This preprint paper out of China, and the easier twitter thread by one of the authors, an immunologist at Peking University, is interesting. The researchers look for, and find, more evidence that supports the long known concerns in vaccinology against coronaviruses; those of immune imprinting (or original antigenic sin, OAS) and antibody dependent enhancement (ADE).
Our NZDSOS immunologist has this comment:
A great paper and twitter thread. As far as I am concerned this was always the most likely outcome and this paper pretty much nails it. Vaccines helped drive escape mutants (variants) and OAS, or antigenic imprinting, has rendered us incapable of neutralising them. Basically also confirms what we also already know, a bivalent vaccine will be useless. God help us if the virus refinds virulence/pathogenicity as I would expect. This may end in ADE for everyone, if it hasn’t already for the vaccinated! This is why I wrote to MPs and Medsafe in Sept 2021 trying to alert them to early evidence that the vaccine was doing more harm than good – short term gain for long term pain!
…at least our unvaxxed won’t have Wuhan Hu.1 spike imprinting, more likely BA.1 or BA.2. Nevertheless ample evidence that natural infection to BA.1 did not protect against BA.2 infection and neither against some of the more recent variants. However, the Qatari study suggests unvaxxed but naturally infected, regardless of variant, are 97.3% protected from severe disease on reinfection with any variant and that it is robust and durable while those vaxxed and infected have rapidly waning immunity against both infection and severe disease. This was recently also confirmed with kids (Lin et al).
Which leads me to my biggest problem with the Cao paper, they only looked at those who had been triple vaxxed with presumably inactivated Wuhan. What the study shows is that initial imprinting is definitely a problem but what of those who have never seen Wuhan Spike? I strongly suspect as implied by Cao et al that newer variants will evolve to escape even natural immunity.
Immunologists have been warning us of this doomsday scenario, that vaccinating during the covid pandemic, may eventually result in a really lethal variant emerging. Left alone, without the immune pressure of vaccinated people pushing back, endemic respiratory viruses do gradually weaken over time. Not so with the Covid-19 pandemic, when, suddenly, accepted public health wisdom was sidelined. If it hadn’t been, original Wuhan C19 could have come and gone through the world over 3 to 4 months and we’d be long done with it.
We also note the cohorts studied in the Cao paper used 3 doses of Sinovac, a traditional inactivated protein vaccine. However, it is likely that mRNA vaccines, being even more specific to just the SI receptor domain of the original Wuhan spike protein, would further provoke viral mutation convergence towards sites that then defeat neutralisation by the narrow band of gene agent-induced antibodies.
The Lin study in the NEJM quoted above showed that vaccinated children derive negative benefits when subsequently exposed to Covid after a rapid decline in initial vaccine immunity. The paper tries to gloss over this with a reassuring call for boosters, to resolve this inconvenient truth, but the facts are plain to see.
So, in English, there is a lot to worry about, and further confirmation of warnings from multiple immunologists, that these injections weaken immune memory, worsen covid illness and reduce the flexibility of future responses against other variants as they arise, which are provoked by the injections themselves. Nice one, world, as 5.3 billion people have now received at least one dose, allegedly.
We knew already that children’s immunity following injections drops very quickly, and finally the UK has banned injections below the age of 12, but Denmark has gone further and is not recommending boosters below age 50.
Based on research by immunologists, the Danish health minister has admitted they were mistaken to vaccinate children and apologised to the public. We note with some relief that our government has not pushed the jab on our littlies thus far, though it is awaiting approval by Medsafe. We suspect the paperwork is approved but the political decision awaits. We hope they are being influenced by the fuss we made over the appalling Pfizer study ‘in support’ of the application recently approved by the FDA.
As noted, the UK has backtracked on jabs for kids, but are not saying it is because of the 22% rise in deaths in the 5 -9 year olds since the rollout began. However, the Expose.UK online news service extracted this graph from official Office of National Statistics data:
The Expose notes the sudden jump from a stable baseline and asks the following pertinent question:
Is it just a coincidence that the UKHSA has decided to pause the roll-out to young children now that we know deaths among the age group have increased by 22% since they were offered the Covid-19 injection?
The same outlet has been shining a persistent light on UK data that has been proving the vaccinated comprise most of the burden of serious disease and death from covid. Their latest investigation though, is alarming to say the least, and they say it has prompted an investigation by the European Medicines Agency. Deaths in children 0 to 14 are up by 1600% on baseline, since the vaccination campaign. Since the Exposé released their findings it seems the EMA has tried to alter the figures but the internet archive’s Wayback machine caught them out. Please read the article for the full story.
Please also read our article on kids cardiac issues with the jab for more detail on recent studies.