservoir of people with little or no protection from the new variant. The waters are muddied to some degree by the fact that many of those vaccinated have received the Pfizer and this seems to be more effective against B.1.617.2 (though no numbers are available for efficacy after one dose).

          On the plus side, it is pretty certain that the vaccine programme will reduce the CFR a great deal in this coming wave, especially as the most vulnerable groups are now mostly fully vaccinated. However, it is quite possible that the NHS could still be overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of hospitalisations if the Indian variant spreads to as many people as seems likely.

          1. UK chemist says:

            It’s worth adding that 60% efficacy figure for the 2-dose AZ vaccine vs symptomatic infection by B.1.617.2 comes with huge 95% confidence intervals of 30-80%. I think there were only 1000 people with this variant in the study. Hopefully the emerging data will show it’s closer to 80% than 30% but I completely agree that we should find out before opening up more.

  93. Riccardo says:

    https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/how-a-newly-discovered-body-part-changes-our-understanding-of-the-brain-and-the-immune-system/

    “Indeed, because of these vessels’ hidden location deep within the brain and their close proximity to prominent blood vessels, brain lymphatics had legitimately escaped the notice of the biomedical community.”

    1. BillyBob says:

      The vectors entering the blood stream was the old plausible explanation, hell they even came up with a solution to aspirate before injection! Now it seems it’s probably the lymphatic system which is causing these fatal brain clots.
      Latest tragic loss
      https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-57267169
      If we are seeing so many unexpected short term problems are we unreasonable to expect long term issues? Is ADE an issue afterall? Why do some of the countries with the highest vaccination rates in the world have the highest death rates from Covid?

  94. PETER ROSS says:

    There’s no direct evident that these synthetic mRNA injections generate any protein products.
    Also, nobody knows the actual composition of the prepartions for injection.
    Attempts to analyze these prepartions for injection – both the Moderna and Pfizer-///////////// – were unsuccessful, although it should be the simplest of tasks working with pharmacologically “pure” products.

  95. Shahid Hasan says:

    I am posting this comment to express my PERSONAL VIEW ONLY.

    If COVID vaccines are so SAFE, why the need by HHS to shield the Vaccine makers from lawsuits??? Currently, GOD forbid, if someone suffers from debilitating side effects from COIVID vaccination, they are almost on their own.

    see https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html

  96. Mansour says:

    Short answer is that we are not seeing reports of lung damage from the vaccines

  97. Mansour says:

    he Spike protein is not released to wander freely through the bloodstream by itself, because it has a transmembrane anchor region that (as the name implies) leaves it stuck.

  98. niloo says:

    By my rough estimate, N95 masks look to pass 70% of SARS-COV-2 and cause self-infection of the remaining 30%.

  99. niloo says:

    Are there any examples of inhaled vaccines that have outperformed injected vaccines?

    1. CAvisitor says:

      Seems like the “I’m definitely not anti-vaccine” guy has been speaking against vaccines for over a year. Responses to his statements are on the website ironically registered under his own name at http://byrambridle.com.

  100. Molly says:

    My sister received the second Pfizer shot the first week of April. On May 8th she developed hives over most of her body. The hives come and go and are at times accompanied by swelling of the eyes and lips and occasionally a raspy voice and tightness in the throat. She was put on a course of prednisone and has been taking Zyrtec and Benadryl. She has seen 4 doctors including dermatologists and allergy specialists, has had numerous blood tests and everything comes back normal though once her WBC was high and one test indicated autoimmune disease but subsequent test did not show any of that. None of the doctors are willing to say it’s vaccine related but she has no known allergies, has never had hives before and nothing in her environment has changed. She has lived with hives on a daily basis now since May 8th and things are not improving. Her quality of life is suffering as she doesn’t want to leave the house and living in Arizona, the heat makes her more uncomfortable when she is outside. I don’t know if it’s a PEG allergy or what is causing this and apparently neither do the doctors. I wish I could tell her they will go away soon but I don’t know that. I had the moderna vaccine and had no side effects aside from sore arm and fever that lasted a few hours. I now regret getting the vaccine after seeing what it has done to my sister.

    1. Robert Clark says:

      This may be an example of “long-COVID”. It’s now known it can also happen post-vaccine, even without a prior diagnosis of COVID-19 itself.

      Some experts on treating long-COVID believe ivermectin can treat it:

      Bruce K. Patterson MD
      @brucep13
      Apr 22
      Top Yale Doctor/Researcher: ‘Ivermectin works,’ including for long-haul COVID. Our collaboration with Dr Santin has led to our successful drug panels that include ivermectin with CCR5 antagonism. #longhaulers
      Top Yale Doctor/Researcher: ‘Ivermectin works,’ including for long-haul COVID
      A Yale University professor and renowned cancer researcher has pored over the COVID-19 literature and treated several dozen patients. He can remain silent …
      trialsitenews.com
      https://twitter.com/brucep13/status/1385417879135264772?s=20

      Robert Clark

    2. N. Ali says:

      Hi , I have the same symptoms like your sister . Mine started on day 10 of second dose of Moderna . It’s been 3 months and still getting hives everyday ! I have no history of any allergy.

  101. Lane Simonian says:

    The line that all of these vaccines are safe and effective is beginning to run thin. I will skip the breakthrough infection cases and address only the safety issue.

    The one in a million cases of clots is now down to about 1 in 50,000. The survival rate is improving for those who develop serious clotting issues but is still alarmingly high (about 20 pecent).

    https://theconversation.com/second-dose-of-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine-faqs-about-blood-clots-safety-risks-and-symptoms-161587

    The problem seems to occur with all the vaccines, and appears to be linked to platelet factor 4 antibodies developed in response to the spike protein. Johnson and Johnson reached out the other vaccine makers to try to determine number of cases and causes, but Pfizer and Moderna refused in part because they felt to do so would tarnish their reputations (plus they felt this was someone else’s responsibility). Pertinent or not Pfizer and Moderna are making a profit off their vaccines whereas AztraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson are not.

    Maybe once a sufficient number of people are vaccinated, the truth will come out. But by that time it will be too late for some people.

  102. Enzi says:

    Hello, Lane, Narcy and Derek,
    My brother (36 yrs old) has developed an arterial thrombosis at his kidney after the Pfizer vaccine. Abdominal pain that began 4 days after the second doze of the Pfizer vaccine and a massive clot that was eventually found at the ER blocking and damaging his kidney 3 weeks later. There is zero support out there, no way to properly report this (VAERS form was filled) and more importantly no doctors who can offer us a comprehensive report on what is going on and what is going to happen next. Every possible test has been done on him, everything is normal except of course for the blood clot without a traditional origin. They say “yes, it is probably caused by the vaccine but what can we do.” Names of any U.S. researchers or doctors that are working on clots resulting from the beloved Pfizer vaccine would be greatly appreciated.

    1. Don Mega says:

      QUOTE:

      “Enzi says:
      3 June, 2021 at 6:56 pm

      Hello, Lane, Narcy and Derek,
      My brother (36 yrs old) has developed an arterial thrombosis at his kidney after the Pfizer vaccine. Abdominal pain that began 4 days after the second doze of the Pfizer vaccine and a massive clot that was eventually found at the ER blocking and damaging his kidney 3 weeks later. There is zero support out there, no way to properly report this (VAERS form was filled) and more importantly no doctors who can offer us a comprehensive report on what is going on and what is going to happen next. Every possible test has been done on him, everything is normal except of course for the blood clot without a traditional origin. They say “yes, it is probably caused by the vaccine but what can we do.” Names of any U.S. researchers or doctors that are working on clots resulting from the beloved Pfizer vaccine would be greatly appreciated.”

      REPLY:

      The official stand is it’s all in your head.

      You and me know better. So my condolences all the way from Finland to your brother. He’s a victim of the disinformation, the overpowering propaganda, and the peer pressure to get the shot. Young people stand at risk from the shot just like old, while they certainly don’t of the virus to the same level. About 0.1% infection fatality rate among young. For old can be even 10%+ so for them the choice to get the shot may indeed be better. For us young however it’s better to simply not visit McDonald’s, for heart issues kill you far more certainly than 0.1%. And if you can’t help but eat fast food, well why bother with the shot either for such a lousy improvement? Especially with all the adverse effects and unknowns that can come from the exposure to spike protein alone. Emphasis on the “can”, cos I’m certainly not claiming I know of any better. But what makes me suspicious are all these pharma reps etc. who claim to hold all the answers. Overly confident asshats doesn’t cut it for me. All sounds like a bluff to be honest. The desperation especially, like they’re put on a spot and behave that way. Like this guy writing the overly long boring article that in the end proved nothing either way.

    2. Don Mega says:

      This writer also doesn’t address the actual spike protein in the shot that gets injected to you just like the hamsters. That is harmful, hence the adverse effects to the TOXIN.

      (Spikeprotein is listed as the main active ingredient in the shots)

      So he rather derails and starts talking about the spike protein your body then starts producing, as if that mattered at this stage when the damage is already done by the spike protein injected into you…

      A cunning agent of disinformation used the classic “how not to answer a question” technique of altering the question to how he’d like it have been formed.

      But nevermind me, I guess I’m just a Russian bot (pretty smart bots we are cos we even give condolences LOL). The fact is they have the lamest excuses to not take any critique towards their lies.

      1. Nav J. says:

        There is no spike protein in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. You can read out the ingredients yourself. In the Pfizer vaccine, there is mRNA, two synthetic lipids, and then a bunch of common ions. That is all.

    3. Lane Simonian says:

      I am saddened, Enzi, to hear about your brother’s condition and hope that he will be all right.

      I have been searching since January for expert insights into the clotting problems, without too much success. I did find this today:

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/05/210517102624.htm

      The following is from an article that requires an email address, but I will just spotlight a couple of the most important observations:

      “After developing rare blood clots post coronavirus vaccine, Michigan man wants more awareness”

      Kent Herrick spent two months in and out of the hospital with a rare but serious blood clotting condition following his COVID-19 vaccine.

      Given a do-over, the 52-year-old Saline native said he’d still get the vaccine, given that his underlying health conditions could cause serious illness if he were to get coronavirus. But, he’d like to see more effort from those pushing the vaccine’s safety profile to highlight the potential adverse reactions for those, like him, who have a history of immune system issues.

      “The problem is they’re concerned about making sure people get vaccinated and so they don’t want to say bad things about it,” Herrick said. “There’s a lack of communication on the bad stuff and that’s unhealthy.

      “While the ‘rare’ thing is true; it is rare, but it’s also a reality … When I called the hematologist, I called myself a rare case and they said they’ve been treating similar cases the last four months. So officially, it’s only a handful, but unofficially, people have been dealing with it for a while.”

      1. Robert Clark says:

        Thanks for that link, Lane. I almost didn’t click on that link because what you wrote after it about the “52 year old Saline native” led me to think it was just about that. But it was really about this:

        COVID-19 vaccination: Thrombosis can be prevented by prompt treatment, researchers report.
        Efficacy of a potentially life-saving treatment strategy for vaccine-induced thrombosis described for the first time
        Date: May 17, 2021
        Source: Medical University of Vienna
        https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/05/210517102624.htm

        This shows why you should always give the title and some kind of description of what it’s about when you give a link in online discussions forums.

        Robert Clark

      2. Lane Simonian says:

        I am always leery of “breakthrough” therapies, but this is the best one that I have found available to date (the blood thinner was not specified but I am assuming that it was not heparin).

        https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-06/mu-ntd060821.php

    4. Robert Clark says:

      Just saw this article from November last year:

      New Cause of COVID-19 Blood Clots Identified.
      A new study reveals the virus triggers production of antibodies circulating through the blood, causing clots in people hospitalized with the disease.
      https://labblog.uofmhealth.org/lab-report/new-cause-of-covid-19-blood-clots-identified

      It discusses that some people have pre-existing genetic markers that put them at greater risk from getting clots from COVID. Then this may also be true of the vaccines.

      Robert Clark

  103. Don Mega says:

    You called them “vaccines”. I had to stop reading at that point cos you’re spreading disinformation.

    They are not vaccines, for vaccines contain virus in them. And vaccines give you immunity, rather than just reduce symptoms. We must differentiate between real vaccines and these RNA and cell messing agents.

    In my view man has no business meddling with his physiology at this age. Maybe in a 1000 years we’ll we smart enough for it, but at this time no amount of fancy vocabulary will change the fact you’re still a dumb ape comparatively only slightly smarter than the rest.

    1. Dim Don says:

      @Don Mega, you made a “statement”. I had to stop reading at that point cos you’re spreading disinformation.

      That was not a statement, for statements contain facts. And facts are based on data and the real world, not just made-up lies. We must differentiate between facts and data and ignorant, malicious fairy stories.

      In my view you have no business meddling with science at your mental age. Maybe in a 1000 years you’ll be smart enough for it, but at this time no amount of fancy vocabulary will change the fact you’re still a dumb ape comparatively only slightly dumber than the rest.

    2. Jack Londoner says:

      I agree with you, they are not vaccine ,intracellular tool

  104. non-scientist curious says:

    Question for only those of you with legitimate medical backgrounds:

    Would a PF-4 antibody test before first vaccination makes sense for discovering whether there is an increased risk (if test positive) of a potential thrombotic event post-vaccination? Thanks.

    1. Peter Maystone says:

      I’m also curious about this. Does anyone know?

  105. Tanith Eley says:

    How do you explain the rare blood clots caused by the vaccine and now reports of it looking highly likely to cause heart inflammation in young people?

  106. Tanith Eley says:

    How can it be safe because it goes into the muscle and then it does go into the blood stream but that is safe because of additives? Sounds a little implausible especially considering it is now accepted that people have developed rare blood clots from the vaccine.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      The rare blood clots are associated with the adenovirus-vector vaccines, not the mRNA ones. The mechanism for this is very close to be tracked down as well.

      1. Cassandra says:

        PolitiFact could easily tear apart this completely erroneous statement.

  107. Psyop says:

    The lipids accumulate all over the body, in especially high concentrations in the ovaries. Check Japanese animal study results with table
    https://twitter.com/shawntcuff/status/1399050646020497409/photo/1

  108. Hank R. says:

    The clinical trials news site trialsitenews.com reported last week that a Freedom of Information Act request filed by a group of Canadian physicians reveal animal study results demonstred that the Pfizer mRNA-based vaccine nanoparticles DO NOT remain only the region of the injection site. Rather the spike protein nanonparticles appear to spread widely after injection. According to the documents, the pre-clinical studies showed that the mRNA-lipid nanoparticles, which produce the spike protein, spread throughout the body and are concentrated in various organs, including the ovaries and spleen.

    If this is correct, we may have a very serious problem on our hands. Emergency authorization should only have been for Novavax (isolated spike protein) and similar traditional vaccines. Novavax has has been bravely pressing on against all odds (approval probable in July/August 2021), while the experimental Pfzier and Moderma mRNA vaccines where pushed on the public, with a sham version of informed consent. At this point, in my opinion people who are at risk (over 65, or those with predisposing medical conditions) should only get the J&J one-dose vaccine or wait for the Novavax approval. In particular, those with any autoimmune disease, taking immune suppressant medication for autoimmune disease, or immne system compromised/diminished by any other medical condition, should NOT take the Pfzier or Moderma mRNA vaccines. Children are at little or no risk, so there is no need for them to be vaccinated now. Parents should wait for the Novavax vaccine approval (and then several weeks after it is widely available) before considering vaccinating children.

    Full article here:
    “Did Pfizer Fail to Perform industry Standard Animal Testing Prior to Initiation of mRNA Clinical Trials?”
    https://trialsitenews.com/did-pfizer-fail-to-perform-industry-standard-animal-testing-prior-to-initiation-of-mrna-clinical-trials/

    1. Concerns and Questions says:

      Thank you for this information. I have been struggling to understand the difference between Novavax and the RNA vaxes. Your post has helped. I am more comfortable getting that now when it comes out.

  109. Rachel Sommer says:

    Is the Spike protein a type of antigen, then? Are there any other pathogens where the exterior antigens are themselves dangerous?

    (I was a Westinghouse semifinalist back in 1988 for working in a flu virus research lab, but didn’t go on to pursue scientific research, so I may be completely off.)

    1. Hank R. says:

      Yes, the spike protein itself is an antigen. The below linked plain language article on Medium.com explains the concerns about the lipid nanoparticles in the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA migrating widely throughout the body (pro & con).

      In my opinion this migration is much more concerning than the small number of cases of rare-type blood clots reported for the Johnson & Johnson adenoviral vector vaccine (but still a risk). The Chinese-developed Sinovac and Sinopharm inactivated virus vaccines (using traditional virus vaccine technology) will not be available anytime soon in the United States, but are being distributed in other countries. So for anyone who has not yet been vaccinated in the United States, I believe it is best to wait for the Novavax approval (hopefully July/August). And then wait a few weeks until it has had wide U.S. distribution and use, to see if any widespread side effects are reported for Novavax in the news media. So far the trails look very good for Novavax.

      “Concerns of Lipid Nanoparticle Carrying mRNA Vaccine into the Brain: What to Make of It?”
      https://medium.com/microbial-instincts/concerns-of-lipid-nanoparticle-carrying-mrna-vaccine-into-the-brain-what-to-make-of-it-42b1a98dae27

      1. Jean says:

        The following statement is indeed worrisome:

        “The mRNA vaccine is injected intramuscularly through the arm. This method is preferredbecause large muscle cells have high vascularity, so the injected biomaterial can easily reach the systemic bloodstream and lymphatic system.
        LNPs fuse with and enter mammalian cells easily. As mentioned, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines use LNPs to encapsulate the mRNA genetic material for more efficient cell delivery.
        Thus, the combined intramuscular injection and LNP technology would enable the mRNA vaccine to reach a broad range of cell types. The mRNA might even reach delicate cells or places that we don’t want them to, such as neurons in the brain or spinal cord.”

        https://medium.com/microbial-instincts/concerns-of-lipid-nanoparticle-carrying-mrna-vaccine-into-the-brain-what-to-make-of-it-42b1a98dae27

      2. Concerns and Questions says:

        But the Novavax vaccine now seems to generate spike proteins, as well. Ditto the latest French offering. I thought both were going to be like the Chinese vax (create antibodies to the virus itself, not just the spike proteins), but they are not. I don’t see anything in the pipeline in the West like the Chinese vax. Plus Novavax is introducing an entirely new ingredient to enhance the immune response. I have been looking now for three days to find a potential traditional vax with no luck. I would prefer a traditional vax, not a spike protein vax. The spike protein seems to have been chosen because it was the easiest to produce in mass quantities, not because it’s the best choice for immunity. There were other proteins to choose from, but they were not good for getting lab test results which is what all this has been predicated on. I found NIH research going back to 2005 saying that the spike proteins are highly unstable and mutate quickly and often. That’s what the “variants” are all about – changes to the spike proteins, not the coronavirus itself. Moderna CEO admitting in public “boosters” needed because of virus “mutations” Baloney. It’s the spike proteins mutating and they KNEW THIS GOING IN. They knew this would happen. It’s apparently a well known scientific fact. They now want to jab us to have our bodies produce slightly different and yet more spike proteins with each “booster”. Very concerning.

        1. madhatter says:

          Covaxin currently deployed in India, manufactured by Bharat Biotech, and planned for release in the US by Ocugen is a traditional vaccine. I know many who have taken it with few side effects and it seems very effective against all variants. It uses inactivated whole virus. However the FDA hurriedly changed their EUA policies end of May and are not providing them (or Novavax) an EUA anymore. They asked them to apply for full authorization which means good luck finding it here.

    2. Barry says:

      Diphtheria toxin is an antigen that will induce immunity–if it doesn’t kill you first

  110. Jean says:

    “The Spike protein is not released to wander freely through the bloodstream by itself, because it has a transmembrane anchor region that (as the name implies) leaves it stuck.”

    If the spike is not released I’m not sure how it could generate immune response.

    Indeed, antigen presentation to T cell occurs in the context of a peptide-MHC complex bound on the cell surface of an antigen-presenting cell (APC).

    Macrohages, B cels or dendritic cells are known professional APCs.

    Since the peptide to be presented should be short (between 8-25 amino acids), the spike protein should be released as a soluble protein so that it can be taken up, processed, and presented to T cells.

    If the APC in question is a B cell, the presentation ultimately leads to antiboady production.

  111. Safety says:

    Case Report
    Deaths associated with newly launched SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (Comirnaty®)

    Legal Medicine
    Volume 51, July 2021, 101895

    Deaths associated with newly launched SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (Comirnaty®) – ScienceDirect
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1344622321000596

  112. Question says:

    Can anyone tell me what other vaccine instructs the body to product spike proteins?

    1. sgcox says:

      All vector vaccines, mRNA or adenovirus based:
      AZ, J&J, Pfizer, Moderna, Sputnik, some Chines vaccine (forgot the name) and few more still in development.
      Other used prefabricated Spike protein as an antigen. Either as a recombinant like Novavax, or killed virus – Sinovac.

  113. Jon Rose says:

    I’d be interested in comments related to this video by Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, and Bret Weinstein claiming the “Spike protein [as used in the mRNA vaccines] is very dangerous, it’s cytotoxic” https://youtu.be/Du2wm5nhTXY

    1. WST says:

      Jon,
      well, it’s difficult to listen to this uncivilised person Kirsch, unable to hear out dr Malone , interrupting , full of emotions and keen to tell his anecdotes.
      But, it gives a little insight to his way of thinking and his standard logical fallacies. He met two people with what he thinks are serious vaccine adverse reactions and builds a case around it because “lightning never strikes at the same place twice” (which is btw untrue), this is a false analogy. Over the months I met over 100 vaccinated people (from 18 to 101 years) that had no or very light AE, worse had my wife, a week of arm pain and fatigue.
      (while three of my friends died from covid and few had or still have serious side effects, and quite few had covid with light symptoms). I don’t think I can draw any general concussion of my anecdotal observations .
      Kirsch listens to dr Malone and interrupts and over-interprets what is said and just waits from some “magic word” that triggers an association with some anecdotal case. This is called “cherry picking”, he ignore everything, even neutral statements, that does even remotely prove his point.
      Then the contradiction, Maloney says that FDA knows about all the adverse events (means it’s in the documentation, this is where Malone found it anyway), but then all is “silenced” and press is “not interested” .
      Kirsch makes a very bad impression I would not trust him to critically examine his own statements.

      1. Robert Clark says:

        Stephen Kirsch is a forceful, Type A, personality, a common trait with highly successful business men.He’s not going to be a shrinking violet in any discussion. The points he makes are far more important than his presentation, though.

        You stated:
        “Over the months I met over 100 vaccinated people (from 18 to 101 years) that had no or very light AE, worse had my wife, a week of arm pain and fatigue.
        (while three of my friends died from covid and few had or still have serious side effects, and quite few had covid with light symptoms). I don’t think I can draw any general concussion of my anecdotal observations .”

        Note Kirsch is not saying everyone will get a serious reaction. But even in your anecdotal observations say 4 or 5 out of 100 got severe reactions that’s greatly out of line with respect to earlier vaccines.

        For instance, on VAERS in the U.S. you have ca. 5,000 deaths out of 100 million vaccinated. This is wildly out of whack in comparison to other vaccines, like the yearly flu vaccine. With the flu vaccine the deaths are like in the range of 1 in a million. With these COVID vaccines, it’s like 50 times that.

        And it is known VAERS actually underestimates the adverse events. Kirsch said talking to CDC officials he got an estimate of perhaps 20,000 actually killed, which would be 200 times higher than the flu vaccine.

        Let me further emphasize the extent this compared to for example the flu vaccine. If it really is the case that 20,000 people died after the COVID vaccine, then rather than the chance of dying after the vaccine of 1 in a million like the flu vaccine, it would be 1 in 5,000.

        Robert Clark

        1. WST says:

          I did not say that “But even in your anecdotal observations say 4 or 5 out of 100 got severe reactions ” .

          I would call my wife’s reaction as serious, it did not prevent her from working as usual the day after.

          The way you look at the VAERS data is not serious.

    2. Mike says:

      Another point is, when this all were true, why not a single big network was interested in this story?

      I guess that Malone, if this story would be a real eye-opener, would aim for big-tv first, wouldn’t he?
      Why show up at this occasion?… and make such a questionable impression.

      Did he try?
      Was he rejected?
      Or did he not dare?

  114. Chiharu Kinjo says:

    I wanna ask who wrote this article or report.
    How you think about this video?
    https://odysee.com/@jimakudaio:9/Dr.-Roger-Hodkinson—Vaccination-of-kids-is-State-Sanctione:1

  115. Jasper says:

    I really enjoy this article and the expertise in the comments. I am not a doctor but due to covid I have lost all my businesses and my life really and thus I have been reading 50 to 100 research papers on SARS-COV 2 and the vaccine. Simply because I want to know why: is this virus so dangerous for everyone or just the risk group? are the measures the right response or were there better ways to deal with this? is the vaccine safe and do I as a young person with a healthy immune system (and a previous covid infection) need it? I bet all of you doctors did not have the problem of losing all your livelihood so bear with me and other people who are critical, not because we think we know better, simply because being critical is the very essence of science. Science is never a 100% fact, there is ALWAYS room for improvement. Next to that all that; we have an unprecedented global financial situation already before the pandamic hit, world debt was at an all time high. (the last point is non-medical but always relevant in an increasing capitalist health + science market)

    So in short I post my findings based on scientific research and please debunk me wherever I am wrong:

    1. is this virus (COVID-19) so dangerous for everyone or just the risk group?

    SARS-COV 2 is (potentially) dangerous for people with a compromised immune system due to any form of illness or “compromised / unhealthy” body condition. For example: leptin resistance comprimes the immune system; most obese people have leptin resistance. Another example: vitamin D deficiency – which according to research paper is around 40% (!!!) globally. Vitamine D is crucial for your T-cells to function.

    Vitamin D deficiency:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4018438/
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28516265/ (calling it a pandamic + health crisis!!!)

    Leptin resistance, video of dr. with clear explanation – allocating risk groups for covid at start pandamic: https://thefatemperor.com/why-viral-impacts-occur-and-root-cause-solution-ron-rosedale-md/?fbclid=IwAR1H_zva7aL7sf8HLer2VyEOgQgLdEToW1lBGo7L-umJbPTIWRXTtvHiCLQ

    Recent study of vitamine D treatment for covid patients, less deaths + less ICU for treatment with vitamin D:

    Vitamin D and T-cells:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4880125/
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100307215534.htm

    “Scientists at the University of Copenhagen have discovered that Vitamin D is crucial to activating our immune defenses and that without sufficient intake of the vitamin, the killer cells of the immune system — T cells — will not be able to react to and fight off serious infections in the body.”

    2. Are the measures the right response or were there better ways to deal with this?

    Given I have enough scientific backing for question 1, this means that question 2 must be answered with no. Why? Well, first because the models from imperial college for deaths estimated at start of the pandamic were wrong! They overestimated deaths and cases (see link below). Now one could argue; because of the lockdown we had fewer deaths… Well, that theory is debunked by Sweden who showed no significant excess deaths during the pandamic other than having a very weak 2019 flu season and thus having more susceptibles (risk group) alive at the time than normal. Talking about background noise: the graph linked below clearly shows the fewest deaths in 2019 over the last 10 years in Sweden. The “mania” about the covid death rate in Sweden was just because of the surplus of susceptibles coming out of 2019.
    But people say: lockdowns prevent spreading the virus!! No I do NOT agree. Yes, of course if everyone locks himself up, sure they don’t spread the virus if not visited by anyone. But this scenario is unrealistic, people still live and move. Besides that; most infections take place indoors, not outdoors! Lockdowns only stimulate indoor visits as the outside world is full with police and mania for covid, so it works against what you want. Its better to meet friends in the park than inside however lockdowns achieved the opposite. Sure, infections have been prevented by the lockdown, no doubt but would we be worse off without a lockdown? Well, yes and no. Why? Well according to the proof of question 1, the best measures would be: stimulate the immune system by providing (free) vitamine d (its cheap), info on healthy food that the stimulate immune system AND restrictions (lockdown if you wish) for the risk groups! The risk groups clutter the hospitals, not young people like myself who take care of their bodies and immune system / diet. (yes I take vitamin D every week and eat healthy and stay away from most sugars) So, in short: the best way was to protect the risk group and to let the younger generation built up natural immunity and thus form a protection barrier for the elderly! People: BUT I’ve seen young people in the hospital with covid!!? Yes, sure, do you know if they are vitamin d deficient or were leptin resistant, have diabetes or any other condition that compromises their immune system? No, you do not. So again, don’t generalize, if you’re young it doesn’t mean your are 100% healthy or have a 100% working immune system.

    Imperial college models: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01003-6
    Deaths Sweden 2010-2020: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/
    Mild flu season Sweden 2019/2020 corresponding with least amount of deaths in Sweden in 2019: https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/publicerat-material/publikationsarkiv/i/influenza-in-sweden-2019-2020-season/?pub=80782

    3 Is the vaccine safe and do I as a young person with a healthy immune system (and a previous covid infection) need it?

    For this last question I relate to the above article and the (scientific based) comments. In short it’s quite simple: long term tested and approved vaccines work and are safe. The shorter the testing and development; the more flaws and risks it may have. No scientist would or should disagree with this! More research, more knowledge! Easy.

    Now, let’s get back to question. Is the vaccine safe? Yes, based on the article and comments I would say its relatively safe however it still involves a risk and definitely a higher risk than vaccines that have been developed and around for decades. So in short that means: if you are in the risk group, it is definitely wise to take the vaccine as you have less risk by taking it than getting covid. Again, simple. For younger generations that have a healthy immune system however; the risks of the vaccine vs. the risks of severe disease of covid does NOT outweigh the risk of SAE of the current vaccines on the market. So it is important to know if you have an healthy immune system. How do you know? Well, do you get ill from flu every winter? I do not, haven’t been for over a decade, if not more. Did you get severe ill while getting covid? No I did not, it was over in 2 days and I isolated (ofcourse) but was still up and running during those days (apart from some fatigue). Do you have any condition that compromises your immune system? No I don’t have any of such conditions.

    So for me that means I do NOT take the vaccine until I will belong to the risk group at some point due to age or body condition. This is for me the SAFEST way to handle the pandamic. But you will be spreading covid if you do not take vaccine!!?? No I do not, I am immune, I have healthy T-cells and they store the information against covid. Anti*-bodies are just temporary when you actually have virus infection. Expecting anti bodies to stay in the body is like asking the fire truck to wait in front of your house because one day your house might be on fire. Its plain stupid and inefficient, nature does not work like that. It stores the info and accesses it again when needed. You call the fire department when your house is on fire, not when you think it might be on fire next month…

    Next to that, a large group of healthy people was already cross immune against covid due to previous infections of other viruses in the corona family. This has been researched in the academic hospital in Berlin and guess what’s so important to establish this cross immunity? T-cells! What was the important for T-cells to function? Vitamin D! What is the world population lacking according to scientific research? Vitamine D! Other points: do you think the world population eats and drinks healthy? Let me give you a simple example: the two most famous and popular drinks are: Coca-Cola and Red Bull. See my point here? Do you see WHERE the problem REALLY is?

    Vaccine petition seeking for compensation for injury in the U.S. is 3rd highest this year compared to all of the previous 20 years before, remind you; 2021 is only half way: https://www.statista.com/statistics/668852/petitions-per-year-seeking-damages-for-injuries-or-deaths-caused-by-vaccines-us/
    * I am not saying this means the vaccine is unsafe, I am saying it has an increased risk profile and the stats back up this claim.

    World’s most popular soft drinks:
    http://thetop10game.bksites.net/business/top-10-worlds-most-popular-soft-drinks
    World’s most popular food (high carb / high sugar): https://www.zegrahm.com/blog/most-popular-food-world

    To conclude, SARS-COV 2 is dangerous for people with a compromised immune system as it is their immune system that responds in a wrong way thus the immune system kills the body. Example is the cytokine storm, it’s simply caused by the immune system not having any T-cells to rely on or has been disoriented by your leptin resistance. So the learning for this pandamic is that we need to improve our immune system with healthy habits + lifestyle + consumption. Basing policies and measures on models is wrong or at least should be corrected on time + science and politics or finance should never be intertwined. Freedom of citizens should never be taken away based on pseudo scientific “estimates” or “assumptions”, if you really want to tackle the health problematic; start with the core. That is: how we live, what we consume and a healthy mind set. Stress also compromises the immune system and the approach of the govs around the world only given society more stress, not less.

    To get to my very last point which is not related to medicine or science. Finance and globalization + corporate interest is currently favored above the health of our planet, our people and society as a whole. Govs only have debt, corporates + banks (or their CEO’s) have all the money and wealth in form of possessions. This creates an unhealthy unbalance in terms of power, wealth distribution and the well being for the planet (and everything on it). This means that due to the private powers; science, economy / finance and politics serve private interests. Not because of some evil master plan but because they HAVE to in order to survive, going against it means that corporates will simply move their business elsewhere or fire you as a researcher. This is very similar to the influence the church had in those same fields several hundreds of years ago. This is a problem. If you do not see this as a problem, maybe because you get a fat pay check; you are part of the problem.

    That’s the complete overview of the current situation and I would be happy with feedback on where I can improve my research and enhance my “NEUTRAL and HONEST” reflection of society and the pandamic. Thank you very much for your research and effort to inform us and thank you for reading this and your feedback.

    1. WST says:

      stopped reading after thus utter nonsense :
      “Well, that theory is debunked by Sweden who showed no significant excess deaths during the pandamic other than having a very weak 2019 flu season and thus having more susceptibles (risk group) alive at the time than normal.”

      The life expectancy in Sweden decreased in Sweden in 2020, SCB says :
      “Between 2012 and 2019, life expectancy increased in all education groups, while in 2020 life expectancy fell and in some groups was lower than in 2012.”

      You need a lot of premature deaths in all groups in order to move a large scale metric like life expectancy.

      https://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/sverige-i-siffror/manniskorna-i-sverige/medellivslangd-i-sverige/

    2. David says:

      Regarding your first point – by all means, continue with the vitamin D and keep healthy, but don’t expect it to help with Covid-19 (https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015043/full). It’s always problematic to overestimate our own knowledge, and in this case it’s also dangerous to those around us.
      As for your second point – Are lockdowns overkill? Are lockdowns expensive? The answer to both seems to be yes. Lockdowns are the worst solution to our problem, except for all the rest. It’s almost impossible to selectively protect at risk groups (See the case of Sweden).
      If you have a population that is serious about the other kinds steps you can take, you may be able to avoid them (check out the case of Taiwan).
      But when large parts of the population think that they know better, think that money is more important, or they don’t take the virus seriously, there doesn’t seem to be many options, if you don’t want you hospitals overrun.
      If you don’t want to be anti-vax don’t be. Don’t help them and don’t add to the confusion already out there.

      1. Jasper says:

        Thanks for your reply David. Well, I hear a lot vitamin D doesnt work against covid. Yes sure, it doesnt protect you against covid but T-cells do! T-cells need vitamin D and thus indirectly taking vitamin D does boost your immune system against covid.

        T-cells and covid:
        https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00367-7

        Vitamin D and viral infections:
        https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/9/2879/pdf#:~:text=Recent%20evidence%20has%20indicated%20that,the%20risk%20of%20recurrent%20infections.

        Recent study by Oxford: Calcifediol treatment and COVID-19-related outcomes
        https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgab405/6294179?fbclid=IwAR2lAol5xpCjCAuP0VJEx97ltt7whlUFQoqqjF_d7KJCRs3rtNVrKYQA38k

        So you’re telling me these doctors and researchers are all wrong?

    3. WST says:

      If you want to understand the effects of Swedish “herd immunity” policy you should compare Sweden’s deaths per million figure with it’s Scandinavian neighbours, sharing very similar population density, demographics and other cultural factors.

      Sweden 1,434 deaths/M
      Denmark 435 d/M
      Finland 127 d/M
      Norway 145 d/M

      Amazing we are still discussing the obvious nonsense of the success of Swedish “do nothing” policy.

      It’s not so surprising that Swedish parliament voted out the current government, surprisingly, everybody wearing a face mask, something that is still just recommended and in few circumstances, really a sign of defiance with the Swedish current health authority strategy.

      1. David says:

        I agree. How come none of the libertarians want to copy the social safety network or the government funded healthcare system?

      2. Jasper says:

        First off, thank you all for commenting. For me its really helpful to have a conversation and discuss these things rather than: “you’re not a doctor so shut up attitude”. So thank you all for that.

        When it comes to Sweden, they did not do any worse than other countries with a comparable amount of residents + age groups. Mind you that 2.7 million people are 65+ in Sweden compared to just 1.4 million of 45+(!) in Norway. So to count deaths per 1000 as see it as a valuable statistic is utterly wrong. I would have hoped for a bit better understanding of how to deal with statistics than just throwing random numbers out. So, that does not debunk anything; Sweden is the largest and oldest country in Scandinavia so of course they will have more covid deaths per 1000. Next to that, and this proves my point completely with regrads to lifestyle, eating habits, vitamins etc:

        https://genus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41118-021-00115-9/figures/3

        The USA is the worst performing country in this table. Is the USA known for healthy habits and diets? Or do we see a lot of obese people there? See, there is the point. Please show me with research and fact that Sweden did far worse than countries with a comparable population / age groups.

        1. David says:

          Correction – Noway is 16.9% and Sweden is 20.4% over 65. So x10 deaths per million is to be expected?
          It may be true that the US has lots of people with preexisting conditions, maybe more than other developed countries, and that these conditions contribute to mortality. In spite of this – there is no prof that vitamins can help COVID-19.

          1. Jasper says:

            David, I commented on the vitamin d subject but didnt come through yet. In short vitamin d is not a vitamin but a hormone and it is proven that T-cells need it to function. So are you telling me now that T-cells are unimportant for the immune system or do not fight against viral infections? You might wanna double check that because that is not what scientific literature tells me. I wont post link because the comment doesnt go through but I have lots of them….

          2. Jasper says:

            Also my whole point is that we focus on the wrong thing. Stopping covid to spread is almost impossible as you can see despite lockdowns and all that nonsense. The focus should be on the individual health of the population and their immune system. As you can clearly see, healthier countries outperform unhealthy countries by a lot. Good health saves lives, lockdowns do not.

          3. David says:

            First of all – the fact that there is a potential biological mechanism doesn’t mean that it works. That’s not the question. The question should be – does vitamin D help people fight of Covid-19? The answer does not seem to be yes (https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD015043/full). I do think that we can say that vitamin D is not the cure to Covid-19.
            It’s think that it’s safe to say that it’s better to be rich and healthy than sick and poor (I don’t have a citation, sorry).

            Shouldn’t the point be stopping preventable death?

          4. David says:

            By focusing on the health of the individual, you are leaving those with immune problems unprotected, to fend for themselves. Society can’t absolve itself of responsibility for the weakest.
            What is our responsibility to them, yours and mine? Are they at the mercy of those people don’t believe in Covid-19 and don’t vaccinate/wear a mask? Do you expect god to save them?
            Maybe that is the point. If we don’t have all the information and are wrong (and I am sure that we are all wrong, to some extent), in what way do you want to err?

          5. David Young says:

            Vitamin D is a vitamin. If it is a normal hormone in the body, then why supplement it? (responding to Jasper’s comment).

          6. Jasper says:

            @David, I don’t think you understand my point. I am saying that if you educate people to live healthy; there would be x amount LESS people with immunity problems or any other form of illnesses and thus less deaths – and thus most of the preventable deaths and hospitalizations are prevented from scratch; covid included. The covid deaths per country show that. You have been hypnotized by social distancing that you cant think of the root cause of the covid problem: 1. unhealthy population 2. a health system that isn’t prepared for an increasing older population and definitely not for pandemics or other emergencies that require immediate qualitative capacity. So in anyway we need more capacity but the extend of that depends on the overall health of the population. Millions of deaths a year can be prevented with the right education, guidelines and laws in place for cancer producing products such as candy, sugary drinks, fast food, cigarettes etc. Does that mean all needs to be banned? No. It means that if you tell people what is healthy at least they understand that drinking coke everyday literally kills them over time (for example). You are what you eat and how you life.

          7. David says:

            I understand you point, and I wish you good luck. My point is It’s not as simple as ‘eat healthier’ and you shouldn’t blame those that die for not taking care of themselves.

            How many people do you think could be saved by healthy food? More or less than with vaccines?
            It seems that the factor that contributes most to mortality is not dying from something else (also known as getting older). Being 10 years older contributes about as much as obesity or diabetes – or being a man (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7671522/pdf/pone.0241955.pdf).

          8. theasdgamer says:

            Vitamin D deficiency is correlated with poor covid outcomes. Vitamin D deficiency is also correlated with age. Vitamin D is essential to proper immune functioning and non-mild covid is in part an immune-dysfunction disease.

            I’m agnostic on vitamin D supplementation, but I do it.

            Elevated levels of IL-6 associated with low 25OHD and increased need for ventilation…age 66.1 +/- 14.1 years…all male

            https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06281-7

        2. WST says:

          Jesper, this is funny:
          “Mind you that 2.7 million people are 65+ in Sweden compared to just 1.4 million of 45+(!) in Norway.”
          – Norway is a smaller country, so you comparison does not say anything.
          “So to count deaths per 1000 as see it as a valuable statistic is utterly wrong.”
          – counting deaths per 1M is a standard way to compare between countries of different sizes. Thinks about it for a while….

          About age structure of the Nordic countries, % of the part of 65+ :
          Sweden 20.26%
          Norway 16.9%
          Denmark 19.42%
          Finland 21.1%

          So, it’s very similar .

          Gamer and your ramblings about migrants pushing Swedish figures, 19.7% of Swedish population is foreign born, if you count in born in Sweden with two foreign parents, it’s roughly 25%, same figure for Norway is …25%.

      3. theasdgamer says:

        Why compare it with its neighbors? There are many, many confounders between Sweden and it’s neighbors.

        immigration (1/4 are foreign born)…age disparity…population density…population size

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_Nordic_countries

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden

        Finland and Norway have less diversity.

        1. David says:

          What is your point? Are saying that you can’t compare anything?

        2. WST says:

          Why compare Sweden with other Nordic countries ?

          Because it’s the closest match for social/demo parameters, and other Nordic countries had very different policies.

          We have been through that already and you seem to think that it’s the “foreigners” that pushed up the figures, and implied non-whites….while the most impacted foreign-born population were retired Finns living in Sweden and these non-whites are generally much younger ….

          1. theasdgamer says:

            No, I was merely pointing out all the possible confounders I could think of.

            The human race will have to live with covid and it will be interesting to see the long term ramifications of all these non-therapeutic interventions and vaccines.

          2. David says:

            So you don’t want to compare Sweden to another country? Or your OK with the comparison and agree that Sweden had a terrible response? I’m confused

          3. theasdgamer says:

            David,

            Why restrict comparing Sweden with other nordic countries? Why not compare it with other countries that had strict lockdowns, like Peru?

          4. David says:

            I wouldn’t, but you can go for it.

            Peru seems to be almost the opposite to Sweden in so many indicators, such as demographics, economic and sociological situation, seasonality etc., in addition to the response to the pandemic.

          5. RobZ says:

            Regarding Peru:

            A government can pass lockdown rules but if they aren’t able to enforce them and the people ignore them, the rules will not be worth a lick.

  116. Jasper says:

    Why is my comment not posted? Is it moderated or being tagged as “spam”? I have put down a point of view backed with sources so it would be nice to have it on here… Would be nice if the moderators can have a look, thank you.

    1. Derek Lowe says:

      It went into the Spam bucket – the filter flagged it because most comments of that length (and with so many links) are trying to push Dubai timeshares, online casinos, or are offering to lengthen various body parts through herbal voodoo. It’s published now.

  117. Tom Maguire says:

    I am VERY late to this party but with myocarditis in the news I am wondering (as are we all) about rare, unexpected vaccine side-effects.

    With that in mind, I am focusing on this:

    “You certainly don’t have the real-infection situation of Spike-covered viruses washing along everywhere through the circulation.”

    Well, *something* seems to be creating unexpected problems, and the spike protein (and associated immune reactions) seems like the first place to look.

    So, per this paper, a vaccinated cell that dies can release debris, including partial spike proteins, into circulation:

    “6. Free-floating Spike proteins and ACE2 interactions

    When a vaccinated cell dies or is destroyed by the immune system, the debris may release a large amount of Spike proteins and protein fragments (free-floating Spike proteins).

    It is well known that SARS-CoV-2 uses ACE2 as a Trojan horse to invade target cells. Thus, interactions between free-floating Spike proteins and ACE2 of other cells are highly plausible mechanisms. As recently demonstrated for adenovirus-vectored vaccines, Spike proteins produced upon vaccination have the native-like mimicry of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein’s receptor binding functionality and prefusion structure [41].

    The native-like conformation of the Spike protein produced by vaccines has the potential to interact with ACE2, promote ACE2 internalization, and its degradation [42]. Of note, such phenomenon has been also observed in platelets [43]. Zhang and co-workers found that SARS-CoV-2 induced a time-dependent decrease in ACE2 levels in platelets, indicating the degradation of ACE2 upon ACE2 activation [43]. Spike protein induces a dose-dependent enhancement of platelet aggregation and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) release [43]. The subuni 1 of the Spike protein, but not subunit 2, is that binds to ACE2 of platelets thereby triggering platelet aggregation (Fig. 2 ) [43].”

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8084611/

    Is that true? And would it have been picked up by the imaging tests describing where the vaccine itself goes (I’d guess not.)

    1. Maria Cristina says:

      I totally agree that the question should be focused on what happen to the debris after T cells program death cells during apoptesis with mRNA vac and necrosis from SARCoV2.
      To my opinion, SARCoV2 serious clinical symptoms and nanolipid coated mRNA serious side effects are caused by free spike proteins inducing autoantibodies production and/or reactivating B cells. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00149-1

      1. Cassandra says:

        This is reason that the vaccine ‘treatment’ is likely to be worse than the disease. The disease is a result of immune related pathology in 99% +++ people rather than the virus doing the damage.

        1. RobZ says:

          You might be one of the people getting paid to spread nonsense in which case, I hope karma is a real thing.

          1. Old Novartian says:

            Rob, I’m pretty sure that crazies are ready, willing and able to spread crazy without any sort of recompense.

        2. Maria Cristina Privat says:

          Yes, it is good to note that human body can resist or recover from the virus infection with reported 98% recovery rate, but we have to understand that human body does not have the ability to reverse mRNA vac serious side effects particluarly auto immune and neurologic related disorders. Many people only look at the short and immediate side effects but most of the long term side effects are not observable right away, it may take 1 or more years because most of them are progressive and debilitating conditions.
          These are actually listed in the initial Pfizer Oct. 2020 report. .pg.16
          https://www.fda.gov/media/143557/download

          1. RobZ says:

            When Covid-19 doesn’t kill you, it’s quite likely to leave you with progressive debilitating conditions. The vaccine is quite unlikely to do that.

          2. WST says:

            A dear friend of mine had covid more the a year ago and thus young professional still can’t work intellectually more then 4 hours a day, is tiered, has often “brain fog” (inability to recall words or understand a message), shortness of breath or chest pain on effort. Two of my family members in their 40ties have similar symptoms. What will be their long term issues ? There are hundreds of thousands of people in this situation in EU and millions in the world. These are not very low frequency anecdotes you talk about.
            Are you aware of the study that “Study found high proportion of children with SARS-CoV-2 infection met clinical criteria for thrombotic microangiopathy”.
            What will be the long term effects of this risk ?

            You have lost a sense of proportion and relevance.

            “the virus infection with reported 98% recovery rate” yes, recovery from the viral infection, but as it’s observed, millions of adults and a lot of children show clinical side effects with unknown but worrying possible long term developments.

  118. nitram says:

    Also. Charles Hoffe recent statement could easily be debunked by doing d-dimer test before and after vaccination to see if there’s been any microclotting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.