The vaxx prevent production of antibodies for new variants

~ Yes indeed. Other countries have identified this months ago and I suppose the U.S. is now forced to "spill the beans" on obvious flaws in this "vaccine " of confusion. I believe Denmark concluded the covid-19 injection actually prevents natural immunity and has ceased vaccinations.
Apparently the masks, cloth bandannas and Covid vaccine all are equally "effective " ... '

 

Sleazy politics isn't science.

 

Tell your dear leaders that. They're the ones who push their agenda driven pseudoscience.

 

You've got that backwards.

 

Aren't you proud of the guy you voted for through his hands up in the air and declared that there was nothing the federal government could do for covid-19?

After he promised you that he would eradicate it, if you just voted for him....

 

Yes, he's done a lot better than I expected.

Btw, you babble.

 

Your expectations must be so low that a micrometer looks like a surveyor's wheel.

 

He put the pandemic team back together, and they made progress. He kept millions, a lot of them children, from living in the streets, and with some help from Putin NATO is strong again. Speaking of the beast, he didn't play kissy face with Putin. That's not just Trump (but mostly), a number of presidents tried to get Putin to play nice, but that was never going to happen.

Way better than I expected...

 

~ Of course. That is why Russia is now at war with Ukraine. '

 

Yeah looks like it.



How the injections destroy immune system. Vanden Bossche explain this in his new paper.

https://www.voiceforscienceandsolid...og/predictions-gvb-on-evolution-c-19-pandemic


Why are C-19 vaccinated people no longer able to rely on relevant innate immune cells when circulating variants become resistant to the neutralizing capacity of the vaccinal Abs?


"Neutralizing anti-S Abs have strong affinity for SC-2 as they are primarily directed at immunodominant epitopes within the S-RBD. Because of their high affinity, these Abs can easily outcompete innate polyreactive IgM Abs that recognize self-like glycans on the surface of CoV. In case there is sufficient match between the immunodominant RBD epitopes and the vaccine-induced Abs, this does not pose a problem to controlling viral infection and spread. In the absence, however, of sufficient virus-neutralizing capacity of vaccine-induced Abs (due to resistance of the virus to potentially neutralizing anti-S Abs), these innate polyreactive IgM Abs can still be outcompeted by non-neutralizing, infection-enhancing anti-NTD Abs that are equally elicited by all S-based C-19 vaccines (see fig. 3).

As the enhancing NTD site is relatively conserved (i.e., shared among all different SC-2 variants), the enhancing Abs will be recalled upon re-exposure with new immune escape variants and bind with disproportionally high affinity to S if the neutralizing capacity of the vaccinal Abs towards the circulating variant is low.

Unless the functional capacity of the relevant innate immune cells has been sufficiently trained before
vaccination such as to produce relevant polyreactive IgM of higher affinity, the infectious and
pathogenic behavior of SC-2 in vaccinees will be largely determined by their vaccine-induced enhancing Abs, especially as those will continuously be boosted by virtue of the dominant circulation of the vaccine-resistant variant."

 

Play the odds often enough and you eventually lose. Every new vaccine comes with a risk of a 'rare' reaction... not so rare if you take enough.

 

But yet you do not believe in the government telling you what drugs you cannot take.

So you want the government to be able to force you to take certain drugs but you don't want them to tell you can't take any drugs....

Does anyone here but me see the damn contradiction?

 

Your risk is always the same. If you toss heads 500 times in a row your odds of tossing heads on the next throw is still 50/50

 

But if you toss 500 coins, you'll toss ~250 heads instead of maybe 1.

If a vaccine has a 1% adverse reaction rate, but you take 100 of them, you're chances of an adverse reaction are not 1% anymore...

 

Yes, it is. With each shot in your fantasy scenario, there is a 1% chance.

The actual chance a serious reaction is more like 0.00001%

What about serious side effects?
Serious side effects from vaccines are extremely rare. For example, if 1 million doses of a vaccine are given, 1 to 2 people may have a severe allergic reaction.
https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/basics/safety/side-effects/index.html

And that doesn't mean they died. It means they had a serious reaction.

 

No ****, Sherlock. I'm using the Sherlock idiom to disparage all those who, for example, vehemently promote multiple boosters (which mess with our immune systems every time a booster is given). I'm not disparaging you or your Original Post.

 

Lots of folks speculated prior to this study that this would be the case. The obvious danger here is that if another similar and more lethal variant is developed in one of those NIH funded labs, well, we'll start really seeing folks die... But isn' that the plan? Ask Bill Gates. He seems pretty interested in population control these days.

 

What does "effective" here mean? The subsequent variants are far less lethal, so clearly the original vaccine isn't stopping folks from becoming infected, and frankly, where is the study data that suggests the having had the previous vax was better? The cited studies above do seem to contradict your assumption here.

 

Sad but true, the shots are bioweapons, and with half the population now inoculated, the proverbial horse is out of the barn.

 

"Currently, 78% of covid cases are in fully vaccinated people, as are 67% of hospitalizations."
"There aren’t many deaths, but if we go back to the end of February, 70% of “covid deaths” are fully vaccinated people. "
Vaccination Blues | Power Line (powerlineblog.com)

 

and
the UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report of Week 8 in 2022, one can surmise that more than 70% of COVID infections and hospitalizations were in the vaccinated, while more than 85% of the deaths were in the vaccinated.
Negative Vaccine Efficacy - Dr. Paul Alexander sounds the alarm | Columnists | thedesertreview.com

 

I don't believe you are correctly interpreting that.

You state that there is blocking going on.

But, I don't see any of that identified in the cell cite.

It's always going to be the case that viruses will mutate, making vaccinations less effective. That's why we have yearly reformulations of flu vaccines, for example.

But, the idea that a person is better off if they don't get vaccinated is not supported by what you have posted.

 

not true, but can keep saying that

as far as a vaccinated person getting covid, sure, happens all the time, just they are vaccinated, so their immune system has been trained to fight it when they do get it

vaccine are not like Condoms to covid, you can still get it

 

Brilliant retort einstein

70% of the deaths from COVID are among the vaccinated. 85% in the UK. The training doesnt work very well.

 

link?