Jump to content

Is this study evidence for ADE from Covid vaccine? [Answered: NO!]


BV63
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, swansont said:

That's not a link to peer-reviewed literature. You've already admitted you're not a scientist, so you have no credibility in making claims

Ok..CDC is enough?

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html

How mRNA Vaccines Work

To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.

 
  1. First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it.
  2. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection.
Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BV63 said:

Ok..CDC is enough?

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html

How mRNA Vaccines Work

To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies.

 
  1. First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it.
  2. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection.

Where's the part that says that immunity from having the disease is better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, swansont said:

Where's the part that says that immunity from having the disease is better?

Here is one. Perhaps there are others.

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

Igor explain what it means.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BV63 said:

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

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

 

This is totally garbled. First, non-neutralising antibodies also help against infection by marking the virus for destruction by phagocytes. So they are generally a good thing, not a bad thing. 

Secondly, partial escape of variants from previous immunity seems to mean that while people catch the virus in spite of being vaccinated, as I did recently, they don’t get very ill. Upon recovery, they are likely to have a broad-based immunity, deriving from having been infected. So there are some grounds for thinking that vaccination does a good job of blunting the impact of these newer variants, while building broader based immunity from people getting mildly infected. 

But you ignore all this in favour of promoting alarmist nonsense from cranks, using one argument after another, to suggest that vaccination is some kind of disaster, even after each one is shot down in turn, all the while professing innocence because you are not a scientist.

The obvious question is why, if you are not a scientist, you are so determined to ignore what mainstream medical opinion is saying,  focusing instead  on  fringe and  crank opinion in preference. Why is that? Why is it so important to you, personally,  that vaccination be shown to be a bad thing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, exchemist said:

The obvious question is why, if you are not a scientist, you are so determined to ignore what mainstream medical opinion is saying,  focusing instead  on  fringe and  crank opinion in preference. Why is that? Why is it so important to you, personally,  that vaccination be shown to be a bad thing? 

It's far more than mere vaccine hesitancy, isn't it? Especially the constant claims of "I'm not a scientist", which seemed designed to make the OP look like a concerned citizen. But concerned citizens don't ignore expert advice, especially when they ask for it so many times. This seems like a professional agenda, like someone is being paid to spread misinformation under the guise of a layman who's afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, exchemist said:

This is totally garbled. First, non-neutralising antibodies also help against infection by marking the virus for destruction by phagocytes. So they are generally a good thing, not a bad thing. 

Secondly, partial escape of variants from previous immunity seems to mean that while people catch the virus in spite of being vaccinated, as I did recently, they don’t get very ill. Upon recovery, they are likely to have a broad-based immunity, deriving from having been infected. So there are some grounds for thinking that vaccination does a good job of blunting the impact of these newer variants, while building broader based immunity from people getting mildly infected. 

But you ignore all this in favour of promoting alarmist nonsense from cranks, using one argument after another, to suggest that vaccination is some kind of disaster, even after each one is shot down in turn, all the while professing innocence because you are not a scientist.

The obvious question is why, if you are not a scientist, you are so determined to ignore what mainstream medical opinion is saying,  focusing instead  on  fringe and  crank opinion in preference. Why is that? Why is it so important to you, personally,  that vaccination be shown to be a bad thing? 

Ok! As i wrote i am looking for studies to confirm what i already know. That VAIDS is real. Hard to convince others otherwise. That ADHD meds will save peoples lives.

It´s just the truth but few will of course believe it without some sorts of scientific explanation.

 

Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BV63 said:

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

Exactly, that's why we need more guns to prevent death by guns...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BV63 said:

Ok! As i wrote i am looking for studies to confirm what i already know. That VAIDS is real. Hard to convince others otherwise. That ADHD meds will save peoples lives.

It´s just the truth but few will of course believe it without some sorts of scientific explanation.

It's a lie you're spreading: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaids-fakes/fact-check-vaids-is-not-a-real-vaccine-induced-syndrome-experts-say-no-evidence-covid-19-vaccines-cause-immunodeficiency-idUSL1N2UM1C7

Quote

“There is no phenomenon that I know of ‘Vaccine-induced immunodeficiency syndrome.’ It is not a real syndrome,” Donna Farber, chief of the Division of Surgical Sciences and Professor of Microbiology & Immunology at Columbia University, told Reuters via email.

Quote

Likewise, Stephen Gluckman, MD, a professor of Infectious Diseases in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and the medical director of Penn Global Medicine, told Reuters “VAIDS” is “absolutely not” a real condition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BV63 said:

Ok! As i wrote i am looking for studies to confirm what i already know. That VAIDS is real. Hard to convince others otherwise. That ADHD meds will save peoples lives.

It´s just the truth but few will of course believe it without some sorts of scientific explanation.

 

And you “know” these two - quite separate - things how?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, exchemist said:

And you “know” these two - quite separate - things how?

Goddess Kali have told me many times. Wrote that before.

Chronic Covid would be like AIDS i suppose. Damage to T-cells i read.

Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BV63 said:

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

And the death rate from being unvaccinated is even higher than that.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/

For the month of March, “unvaccinated people 12 years and older had 17 times the rate of COVID-associated deaths, compared to people vaccinated with a primary series and a booster dose,”

And if you look at the graphs, it's almost 17x for people 65+ and boosted, and even bigger for people 50-64 and boosted

So the cost of this N-antibody immunity is a markedly higher chance of dying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BV63 said:

Goddess Kali have told me many times.

Chronic Covid would be like AIDS. Damage to T-cells i read.

Well if you are relying on Goddess Kali for information, why do you bother making ill-informed and disingenuous  arguments on a science forum? 

Or are you just trying to generate more search engine hits for your favourite cranks, charlatans and misinformation specialists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ok a suggestion. Can you help finding out why ADHD meds will work for VAIDS?

I assure you it is the truth. So you can help lots of people and perhaps also make lots of money.

I read this but have no idea if that is why some ADHD meds will help for VAIDS.

 

"Some adhd meds are methyl donors, boosting methylation in the body protects a person from many viruses because it tightens up the dna and slows replication of everything"

Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BV63 said:

I assure you it is the truth.

You have no credibility. Nobody trusts you. You're not a scientist, but want to assure us you know more than scientists. Those we do trust tell us your truth is a lie. There's little to be learned from liars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BV63 said:

Ok a suggestion. Can you help finding out why ADHD meds will help?

I assure you it is the truth. So you can help lots of people and perhaps also make lots of money.

I read this but have no idea if that is why some ADHD meds will help for VAIDS.

 

"Some adhd meds are methyl donors, boosting methylation in the body protects a person from many viruses because it tightens up the dna and slows replication of everything"

Asked and answered. The last sentence is just stupid.

Also regarding natural immunity:

Quote

[...] In contrast, Omicron breakthrough infections induce overall higher neutralization titers against all VOCs. Our results demonstrate that Omicron infection enhances preexisting immunity elicited by vaccines but, on its own, may not confer broad protection against non-Omicron variants in unvaccinated individuals.

Note that breakthrough infections refers to vaccinated individuals who get infected. In other words, the highest neutralization titers was found in individuals who were vaccinated and got infected with Omicron.

Suryawanshi, R.K., Chen, I.P., Ma, T. et al. Limited cross-variant immunity from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron without vaccination. Nature (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04865-0

You need to learn to follow evidence to come to a conclusion, not the other way round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BV63 said:

Ok a suggestion. Can you help finding out why ADHD meds will work for VAIDS?

I assure you it is the truth. So you can help lots of people and perhaps also make lots of money.

I read this but have no idea if that is why some ADHD meds will help for VAIDS.

 

"Some adhd meds are methyl donors, boosting methylation in the body protects a person from many viruses because it tightens up the dna and slows replication of everything"

You are now recycling crap that has already been amply dealt with.

VAIDS is a myth.

ADHD meds only help people with ADHD, by reducing the ADHD symptoms that make them more liable to catch the virus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

...

8 minutes ago, exchemist said:

You are now recycling crap that has already been amply dealt with.

VAIDS is a myth.

ADHD meds only help people with ADHD, by reducing the ADHD symptoms that make them more liable to catch the virus. 

It would not be the first time scientists find that drugs can be used for other problems than the drugs were approved for.

I read a recent study that ADHD meds may help for Alzheimer to.

Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Phi for All said:

It's far more than mere vaccine hesitancy, isn't it? Especially the constant claims of "I'm not a scientist", which seemed designed to make the OP look like a concerned citizen. But concerned citizens don't ignore expert advice, especially when they ask for it so many times. This seems like a professional agenda, like someone is being paid to spread misinformation under the guise of a layman who's afraid.

Yes, I must say I am becoming rather suspicious of the motives of our poster.

32 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Asked and answered. The last sentence is just stupid.

Also regarding natural immunity:

Note that breakthrough infections refers to vaccinated individuals who get infected. In other words, the highest neutralization titers was found in individuals who were vaccinated and got infected with Omicron.

Suryawanshi, R.K., Chen, I.P., Ma, T. et al. Limited cross-variant immunity from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron without vaccination. Nature (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04865-0

You need to learn to follow evidence to come to a conclusion, not the other way round.

The bit about Omicron and breakthrough infection is particularly interesting - and encouraging. It starts to look as if the future may be one in which repeated infections, rendered mild by vaccination, may enable the population to tolerate endemic Covid without significant severe illness.

Though I suppose that one day an evolutionary jump to a nastier version is always possible. At which point a new vaccine can be produced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Though I suppose that one day an evolutionary jump to a nastier version is always possible. At which point a new vaccine can be produced.

A big challenge is that so many folks are infected at any given time that we get tons of lineages and sub-lineages at a rate where new vaccines might not keep up. It is possible that over time there will be few main lineages sticking around, which would be more similar to what is happening with influenza. But right now we are still in mostly unchartered territory. 

It also depends a lot on the potential of immune evasion. I.e. how many mutations can the virus undergo to evade recognition, but still remain infectious.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Phi for All changed the title to Is this study evidence for ADE from Covid vaccine? [Answered: NO!]
2 hours ago, BV63 said:

It would not be the first time scientists find that drugs can be used for other problems than the drugs were approved for.

Very true, but such instances are the result of professional observation that hints at such a possibility and is then demonstrated (or refuted) through a series of carefully designed tests. It is not taken as an established fact just because someone makes an unsubstantiated claim in a random blog.

I am also curious how you as "I'm not a scientist" seems so proficient at producing bits and pieces of research that allegedly support your view point, yet seem blindly unaware of the vast volume of publications that contradict your claims. It's almost as if you were being fed material by someone with an agenda. Can you explain that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phi for All said:

It's far more than mere vaccine hesitancy, isn't it? Especially the constant claims of "I'm not a scientist", which seemed designed to make the OP look like a concerned citizen. But concerned citizens don't ignore expert advice, especially when they ask for it so many times. This seems like a professional agenda, like someone is being paid to spread misinformation under the guise of a layman who's afraid.

By the way, this poster, under the name jb71, seems to be spamming identical crap on other science forums: http://www.thescienceforum.com/health-medicine/51094-geert-vanden-bossches-covid-predictions.html#post635485

which tends to support the suspicion that the poster is not acting in good faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Anti-vax evangelist on a mission to spread lies, half-truths and doubt. 

A “Social Jaundice Warrior,” as it were 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, exchemist said:

By the way, this poster, under the name jb71, seems to be spamming identical crap on other science forums: http://www.thescienceforum.com/health-medicine/51094-geert-vanden-bossches-covid-predictions.html#post635485

which tends to support the suspicion that the poster is not acting in good faith.

Just want to help. Is it not obvious that this mass vaxx will lead to disaster? Like giving everyone on the planet antibiotics at the same time although 99% have a natural protection.

 

Viruses mutate and the protection from the shots is very narrow.

"The goal, they say, should be "to reduce infection of and transmission from vaccinated individuals," and to "reduce the possibility of variant selection in vaccinated individuals."

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/01/health/uk-scientists-covid-variant-beat-vaccines-intl/index.html

"The approved COVID-19 vaccines, on the other hand, all target a single protein — and two of them only a short stretch of that protein. If mutations change the shape of that protein, it could easily make our vaccines less effective. Studies of this question are still underway, but the initial evidence is worrying.

At least some of our vaccines seem to be somewhat less effective against some coronavirus strains now in circulation. Focusing on a single protein contributed to the record-breaking pace of COVID-19 vaccine development. But it also produced narrowly focused vaccines that could falter in the face of viral variation."

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo-news/viruses-variation-and-vaccines/

Edited by BV63
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.