Case rates as published by UK Health Security Agency (previous PHE) strongly suggest that the more innate antibodies (Abs) are trained, the more they resist competition from either poorly functional anti-S(pike) Abs generated from asymptomatic/ mild infection (in the unvaccinated), or from vaccinal Abs (in the vaccinated).
1. Our immune system starts out naive to pathogens. As we are exposed over years, both the innate system & the adaptive system are exposed & "train" to recognize various pathogens.
2. The more the innate immune system has been trained on coronaviruses (via head colds), the more it focuses antibodies on the nucleocapsid antigens & the less it focuses on spike proteins.
So for children, whose innate immune systems are relatively naive, the vaccines *appear* to have greater VE (vaccine effectiveness) than for adults, whose innate immune systems have decades of training on routine coronaviruses.
The anti-S antibodies produced by the adaptive immune system in response to vaccines suppress the innate immune system.
Exposure to c-19 variants that have mutated around the spike will leave children more vulnerable, since they don't have well developed innate immunity to prevent breakthrough to the acquired immune system. And the acquired immune system antibodies are poor fits for the mutated spikes.
"This will likely entail waves of more serious disease in vaccinees and, sadly, prompt the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein. I’ve already warned that such an unfortunate decision will be at risk of unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death (2), primarily in vaccinated children and those who’ve been vaccinated before their innate Ab-secreting B cells acquired sufficient CoV experience"
This last paragraph has me worried for children. It suggests that because their young naive immune system didn't have enough exposure to "train" on it's own before being vaccinated for this form of coronavirus, they may be at more risk for severe disease than older generations with a better trained inate immune system yet still suppressed by adaptive training.
So for now the VE appears high in children (they were fine before so of course it 'appears' that way), but with variants, maybe Omicron, it may not be the case.
Am I understanding correctly?
*tin foil me made note to research the numbers of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in kids aged 5-11 before vaccinations for them officially started because I feared exactly this. Not for any scientific reasons, im not a scientist, just the nervous feelings I've had with how things have been handled (or not) this entire time.
I do agree with GVB that we are playing with fire and need to hit the brakes. By the time their 3 part Omicron vaccine is even ready we will have already peaked and fallen out of it. A new vaccine would just pick it all back up again.
Agree, 100%. For children it is all risk, from the toxic injection side effects, from its damagr to the innate immune system, and greater susceptibility to covid.
A couple months ago, the son of my dog vet asked me ehat I thought of the vaxes for children. I answered with a single word. Criminal.
It's terrifying to hear this is even a minor possibility for children, let alone a potentially inevitable one, and on a daily basis witness how careless those we rely upon are behaving.
What if we didn't get this vax, or any flu shots and also were born in the time US kids only got a handful of childhood vaccines instead of what, over 70 now? Do you think we would have better immunity than those who got a lot of vaccines?
Which is precisely why the pharmaceutical industrial complex is champing at the bit to get 5 year olds (soon it will be newborn, just wait) vaccinated. They want to get their poisonous concoctions into their bodies so that their immune systems are incapable of fighting off even the mildest cold. The human race is in serious jeopardy folks.
The good thing, unless I really am misunderstanding, is that Dr. Vanden Bossche basically seems to have one overarching message that the data is, unfortunately, seeming to support. Did you hear his interview with Del Bigtree on The Highwire? Del was the "GVB for Dummies" guy for me.
I did see him on The Highwire. I asked my husband about GVB's post today and he said, "Bottom line, Omicron will likely not lead to herd immunity." Antigenic original sin amongst the jabbed will interfere. Is this about right?
Yes Fauci is still talking about the vaccines leading to herd immunity. His misinformation makes the Dirty Dozen look like George "I cannot tell a lie" Washington!
I'm not a scientist but have read hundreds of papers. This is pretty much the basic version! Read, re-read and cross-reference. I understand what he is saying and I'm obviously not an expert.
It's a wall of text so I recommend copying into Word and breaking up into easily digestible paragraphs.
No doubt. I find much of Geert's writing to be very dense. That could just be me or his writing style. His sentence structure may just be too complex for my smooth brain.
I think what Dr. Bossche does is tries to put out the most crystallized version of the statement or argument in the smallest number of characters. Like a highly compressed file.
Now, we are left with the work to decompress it, and sometimes, it's taken me months to understand what. Hah
I've found myself wishing this before too, but then remind myself he's a scientist trained to write this way and primarily speaking/writing to other scientists who understand everything he says exactly as written. Maybe in hopes these possibilities gain more exposure within that community and are truly considered and debated amongst them??
I know he's writing to us lay people too as we all deserve to understand the possibilities here, but in the end there are limits with what we can do with his work.
I guess we could aggregate and demand the CDC, FDA, and other health agencies publicly debate it but its highly unlikely to happen. Other scientists coming together have greater power holding these agencies feet to the fire to demand these conversations happen.
In the end I just dont think we're his primary target. So I excuse his complex words and theories, as we all do, and continue to read and re-read and ask questions until I kind of think I get it. Lol.
I'd love to watch him and others sit down with Fauci et all and publicly discuss all of this. The fact they choose to use mandates with force under the guise of choice, ridicule and silence scholars and scientists who have concerns, and aren't transparent with anything at all, is exactly why we have so much hesitation, fear, and misinformation.
Imagine if there was open public discourse among scientists and beaurocrats and altruistic efforts to solve our present circumstances? We wouldn't be here. It would be over.
Ah, this is interesting. The official explanation for the discrepancy you describe here shown in the recent data from the U.K. seems to be that the populations who were most recently jabbed (2 shot regimen or boosted) are least likely to suffer breakthrough infections. If I understand you correctly, you are saying these "vaccines" are most effective in preventing covid in those whose innate immune systems are the least trained. But this is precisely the population in whom we should not be trying to prevent covid.
This reminds me of insights from "On interventionistas and their mental defects" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb:
1. "Complex systems do not have an obvious one-dimensional cause and effects mechanisms, and that under opacity, you do not mess with such a system";
2. "One should not mess with a system if the results are fraught with uncertainty, or, more generally, avoid engaging in an action if you have no idea of the outcomes".
3. "Those who don’t take risks should never be involved in making decisions."
This is an excellent summary of the true nature of the vaccination problem that often gets overlooked when we think about risk. Just the possibility that this might be true means any reasonable benefit risk analysis does not pass the sniff test.
Would using prophylactic Ivermectin prevent infection by Sars-CoV-2 and the development of natural immunity or would it be better to wait and institute early treatment with IVM if infection occurs?Thank you GVB for all you are doing.
One thing I would find useful is more discussion of the notion of "training" the innate immune system. I take it that the distinction between innate and adaptive immune systems is not as clean as the terms would suggest, given that presumably "training" of the innate immune system is itself a form of adaptation?
Can you explain here this statement: "...the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein ...unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death". The link to ref. 2 does not work. Will it be because of OAS? Or the mRNA jab adverse reactions? Thanks!
I think he means the exact same mirror situation will happen as UK and India experienced post rollout. The mild version of the virus was wiped out in a matter of weeks through mass vaccination and the worst versions (Alpha and Delta) completely took over as they were just waiting in the wings to get competitive advantage of mismatched antibodies to the more virulent strains when omicron is attacked (which is presumed to be milder).
"Omicron is attacked" = Mass vaccination against the specific variant will wipe out omicron and give every other variant that wanted a competitive advantage a fully susceptible population sitting on poorly matched antibodies or unresolved asymptomatic infections when omicron was removed with matching updated vaccines (basically, repeat of the wuhan virus vaccine mistake)
I should say more transmissible rather than more virulent. Since Delta and Alpha were more transmissible without necessarily altering any obviously virulence recognizable genes. The enhanced transmission itself can end up being higher morbidity and mortality due to healthcare support being finite resource.
Wow-😲 "This will likely entail waves of more serious disease in vaccinees and, sadly, prompt the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein. I’ve already warned that such an unfortunate decision will be at risk of unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death (2), primarily in vaccinated children and those who’ve been vaccinated before their innate Ab-secreting B cells acquired sufficient CoV experience)"
What impact might this have on individuals whom had covid-19 and 60 days later received their first MRNA injection (followed by second)? Did they acquire sufficient CoV experience? Or is their innate system bonding to the virus outcompeted by vaccinal AB’s?
First off, I am trying to interpret Dr. Geert's thesis, regardless of whether he is right or not fully right, my representation of his thesis might be incorrect itself. So here's an attempt:
Dr. Bossche is saying two separate kinds of immune defenses are competing with each other adaptive immune (acute infection and vaccination) and the innate immune defense is multi specific and not tightly binding though capable of "training" with each encounter it has with the virus. This training is not highly specific enough and takes multiple exposures to get right. On the other hand, the adaptive immune response is highly specific to whatever caused disease (vaccine or real infection). However, there is a caveat, with Coronaviruses, because they are so common, the body has a somewhat of a "middle" ground type of adaptive immune response which Dr. Bossche calls the the short lived spike protein directed antibodies. This specific type of immune response will happen in those who have had an asymptomatic infection, but not real disease.
Now. He is saying, that initially, the first several weeks, these asymptomatic infections will lead to "sub-optimal" short lived antibody titers that will be used by the virus later on in the coming weeks to get some kind of enhanced reinfection. This will happen within 5-10 weeks of the first asymptomatic infection. The reason he thinks this happens is because the constant re-exposure to virus in the vicinity will make this kind of short lived antibodies which should normally fade away, get constantly boosted. This constant boosting through repeated exposure is not good for herd immunity because these antibodies, although not high in titers, are far more spike protein specific than innate immune antibodies which are more general to coronaviruses than just omicron. This means, the opportunity for the innate immune response is diminished by this other antibodies which will ultimately lead to some kind of severe disease in a proportion of the population. Reacting to this, people will update the vaccine to match omicron, and then this will unleash a tornado of variants that were waiting to attack but the field was never cleared for them (no competitive advantage against omicron unless you introduce omicron blocking vaccine). Since vaccinated children will not have had a chance to develop good training against coronaviruses due to lack of exposures, the only children who will withstand the new variants are those who were not sitting on mismatched antibodies. That is-> Unvaccinated/Uninfected with good innate immunity. The rest will be highly vulnerable for either non-trained innate immunity, poor innate immunity, mismatched vaccinal antibodies induced for a variant that's not in circulation. This can lead to ADE where immunocompetent vaccinated children might shed virus that others who are vaccinated may not be able to withstand since the infectious pressure maybe too high for those who are seropositive with other antibodies or who no longer have great innate immunity to attack with multi specific antibodies all the variants that come at them (as most people who get older are).
In your particular case. If you were not re-infected in 60 days, you have not developed long lived antibodies from natural infection. The vaccine antibodies maybe useful or useless depending on whether we roll out an omicron specific variant vaccine and when we do that, what variants are out there, waiting to take over the reigns. If it's Delta or something like that, then most vaccinated maybe safer. If it's something else, like Pi variant, then all bets are off.
(all my speculation and probable misunderstandings of Dr. Geert's thesis)
Another paper showing higher viral load in Newly vaccinated, suggesting Profs theory has merit. Look at the CT value of those infected right after vaccination compared to those who were unvaccinated or double vaccinated long time ago. (Long Term Care facility study during Alpha Variant infections right after vaccination in December)
Note, the infections in seropositive people from days 14-20 was as high are 342% more than those who remained unvaccinated after infection.
"Table S2. Mean Ct values from all available PCR-positive results, by days since the first vaccine dose."
There's a post-first dose period of 28 days where you get low white blood cells and are more likely to infected by many things (including Covid) or have dormant viruses reactivate.
That's been the suggestion, have you come across any definitive studies showing this to be case. I've come across a few showing the exact same pattern (sometimes attenuated) with dose 2 as well.
Here's a very shocking outbreak where almost all the cases happened in dose 2 period when they panicked and started second dosing/vaccinating care home residents when a staff tested positive.
Alex Berenson has written about this. I think he was the one who said it happened in 90 countries. He said it turned small nos. of infections into huge numbers in Mongolia and Vietnam IIRC. Can't recall if it was in his Substack or his erstwhile Twitter feed.
B. Innate antibodies generated from prior infections.
C. Vaccine induced antibodies.
2. Anti-S Abs generated from asymptomatic/mild infection create immature antibodies which also suppress the immune system.
3.Children have immature immune systems which can be trained more readily. Meaning they generate antibodies more readily but they have a more focused immune system subsequently.
4. Try ignoring the bracketed words in complex sentences.
Geert, can you kindly provide some references to evidence the existence of "poorly functional anti-S(pike) Abs generated from asymptomatic/ mild infection"? I am really struggling to find this concept in the literature. I have asked an immunologist (and vaccine developer) from a renownedacademic institution who says he knows no such phenomenon.
"Asymptomatic disease is known to lead to a short duration of anti-S Ab titers (3, 4). However, due to the high level of infectivity of Omicron, re-exposure to the virus is highly likely to occur with a timeframe that is short enough to coincide with elevated anti-S Ab levels. Consequently, dominant circulation of Omicron would ultimately make vaccinees more frequently susceptible to disease, whereas fewer and fewer unvaccinated individuals would be susceptible to contracting C-19 disease as a result of innate immune training upon viral exposure. "
Viral dynamics and antibody responses in people with
asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection - Abstract supports one aspect of Dr. Vanden Bossche's thesis of reinfection upon repeat exposure.
"Over 40% of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) COVID-19 patients were asymptomatically infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the immune responses of these asymptomatic individuals is a critical factor for developing the strategy to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we determined the viral dynamics and antibody responses among 143 asymptomatic individuals identified in a massive screening of more than 5 million people in eight districts of Wuhan in May 2020. Asymptomatic individuals were admitted to the government-designated centralized sites in accordance with policy. The incidence rate of asymptomatic infection is ~2.92/100,000. These individuals had low viral copy numbers (peaked at 315 copies/mL) and short-lived antibody responses with the estimated diminish time of 69 days. The antibody responses in individuals with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection is much longer with the estimated diminish time of 257 days. These results imply that the immune responses in the asymptomatic individuals are not potent enough for preventing SARS-CoV-2 re-infection, which has recently been reported in recovered COVID-19 patients. This casts doubt on the efficacy of forming “herd-immunity” through natural SARS-CoV-2
infection and urges for the development of safe and effective vaccines."
The Second Paper: Different Innate and Adaptive Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Infection of Asymptomatic, Mild, and Severe Cases
Relevant Sections on Asymptomatic and NK cells:
"Antibodies do not undergo further improvement by introduction of somatic mutation. Thus, constitutive IFN type I secretion and ready-to-use antibodies may control viral infection in bats without the need of adaptive immune responses. For this reason, coronaviruses and other viruses remain endemic in bats, without damaging the host (107). Asymptomatic humans may behave like bats, controlling the infection thanks to NK cells and antibodies. The adaptive immune response is strongest in patients with severe disease, following the extensive tissue damage caused by the uncontrolled inflammatory reaction."
--
" The increase of the ratio between Neutrophils (NLR) or Monocytes and lymphocytes (MLR), mainly caused by the loss of lymphocytes, is an indicator of severe disease (3), but does not change in less severe forms when lymphocytes numbers are still maintained (Figure 1B). We propose that the monocyte to NK ratio (MNKR) and the levels of specific IgG, IgA and IgM Innate and Adaptive Immune-Phenotype in COVID-19
antibodies in the serum may be more sensible early markers of disease evolution. In particular, low level of antibodies in the first two weeks after diagnosis and increase of the MNKR may indicate patients at risk for increased severity of disease. "
Hard to read this. Please split into smaller paragraphs. I didn't see the bigger conclusion: Vaccinees will be the breeding ground for the next very pathogenic variant after this Omicron which may have been released by China to provide cover, thinking it will build herd immunity. How did Omicron go into Deep Freeze then suddenly appear?
I really want to understand this. Is there a commenter who can do a "Geert Vanden Bossche For Dummies" (English major) translation for me. Thanks!
I'm taking it 1 paragraph at a time.
1. Our immune system starts out naive to pathogens. As we are exposed over years, both the innate system & the adaptive system are exposed & "train" to recognize various pathogens.
2. The more the innate immune system has been trained on coronaviruses (via head colds), the more it focuses antibodies on the nucleocapsid antigens & the less it focuses on spike proteins.
So for children, whose innate immune systems are relatively naive, the vaccines *appear* to have greater VE (vaccine effectiveness) than for adults, whose innate immune systems have decades of training on routine coronaviruses.
The anti-S antibodies produced by the adaptive immune system in response to vaccines suppress the innate immune system.
Exposure to c-19 variants that have mutated around the spike will leave children more vulnerable, since they don't have well developed innate immunity to prevent breakthrough to the acquired immune system. And the acquired immune system antibodies are poor fits for the mutated spikes.
In the meantime, older vaccinees have traded robust innate immunity for failing spike immunity.
So vaccinating children leaves the pool of unvaxxed adults too small to confer herd immunity.
Thank you!
"This will likely entail waves of more serious disease in vaccinees and, sadly, prompt the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein. I’ve already warned that such an unfortunate decision will be at risk of unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death (2), primarily in vaccinated children and those who’ve been vaccinated before their innate Ab-secreting B cells acquired sufficient CoV experience"
This last paragraph has me worried for children. It suggests that because their young naive immune system didn't have enough exposure to "train" on it's own before being vaccinated for this form of coronavirus, they may be at more risk for severe disease than older generations with a better trained inate immune system yet still suppressed by adaptive training.
So for now the VE appears high in children (they were fine before so of course it 'appears' that way), but with variants, maybe Omicron, it may not be the case.
Am I understanding correctly?
*tin foil me made note to research the numbers of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in kids aged 5-11 before vaccinations for them officially started because I feared exactly this. Not for any scientific reasons, im not a scientist, just the nervous feelings I've had with how things have been handled (or not) this entire time.
I do agree with GVB that we are playing with fire and need to hit the brakes. By the time their 3 part Omicron vaccine is even ready we will have already peaked and fallen out of it. A new vaccine would just pick it all back up again.
Agree, 100%. For children it is all risk, from the toxic injection side effects, from its damagr to the innate immune system, and greater susceptibility to covid.
A couple months ago, the son of my dog vet asked me ehat I thought of the vaxes for children. I answered with a single word. Criminal.
It's terrifying to hear this is even a minor possibility for children, let alone a potentially inevitable one, and on a daily basis witness how careless those we rely upon are behaving.
It is truly criminal.
But unvaccinated children and adults would not face increased risk?
No more risk to them than before. Assuming we are
not in some way immunocompromised, our innate immune systems are already working fully.
What if we didn't get this vax, or any flu shots and also were born in the time US kids only got a handful of childhood vaccines instead of what, over 70 now? Do you think we would have better immunity than those who got a lot of vaccines?
Which is precisely why the pharmaceutical industrial complex is champing at the bit to get 5 year olds (soon it will be newborn, just wait) vaccinated. They want to get their poisonous concoctions into their bodies so that their immune systems are incapable of fighting off even the mildest cold. The human race is in serious jeopardy folks.
The good thing, unless I really am misunderstanding, is that Dr. Vanden Bossche basically seems to have one overarching message that the data is, unfortunately, seeming to support. Did you hear his interview with Del Bigtree on The Highwire? Del was the "GVB for Dummies" guy for me.
I did see him on The Highwire. I asked my husband about GVB's post today and he said, "Bottom line, Omicron will likely not lead to herd immunity." Antigenic original sin amongst the jabbed will interfere. Is this about right?
Using a non sterilizing(leaky) "vaccine" will never lead to herd immunity.
TPTB are trying to correlate 80-90% vaccination rates as if it means herd immunity.
Australians are so "proud" of their high vax rate-OMG
Yes Fauci is still talking about the vaccines leading to herd immunity. His misinformation makes the Dirty Dozen look like George "I cannot tell a lie" Washington!
That's what I'm understanding.
I will try to watch. I also have a hard time trying to understand. It is beyond my knowledge. Have the same issue with Robert Malone.
I'm not a scientist but have read hundreds of papers. This is pretty much the basic version! Read, re-read and cross-reference. I understand what he is saying and I'm obviously not an expert.
It's a wall of text so I recommend copying into Word and breaking up into easily digestible paragraphs.
Thank you. I find myself aching for paragraph breaks too.
No doubt. I find much of Geert's writing to be very dense. That could just be me or his writing style. His sentence structure may just be too complex for my smooth brain.
He needs to use more paragraphs, this is a wall of text. Constructive criticism. :)
I think what Dr. Bossche does is tries to put out the most crystallized version of the statement or argument in the smallest number of characters. Like a highly compressed file.
Now, we are left with the work to decompress it, and sometimes, it's taken me months to understand what. Hah
I really wish you would put a paragraph explaining this in layman's terms so we know what you are saying? I'm completely lost by the 2nd paragraph. :(
for fear of reprisal, I second that!
I've found myself wishing this before too, but then remind myself he's a scientist trained to write this way and primarily speaking/writing to other scientists who understand everything he says exactly as written. Maybe in hopes these possibilities gain more exposure within that community and are truly considered and debated amongst them??
I know he's writing to us lay people too as we all deserve to understand the possibilities here, but in the end there are limits with what we can do with his work.
I guess we could aggregate and demand the CDC, FDA, and other health agencies publicly debate it but its highly unlikely to happen. Other scientists coming together have greater power holding these agencies feet to the fire to demand these conversations happen.
In the end I just dont think we're his primary target. So I excuse his complex words and theories, as we all do, and continue to read and re-read and ask questions until I kind of think I get it. Lol.
I'd love to watch him and others sit down with Fauci et all and publicly discuss all of this. The fact they choose to use mandates with force under the guise of choice, ridicule and silence scholars and scientists who have concerns, and aren't transparent with anything at all, is exactly why we have so much hesitation, fear, and misinformation.
Imagine if there was open public discourse among scientists and beaurocrats and altruistic efforts to solve our present circumstances? We wouldn't be here. It would be over.
Okay lets read this again and again.
I am!
Ah, this is interesting. The official explanation for the discrepancy you describe here shown in the recent data from the U.K. seems to be that the populations who were most recently jabbed (2 shot regimen or boosted) are least likely to suffer breakthrough infections. If I understand you correctly, you are saying these "vaccines" are most effective in preventing covid in those whose innate immune systems are the least trained. But this is precisely the population in whom we should not be trying to prevent covid.
This reminds me of insights from "On interventionistas and their mental defects" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb:
1. "Complex systems do not have an obvious one-dimensional cause and effects mechanisms, and that under opacity, you do not mess with such a system";
2. "One should not mess with a system if the results are fraught with uncertainty, or, more generally, avoid engaging in an action if you have no idea of the outcomes".
3. "Those who don’t take risks should never be involved in making decisions."
https://medium.com/incerto/on-neo-cons-and-their-mental-defects-d12685585b11
That sums it up!
2&3 seem to be in some degree of conflict.
This is an excellent summary of the true nature of the vaccination problem that often gets overlooked when we think about risk. Just the possibility that this might be true means any reasonable benefit risk analysis does not pass the sniff test.
Would using prophylactic Ivermectin prevent infection by Sars-CoV-2 and the development of natural immunity or would it be better to wait and institute early treatment with IVM if infection occurs?Thank you GVB for all you are doing.
Does this mean all the vaxxed children are doomed?
The diagrams aren't showing up here (yet?) but I was able to find them at the link.
One thing I would find useful is more discussion of the notion of "training" the innate immune system. I take it that the distinction between innate and adaptive immune systems is not as clean as the terms would suggest, given that presumably "training" of the innate immune system is itself a form of adaptation?
Dear Dr. vanden Bosche,
Can you explain here this statement: "...the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein ...unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death". The link to ref. 2 does not work. Will it be because of OAS? Or the mRNA jab adverse reactions? Thanks!
I think he means the exact same mirror situation will happen as UK and India experienced post rollout. The mild version of the virus was wiped out in a matter of weeks through mass vaccination and the worst versions (Alpha and Delta) completely took over as they were just waiting in the wings to get competitive advantage of mismatched antibodies to the more virulent strains when omicron is attacked (which is presumed to be milder).
"Omicron is attacked" = Mass vaccination against the specific variant will wipe out omicron and give every other variant that wanted a competitive advantage a fully susceptible population sitting on poorly matched antibodies or unresolved asymptomatic infections when omicron was removed with matching updated vaccines (basically, repeat of the wuhan virus vaccine mistake)
I should say more transmissible rather than more virulent. Since Delta and Alpha were more transmissible without necessarily altering any obviously virulence recognizable genes. The enhanced transmission itself can end up being higher morbidity and mortality due to healthcare support being finite resource.
Thanks for all the replies. I'd like to hear Dr. vanden Bosche's explanation though.
Me too. lol. He rarely replies and thanks for the question as it is on my mind as well. Just guessing.
Wow-😲 "This will likely entail waves of more serious disease in vaccinees and, sadly, prompt the deployment of mass vaccination with updated vaccines that match the antigenic constellation of Omicron’s S protein. I’ve already warned that such an unfortunate decision will be at risk of unleashing a tsunami of severe disease and death (2), primarily in vaccinated children and those who’ve been vaccinated before their innate Ab-secreting B cells acquired sufficient CoV experience)"
Hi AlmostWrong,
What impact might this have on individuals whom had covid-19 and 60 days later received their first MRNA injection (followed by second)? Did they acquire sufficient CoV experience? Or is their innate system bonding to the virus outcompeted by vaccinal AB’s?
I keep reading that it's the latter. :-(
First off, I am trying to interpret Dr. Geert's thesis, regardless of whether he is right or not fully right, my representation of his thesis might be incorrect itself. So here's an attempt:
Dr. Bossche is saying two separate kinds of immune defenses are competing with each other adaptive immune (acute infection and vaccination) and the innate immune defense is multi specific and not tightly binding though capable of "training" with each encounter it has with the virus. This training is not highly specific enough and takes multiple exposures to get right. On the other hand, the adaptive immune response is highly specific to whatever caused disease (vaccine or real infection). However, there is a caveat, with Coronaviruses, because they are so common, the body has a somewhat of a "middle" ground type of adaptive immune response which Dr. Bossche calls the the short lived spike protein directed antibodies. This specific type of immune response will happen in those who have had an asymptomatic infection, but not real disease.
Now. He is saying, that initially, the first several weeks, these asymptomatic infections will lead to "sub-optimal" short lived antibody titers that will be used by the virus later on in the coming weeks to get some kind of enhanced reinfection. This will happen within 5-10 weeks of the first asymptomatic infection. The reason he thinks this happens is because the constant re-exposure to virus in the vicinity will make this kind of short lived antibodies which should normally fade away, get constantly boosted. This constant boosting through repeated exposure is not good for herd immunity because these antibodies, although not high in titers, are far more spike protein specific than innate immune antibodies which are more general to coronaviruses than just omicron. This means, the opportunity for the innate immune response is diminished by this other antibodies which will ultimately lead to some kind of severe disease in a proportion of the population. Reacting to this, people will update the vaccine to match omicron, and then this will unleash a tornado of variants that were waiting to attack but the field was never cleared for them (no competitive advantage against omicron unless you introduce omicron blocking vaccine). Since vaccinated children will not have had a chance to develop good training against coronaviruses due to lack of exposures, the only children who will withstand the new variants are those who were not sitting on mismatched antibodies. That is-> Unvaccinated/Uninfected with good innate immunity. The rest will be highly vulnerable for either non-trained innate immunity, poor innate immunity, mismatched vaccinal antibodies induced for a variant that's not in circulation. This can lead to ADE where immunocompetent vaccinated children might shed virus that others who are vaccinated may not be able to withstand since the infectious pressure maybe too high for those who are seropositive with other antibodies or who no longer have great innate immunity to attack with multi specific antibodies all the variants that come at them (as most people who get older are).
In your particular case. If you were not re-infected in 60 days, you have not developed long lived antibodies from natural infection. The vaccine antibodies maybe useful or useless depending on whether we roll out an omicron specific variant vaccine and when we do that, what variants are out there, waiting to take over the reigns. If it's Delta or something like that, then most vaccinated maybe safer. If it's something else, like Pi variant, then all bets are off.
(all my speculation and probable misunderstandings of Dr. Geert's thesis)
This enhanced reinfection is real phenomenon with high viral shedding. A paper with source: https://almostwrong.substack.com/p/reinfections-or-something-worse?justPublished=true
Another paper showing higher viral load in Newly vaccinated, suggesting Profs theory has merit. Look at the CT value of those infected right after vaccination compared to those who were unvaccinated or double vaccinated long time ago. (Long Term Care facility study during Alpha Variant infections right after vaccination in December)
Note, the infections in seropositive people from days 14-20 was as high are 342% more than those who remained unvaccinated after infection.
"Table S2. Mean Ct values from all available PCR-positive results, by days since the first vaccine dose."
Mean Ct value Unvaccinated 26·55
https://www.thelancet.com/cms/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00289-9/attachment/b198fecd-4791-4edc-afae-fc2732126ee3/mmc1.pdf
Mean Ct value Vaxxed 0-27 days 25·91
The lower cycle threshold means more virus.
There's a post-first dose period of 28 days where you get low white blood cells and are more likely to infected by many things (including Covid) or have dormant viruses reactivate.
That's been the suggestion, have you come across any definitive studies showing this to be case. I've come across a few showing the exact same pattern (sometimes attenuated) with dose 2 as well.
Here's a very shocking outbreak where almost all the cases happened in dose 2 period when they panicked and started second dosing/vaccinating care home residents when a staff tested positive.
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.27.2100626
Alex Berenson has written about this. I think he was the one who said it happened in 90 countries. He said it turned small nos. of infections into huge numbers in Mongolia and Vietnam IIRC. Can't recall if it was in his Substack or his erstwhile Twitter feed.
Some tips. (Not sure if right.)
1. There are 3 types of anti bodies.
A. Short lived abs from mild infections.
B. Innate antibodies generated from prior infections.
C. Vaccine induced antibodies.
2. Anti-S Abs generated from asymptomatic/mild infection create immature antibodies which also suppress the immune system.
3.Children have immature immune systems which can be trained more readily. Meaning they generate antibodies more readily but they have a more focused immune system subsequently.
4. Try ignoring the bracketed words in complex sentences.
Both of the reference links are not working
Geert, can you kindly provide some references to evidence the existence of "poorly functional anti-S(pike) Abs generated from asymptomatic/ mild infection"? I am really struggling to find this concept in the literature. I have asked an immunologist (and vaccine developer) from a renownedacademic institution who says he knows no such phenomenon.
He provided these references for "short duration of anti-S Ab titers (3, 4)" in the piece before his last.
3 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC8107204/pdf/41392_2021_Article_596.pdf 4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7772470/pdf/fimmu-11-610300.pdf
--
"Asymptomatic disease is known to lead to a short duration of anti-S Ab titers (3, 4). However, due to the high level of infectivity of Omicron, re-exposure to the virus is highly likely to occur with a timeframe that is short enough to coincide with elevated anti-S Ab levels. Consequently, dominant circulation of Omicron would ultimately make vaccinees more frequently susceptible to disease, whereas fewer and fewer unvaccinated individuals would be susceptible to contracting C-19 disease as a result of innate immune training upon viral exposure. "
The First Paper:
Viral dynamics and antibody responses in people with
asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection - Abstract supports one aspect of Dr. Vanden Bossche's thesis of reinfection upon repeat exposure.
"Over 40% of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) COVID-19 patients were asymptomatically infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the immune responses of these asymptomatic individuals is a critical factor for developing the strategy to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we determined the viral dynamics and antibody responses among 143 asymptomatic individuals identified in a massive screening of more than 5 million people in eight districts of Wuhan in May 2020. Asymptomatic individuals were admitted to the government-designated centralized sites in accordance with policy. The incidence rate of asymptomatic infection is ~2.92/100,000. These individuals had low viral copy numbers (peaked at 315 copies/mL) and short-lived antibody responses with the estimated diminish time of 69 days. The antibody responses in individuals with persistent SARS-CoV-2 infection is much longer with the estimated diminish time of 257 days. These results imply that the immune responses in the asymptomatic individuals are not potent enough for preventing SARS-CoV-2 re-infection, which has recently been reported in recovered COVID-19 patients. This casts doubt on the efficacy of forming “herd-immunity” through natural SARS-CoV-2
infection and urges for the development of safe and effective vaccines."
Sorry for Spamming, just trying to learn along with everyone else here.
The Second Paper: Different Innate and Adaptive Immune Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Infection of Asymptomatic, Mild, and Severe Cases
Relevant Sections on Asymptomatic and NK cells:
"Antibodies do not undergo further improvement by introduction of somatic mutation. Thus, constitutive IFN type I secretion and ready-to-use antibodies may control viral infection in bats without the need of adaptive immune responses. For this reason, coronaviruses and other viruses remain endemic in bats, without damaging the host (107). Asymptomatic humans may behave like bats, controlling the infection thanks to NK cells and antibodies. The adaptive immune response is strongest in patients with severe disease, following the extensive tissue damage caused by the uncontrolled inflammatory reaction."
--
" The increase of the ratio between Neutrophils (NLR) or Monocytes and lymphocytes (MLR), mainly caused by the loss of lymphocytes, is an indicator of severe disease (3), but does not change in less severe forms when lymphocytes numbers are still maintained (Figure 1B). We propose that the monocyte to NK ratio (MNKR) and the levels of specific IgG, IgA and IgM Innate and Adaptive Immune-Phenotype in COVID-19
antibodies in the serum may be more sensible early markers of disease evolution. In particular, low level of antibodies in the first two weeks after diagnosis and increase of the MNKR may indicate patients at risk for increased severity of disease. "
Frontiers in Immunology | www.frontiersin.org 12
December 2020 | Volume 11 | Article 610300
Carsetti et al.
The limitation they say their study had is that the asymptomatic infections were in younger people. But for Geert's thesis, this may not be relevant.
Hard to read this. Please split into smaller paragraphs. I didn't see the bigger conclusion: Vaccinees will be the breeding ground for the next very pathogenic variant after this Omicron which may have been released by China to provide cover, thinking it will build herd immunity. How did Omicron go into Deep Freeze then suddenly appear?