Skip to main content

Coronamonomania Lasts Forever, Part 229

By November 2, 2023Commentary

I think the bulk of the evidence suggests that the immune response derived from prior infection is better than that provoked by vaccination.  Here is yet another study, bolstering that view, finding that among household contacts, prior infection appeared more protective than vaccination alone, although the combination seemed to offer the most protection against infection.  But over the study period, an astounding 60% of contacts contracted an infection. In all cases, the level of protection declined by six months.  It is common sense that the body is going to develop a better immune response from an actual infection than from a vaccine, especially a vaccine that doesn’t fully mimic the actual pathogen.  (Medrxiv Study)

This study traces the level of immune response to CV-19 in a sample of the US population over time.  As we know, there were very high levels of undetected infections compared to detected ones throughout the epidemic.  Policymakers ignored this, but those undetected infections were obviously non-serious and were contrary to the approved terror narrative designed to build support for masking, lockdowns and other futile suppression measures.  In July 2020, after the first wave of the epidemic, seropositivity (a CV-19 immune response, either from infection or vaccination) was under 5%, but the authors’ initial study at that time showed that this rate was five times the official reported infection rate.  In a follow-up period, as of March of 2021 the rate was 36% and at 12 months it was 89%.   At these points there was a mix of infection-induced and vax produced responses, although the March one was likely almost all infection-induced.  There was some regional, age and other factor variation, but these largely disappeared by the last survey.   (Medrxiv Paper)

Excess deaths is a difficult topic to get an accurate analysis on.  You have to know the real trend before a major event affecting deaths, by cause.  Higher deaths in one relatively short period may be followed by fewer in a succeeding period, a pull-forward effect of those with short expected lives in any event.  You have to identify how many deaths occurred and by what cause.  One underappreciated factor is where someone died.  This can help you understand what may have led to a change in death trends, up or down.  During the epidemic, fear of going to medical facilities and the difficulty in getting routine care may have worsened the condition of many patients suffering from serious chronic diseases.  If people don’t go to the ER with heart attack symptoms or call an ambulance, you may see more heart disease deaths at home.  The same is true in regard to hypertension or serious diabetes.  Putting off cancer screenings means that people are diagnosed at later stages, and may result in more cancer deaths, but because the disease is more serious, more of those deaths may occur in a hospital.  So you need to understand deaths by cause and that may affect where deaths occur.  This post by the doctors behind Trust the Evidence explores the role of place of death in understanding excess deaths.  (TM Post)

This is a technical but interesting article about why there are differences in the immune response to exposure to CV-19.  This affects not only the likelihood that a person becomes “infected” but how serious any subsequent disease may be.  Some of these differences are regional in nature, for example East Asians appear to have stronger responses, likely due to more frequent exposure to coronaviruses similar to CV-19.  What is fascinating is how complex and varied the immune system cell composition can be from person to person.  Prior cytomegalovirus infection was linked to some of these differences.     (Nature Article)

This study from Italy studied neurological adverse events from the CV-19 vax.  Note first, as the authors did, that far more of these events are reported in connection with a CV-19 infection that with the vax.  Also note, that none of the “events” resulted in hospitalizations or deaths.  Most of the people who reported issues had multiple other health conditions.  The responses were self-reported and included in a neurological event were headaches and insomnia, in fact these were far and away the most commonly reported “adverse” events, both of which obviously likely had nothing to do with actual vaccine administration.  There is no control group, and in studies where symptoms in a control group are assessed, they are found to be widely prevalent.  So if 10% of people say they had a headache in the days following a vax, 10% of the control group might say that as well.  So, sorry VSNs, but a big nothing-burger here.  (Vax. Study)

Join the discussion 4 Comments

  • Larry Fitz says:

    Nice review and collection of info. As for excess deaths….I think the troubling statistic are the excess deaths in younger age group adults (25-50) where the death rate normal fairly low. As for immune response….I suppose many people are like me (Moderna in March-April 2021 + Omicron infection Feb 2022), so there is really no need for any further boosters regardless of any new variants. The good read for today linked from ZH is:
    My understanding is that the basis for all CV GoF research (pre-2019) was to discover the key regions of Spike or any other viral sequences allowing human infection from bats/other animals + sequences related to more lethality or transmissibility (transgenic mice and replication potential in cell lines)……with the idea being that a preventive vaccine could be developed in advance. Very crazy thinking. Plus, if such a sequence or CV variant was “discovered” (e.g. furin cleavage site)….it would be necessary to keep it totally secret to prevent it being used by a hostile party. To have such work done by researchers in public universities, farmed out thru “middle-men” like Eco Heath Alliance, involvement with pharma, and collaborating with Chinese groups…….this is all crazy, irresponsible stuff.
    Isn’t is so amazing how quickly Pfizer and Moderna were able to design and test the vaccine after the original CV sequence became available in Jan 2020? It’s like some people knew about everything in advance. You think?
    Supposedly Wuhan was working the bat angle to mix various CV strains to tease out potential new variants (Darwinian approach) for human infection. However, it seems more likely that in 2018-19 the “engineered variants” were shipped to Wuhan from the US collaborators for testing, because it could be done so much more cheaply and with fewer safety restrictions compared to doing this “final testing” work in the US. You think? The Chinese did the “grunt work”, while the technically difficult work was US-based. My take.
    Then, there is the mystery of Omicron, which appeared to originate in SA and shows little ancestry to the CV strains in circulation elsewhere in 2021. Very strange, and no intellectual curiosity. It’s like there was a high infectivity/low lethality CV variant already discovered to keep the ball rolling and get those last 100Ms vaccine doses used ($$$)….the CV “soft landing.”

    • Kevin Roche says:

      I don’t know how to respond to insane conspiracy delusions like this, strongly recommend you seek help or find something positive to do with your life. this ain’t it

  • Larry Fitz says:

    None of my comments are conspiracy theories.
    There was a specific logic behind the NIH, Eco Health Alliance, and others to pursue GoF research on CV. It was to locate portions of CV responsible for animal-human transmission + infectivity + develop a vaccine + eliminate any animal vectors (eg. bats) that might be likely agents of human infection. You should look into this yourself. How do you explain the furin cleavage site insertion other than deliberate human genetic engineering. Researchers were “messing” with CV prior to 2020.
    There is no conspiracy theory as to the basis of the collaboration and publication history of WIV and US collaborators. They shared technology (transgenic mice having the human ACE2 receptor + useful cell Ines to propagate CV strains). Batlady trained at UNC w/ Baric prior to continuing this work at WIV. Look at the publication and grant (DARPA) history yourself. There is every reason to believe that the WIV work on CV was not restricted to bats and other potential vectors. Why won’t the NIH release all the grant details, progress reports, and other information at the request of Sen. Rand Paul? WIV was in an excellent position to test CV strains and constructs produced elsewhere and shipped to them. Why was so much CV experimental research data removed from US databases at the request of the Chinese in 2020? Think it through yourself.
    Omicron. There are valid analysis of the sequences of the various CV strains infecting humans since 2020. There is evidence that Omicron has a separate origin at an earlier time than 2020 based on DNA sequence and basic concepts of viral sequence evolution over the time period involved. Not a conspiracy theory at all.
    Be careful how you label any open discussion of CV as “conspiracy theory”, otherwise you are in the same category as Fauci.

    • Kevin Roche says:

      still completely delusional as well as full of non-facts. CV-19 was not an intentional epidemic. The specific bug may have come from the Wuhan lab, but there is absolutely no reason to believe the epidemic was intentional.

Leave a comment