In Mississippi, and on the Coast, about 3 in 10 people have chosen to be vaccinated. And despite government and social pressure to do so, half the country is not vaccinated, with many being undecided. While many can articulate their reasons not to be vaccinated, others simply confess that something just doesn’t seem right.
Here is how I try to provide insight for my patients in helping them make the decision.
There has now developed a difference of opinions among leading virologists, vaccinologists, and immunologists, on the status of the pandemic with regard to vaccinations. The majority view recommends forging ahead with the investigational vaccines, as quickly as possible, to get people to develop immunity to the virus. Their voices prevail loudly. However, there is a minority view that says not so quickly.
Of the minority view are two of the more prominent scientists/doctors, Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA technology, and Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, a vaccine designer and super-credentialed specialist in all three fields of virology, vaccinology, and immunology. They and others (see below) are of the opinion that the current investigational vaccines are appropriate but are being used at the wrong time. When investigational vaccines are used in the MIDDLE of a pandemic, instead of before its arrival in the community, it has an undesired and potentially adverse effect on the body’s natural immune system in defending the body. As a result, it is and will cause more variants (mutations) to be selected out for virulence and transmission within the community at large. How so?
It takes about six weeks from the day a person is vaccinated for their immune system to become mature to the point that it is FULLY able to defend the body against the virus (COVID) to which it has been vaccinated. During this time, should this person, “young vaccinee”, get infected with the virus, their forming antibodies act as an irritant, not yet a preventative, to the virus’s ability to enter the body’s cell. You probably know of someone who got infected between the first and second shot. The virus therefore, in an attempt to survive, is induced to mutate, or change the molecular structure of the protein spike (the key to the cell’s lock) that enables it to enter the body’s cell. It is this internal challenge to the virus that stimulates its impetus and need to mutate. (Living things want to live). In a mass vaccination program during a pandemic there occurs MANY of these windows of opportunities (immaturing antibodies) during which this phenomenon will be exacerbated. I believe we're seeing this happen before our eyes as the Delta variant, having come to town with 3 mutations, is now reported by the lab on my patients this week, to now have 4 mutations.
How is it the investigational vaccine acts as an irritant to the virus? It’s because it does not completely eradicate the virus. As such it is being referred to now as a “leaky” vaccine, as it allows for a vaccinee to be infected by a variant. How does this happen? The COVID investigational vaccine produces a specific antibody ONLY to the spike protein on the original (Wuhan) virus. The antibodies formed are SPECIFIC for the Wuhan virus spike protein, but NOT ANY OTHER variant spike protein. The shot’s mRNA instructions to the body’s cell is to produce the spike protein of the Wuhan virus, NOT the spike protein of a variant or other virus. It is to this particular spike protein that a specific antibody is generated to defend against the original virus when it comes. This is the answer to the question why vaccinated people are becoming infected, and not that they are deficient in antibodies which they may be as well.
The hope of the majority view is that the body will continue to generate large amounts of antibodies (to the original Wuhan virus) that might somehow overwhelm any arriving variants. This remains to be seen I think, and we should celebrate if this happens. But at this time the double-vaccination strategy that was supposed to return us all to normal is not effective in preventing infection, resulting in work/school disruption. The stark reality is that vaccinated people are becoming infected.
We are told the vaccination at least can keep you from being hospitalized. This may be true in many cases but with respect to a vaccine mandate it won’t keep you from spreading/shedding the virus and infecting other vaccinated and unvaccinated people! It is indeed interesting that the vaccine that was supposed to bring to rest the COVID transmission is now a vaccine that allows for being infected by any one of the variants, resulting in spreading the virus and/or being quarantined from work. Should you get this? Only you can make that decision. As you ponder the decision, know that Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA technology, has reported this week that the viral load in the nasopharynx of vaccinated persons is as great as that in unvaccinated persons and is the earliest sign of vaccine immune escape in a vaccinee, an evolving condition in which at some point a variant will not respond to ANY vaccine! Is he correct? Only time will tell. Should you take the vaccine anyway? You decide.
Yes, there are many unvaccinated people in the hospital, the implication by some is that no vaccinees are in the hospitals. I find this hard to believe. Of those vaccinees hospitalized, is their condition related to, or not, having been vaccinated? Bleeding and clotting disorders? Premature heart attacks? Stroke? Infections? Ectopic pregnancies? Miscarriages? And so on. Is this information available?
If you’ve been infected by the COVID virus and have recovered, you have the natural immunity; there is no need to get vaccinated. There is NO DATA, NO STUDY, that shows a person with natural immunity would benefit from being vaccinated. There are opinions to the contrary, including Dr. Fauci's, but the fact remains that there is no objective evidence, NO DATA, NO STUDY, that shows that vaccines benefit a person with natural immunity.
What about the booster? For the past several months, Pfizer is the only one in the world that has been pushing for a booster shot. Only Pfizer. Not the WHO, CDC, or FDA. In June, when the vaccination rate in the U.S. began plateauing (ycharts.com) it was shortly thereafter the Delta variant came to town. It was then when Pfizer realized their vaccine was not going to be a preventive to the disease (“the war has changed”). In my opinion, when they realized this, knowing that when the data rolled in that would confirm its failure as a preventive, they presented a deflection. And what could be a better deflection from the reality and its attending criticisms than demanding that a booster be given because it can “build up more antibodies.” They kill two birds with one stone (the decreasing number of vaccinations & the criticism of its failure as a preventive).
This explanation flies in the face of world expert criticism that the reason the vaccine is failing is not so much that antibodies are waning, but rather that the vaccine was made to narrowly attack only one of many variant spike proteins in the new family of coronaviruses. It produces a specific antibody to a specific spike protein on the original (Wuhan) virus and not to any other spike proteins! For the same reason, it ain’t worth a darn against the hepatitis, HIV, or measles virus, or any other virus, including a variant coronavirus. Why? Because these viruses lack the specific spike protein to which the vaccine has been made! Matter of fact, this week Dr. Fauci announced and explained how and why the monoclonal antibody infusion is effective. His explanation that the specificity of a single (mono) antibody is more effective in attaching to the cell’s receptor sites is the perfect corollary to affirming the explanation by the minority view as to why the vaccines are failing to be preventives!!
Interestingly, and notwithstanding the clinical matter, Pfizer wields a lot of influence in government and they have a lot of money. Five days after President Biden, out of the blue, announces the need for a booster shot (Aug 18), the FDA approves the Pfizer vaccine (Aug 23). Are the dates coincidental or connected? Maybe. Are the actors connected? Maybe. Have any of these actors ever admitted to a personal quid-pro-quo transaction? Has Pfizer ever been charged, convicted, and fined 2.3 billion dollars for illegally and deceptively promoting the use/indications of four of its drugs (Bextra, Geodon, Zyvox, Lyrica) to doctors and the public, notwithstanding bribes? Federal prosecutors have called Pfizer “a repeating corporate cheat,” their words.
A calculating or underhanded man or corporation can certainly do good, but with observations like these can we ask who truly has the public’s interest at heart? Can one ask why they should take more of what is failing? And can one be blamed for thinking that something doesn’t seem right?
Chastising and demeaning people who are reluctant to take this vaccine is I think misplaced to say the least, if not arrogant. Vaccine reluctancy is not unwarranted. Besides, there’s no one who can provide data, or certainty, that any one of a number of latent side effects will not manifest itself. Historically, when we see acute side effects in a medication or product, the latent side effects ALWAYS come. This I think vindicates those who are reluctant to be vaccinated by this particular vaccine as they consider their own personal risk/benefit comfort. Authoritarian measures by government or businesses to induce people to the contrary will only cause social and individual discomfort in the long run – and probably to a greater degree than we want to see. One patient and a married couple have already shared with me this week that they are preparing to change work places or jobs should their employer invoke a vaccination mandate.
In our haste to develop this vaccine it’s becoming obvious that we may well be paying the piper, sooner or later, for having skipped the steps that enhance safety and reduce adverse effects. Only time will tell.
Interview Dr. Philip McMillan with Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche (explanation of the vaccine risk)
Interview Dr. Bret Weinstein with Dr. Vanden Bossche (Weinstein “interprets” his academic explanation of the vaccine risk)
Interview with Dr. Ryan Cole #Stop the Mandate (pathologist/autopsies on the post-vaxed)
Interview with Dr. Robert Malone
www.FLCCC.net (for early and prophylactic treatment of COVID from doctor-researchers on the front lines)
Any interview with Dr. Peter McCullough (early treatment of COVID)