It could be retuned via epigenetic manipulation. (By combination drugs or small molecules that influence the right signaling pathways) But that's opening Pandora's Box even more.
However the enormous scale of the experiment will lead to more huge experiments. Grab your popcorn and watch.
It could be retuned via epigenetic manipulation. (By combination drugs or small molecules that influence the right signaling pathways) But that's opening Pandora's Box even more.
However the enormous scale of the experiment will lead to more huge experiments. Grab your popcorn and watch.
Haha, in keeping with your constructive comment above - we're well past this being just a respiratory coronavirus, dummy.
And not sure I've ever heard of Pandora's Box where it mattered how much the box was open. The fact is it is open - and many people may be utterly screwed because of that - even the unvaxxed. So what are the solutions you (pl) suggest? "Grab the popcorn and watch"...sounds like a call for ignoring the issues and advocating for a no treatment route like they did with people who got covid early on.
What I'm suggesting is not running out and giving AdV vectored or any other jabs to everyone, it's that first of all we can't consider them as all being equal - re-read the quote I posted from the Irrgang paper. "This induction of IgG4 antibodies was not observed after homologous or heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with adenoviral vectors."
There's plenty of other evidence out there for non-specific effects (NSE) of vaccines (e.g. BCG vaccine on other viral infections) and if we see it here (with adenovirus having positive NSE and/or mRNA negative NSE w/regard to spike IgG4) should that data not be evaluated (or other data re-evaluated with that in mind)? Along those lines, I was re-acquainted with a paper (going down the rabbit whole w/Igor's post on the IgG4 matter) that suggested mrna "reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses" ...https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256520v1.full
One example, "The induction of tolerance towards stimulation with TLR7/8 (R848) or TLR4 (LPS) ligands by BNT162b2 vaccination may indicate a more balanced inflammatory reaction during infection with SARS-CoV-2", i.e. consistent with the notion of enhanced IgG4/spike 'tolerance'.
Those observations even mesh with the idea that things may need to be "retuned via epigenetic manipulation" perhaps with "small molecules that influence the right signaling pathways". Coincidentally, what I've found interesting is that unlike (m)any other whole virion vaccines, the adjuvant used in Covaxin is a small molecule toll-like receptor (TLR) 7/8 agonist. Initial results of the Phase 3 'immunobridging and broadening' trial are allegedly forthcoming sometime in January, so in that sense, no 'huge experiments' are needed (i.e. for a small molecule agonist). In this case it has been given to those who had received either mRNA or AdV primary series to evaluate seroconversion to other non-spike proteins, particularly the nucleocapsid. In my view what would be interesting is if the immune responses for those getting Covaxin as heterologous vaccination were on par with those of the vaccine naive, as there is evidence from both UK HSA Surveillance data and NIAID/Moderna paper (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1) that the nucleocapsid seropositivty post-mrna vaccination appears to be diminished upon subsequent covid infection (i.e. potential adaptive immune suppression).
Who knows if these effects - e.g. stimulating broader immune response, the immune modulation giving rise to the IgG4 type responses, etc. - are coincident, but given the seeming ever increasing connections being found between the innate and adaptive immune systems, I think it may merit a closer look for having a possible remediative effect.
So yes, it could be possible that 'a' (not 'the') potential cure for bad 'vaccines' could be more vaccines. Would someone really close off the notion of using a 'vaccine' which actually might have the desired (secondary, non-specific) effect(s) out of spite because the original implementation of the broader vaccination campaign was such a shit show?
The respiratory virus dummy refers to the inability to erradicate it with the vaccines used and thus the nonsensical (coerced) mass vaccination.
There was early treatment. But putting people on ventilators so fast and without corticosteroids probably killed a lot more people. And go ahead and show me the valid Randomised Controlled Trial that proves that such treatment saves lives in covid. In contrast lots of cheap early treatment has been proposed that was rejected and even sabotaged by the establishment.
"Was not observed" does not mean it doesn't occur. Is it so difficult to understand? The antibodies generated are influenced by the frequency, duration and interval of same antigen exposure. Nothing has been injected so frequently as those mRNA jabs...
Also adenovirus vector DNA vaccines are subject to the same problem as also the extreme high levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 and repeated infections are. And that situation is obviously caused by the total mismanagement of the pandemic.
When you mention adjuvants for TLR7/8 it makes me laugh. It's a tradional addition in many vaccines since long.
The truth is that you and even the top experts of the medical establishment only understand a tiny tiny bit of the very complex virology-immunology-evolutionary biology - molecular biology etc. etc.
Hence you people are dangerous. It's like putting a little kids on the controls of a cockpit. Isn't it then safer to leave it on autopilot?
Not sure what you're talking about re:early treatment - I mentioned no specifics there and consider ventilation and remdesivir as equating to "no early treatment". Instead, what I have been suggesting is, with the evident immune dysfunction seemingly related to mRNA shots, that perhaps potential NSE of other vaccinations should be examined more closely in order to help understand what may be going on, including the possibility (however remote) that they could have a remediative effect...is that so difficult to understand?
And on that note, still waiting for any actual thoughts you might have on potential solutions for this emerging issue. I get it though, you reject the "The Science" - and rightly so as many of us do - but also it seems anything else if it doesn't adhere to your "The Science" - cause somehow neither I (as admittedly not a Julliard trained immunologist/virologist) nor the "top experts understand the very complex virology-immunology-evolutionary biology", but evidently you do (being conspicuously absent from that list). So anyone else's thoughts should be relegated to the trash bin, simply because you said so.
Reminds me of sooo many people I used to work with - we called them "anecdotals". Anecdotals reject anything with not much more than a "that won't work" - seldom if ever refuting anything with actual evidence or data. e.g. you had an opportunity to enlighten us with all the approved vaccines out there which use a TLR7/8 adjuvant - instead you just laugh. And so like many good anecdotals, there's not much more than a confident facade and mish mash of pejoratives, more time spent arguing why nothing will work than cultivating potential solutions through discussion with other curious people. Why not instead teach the little kid to fly the plane from such an elevated and learned state?
And I also love how "you people", who ask questions and are interested in discussion of potential solutions, "are dangerous". Did you get that from KJP? If so, you forgot the "and a threat to our democracy" part.
Anyway, I submit - you "win" whatever game was played here.
I'm not saying that there is an "evident immune dysfunction seemingly related to mRNA shots", am I?
Immunity is always a delicate balance between missing pathogens and cancer cells OR autoimmunity. And there are most likely many complex mechanisms behind this (several are known and have been demonstrated in the lab but many others are not known or are unproven hypotheses). The repetitive antigen exposure effect on immune cell epigenetics seems pretty well established.
I don't claim I know it all better because this science is still very immature. But I do know it's very immature and all my predictions have become true because they were built upon the most essential observations and at least the essence of immunity and evolutionary biology.
If I could get it right, then what does that say about the official experts?
And no. No new vaccines are not going to solve this. Unknowingly people are looking for eternal life. The Covid pandemic could have passed largely without interventions and turned endemic. Yes many people would have died. But many people would have died anyway. Most covid deaths were deaths "with covid". We don't know the end result. But knowing that a natural coronavirus pandemic would have probably only weeded out mostly the weak elderly, like HCOV-OC43 did, and seeing the results of intervention, I'm betting the objective conclusion in a couple of decades will be that the cure was worse than the disease. And that does not even include the effects on society. And since there is absolutely no proof that my bet is wrong, it should be considered the default outcome.
So the solution is : there is no solution. It's life and death.
If either mRNA or the repetitive use of it or the repetitive infections at short interval lead to what you call immune dysfunction, then there will still be many other unknown mechanisms to counter that in a large number of people. For example, the virus might become a latent infection like with HCMV. Or many people will die of a Covid-AIDS but a large group with (epi)genetic differences will survive. I'm not saying that's a great outcome but we do live in a dangerous way. We are constantly exposed to thousands of pathogens and many opportunistic ones in our own body. We constantly produce (pre-)cancerous cells. There's only one certainty: death.
I'm not against research. I find it extremely interesting. Including all the covid and vaccine related research. But there is so much that should be researched. The obsession with covid and in particular vaccines should stop.
I'm in favour of novel evidence-based medical treatments. But they need to be personalized for treatment or prevention for particular persons at real risk. Thus they must have a very clear proven benefits-risks advantage - also long-term if that is relevant.
Any large scale interventions, like mass vaccinations, need to be done very very cautiously, with sufficient proof that also ecological-evolutionary aspects are well understood - like I have argued from the start. If we had done that for the covid jabs, then they wouldn't have been approved (yet). Now we did a huge experiment that may be turning really bad. But how many people will know this?
Your suggestion unfortunately falls in the same trap of overestimated knowledge. Unless it will take decades to apply and then it will probably be obsolete.
And sorry I'm not going to describe here what my plan would be to get us out of this mess with the minimum damage. That would require a whole book. And nobody is going to apply it anyway. Because in the end it's all about money and politics.
You argument well. It crossed my mind that the studies done on allergen immuniation, could tell us something. Its my experience, that immunisation Against pollen and other allergens actually wanes with years. That might give some hope.
Long ago, end of 2021, a few sane people with integrity at EMA, warned for "immune exhaustion" due to repetitive (same) antigen presentation with frequent boosters (and re-infections).
Lots of studies exist from long ago that show that the epigenetic program of immune cells changes every time the same antigen is encountered. This makes sense because our immunity needs to have an inbuilt brake on autoimmunity. Yet it is also known that viruses like cytomegalovirus or EBV can exploit this "feature" and thus remain in our bodies forever. That doesn't bode well. Such virus can become carcinogenic or assisting cancer in other ways. Or like in the case of HIV it can lead to terminal disease in the longer term.
But don't worry. Lots of new mRNA vaccines are being made now to deal with those opportunistic diseases and cancer that are possibly being triggered by the covid mRNA injections.
It's gift that keeps on giving. If you are a Pfizer shareholder.
It could be retuned via epigenetic manipulation. (By combination drugs or small molecules that influence the right signaling pathways) But that's opening Pandora's Box even more.
However the enormous scale of the experiment will lead to more huge experiments. Grab your popcorn and watch.
Glenn -
You're talking too much sense. You're right; it's the hubris of mankind that got us into this situation.
We're trying to push threads back into a tangled ball of yarn.
Like this?
There was an old lady who swallowed a fly. I don't know why she swallowed the fly; perhaps, she'll die.
Exactly.
If only the jabs just jiggled and riggled your immune system...
Flys, spiders, birds, cats, dogs...oh my...:)
Haha, in keeping with your constructive comment above - we're well past this being just a respiratory coronavirus, dummy.
And not sure I've ever heard of Pandora's Box where it mattered how much the box was open. The fact is it is open - and many people may be utterly screwed because of that - even the unvaxxed. So what are the solutions you (pl) suggest? "Grab the popcorn and watch"...sounds like a call for ignoring the issues and advocating for a no treatment route like they did with people who got covid early on.
What I'm suggesting is not running out and giving AdV vectored or any other jabs to everyone, it's that first of all we can't consider them as all being equal - re-read the quote I posted from the Irrgang paper. "This induction of IgG4 antibodies was not observed after homologous or heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with adenoviral vectors."
There's plenty of other evidence out there for non-specific effects (NSE) of vaccines (e.g. BCG vaccine on other viral infections) and if we see it here (with adenovirus having positive NSE and/or mRNA negative NSE w/regard to spike IgG4) should that data not be evaluated (or other data re-evaluated with that in mind)? Along those lines, I was re-acquainted with a paper (going down the rabbit whole w/Igor's post on the IgG4 matter) that suggested mrna "reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses" ...https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.03.21256520v1.full
One example, "The induction of tolerance towards stimulation with TLR7/8 (R848) or TLR4 (LPS) ligands by BNT162b2 vaccination may indicate a more balanced inflammatory reaction during infection with SARS-CoV-2", i.e. consistent with the notion of enhanced IgG4/spike 'tolerance'.
Those observations even mesh with the idea that things may need to be "retuned via epigenetic manipulation" perhaps with "small molecules that influence the right signaling pathways". Coincidentally, what I've found interesting is that unlike (m)any other whole virion vaccines, the adjuvant used in Covaxin is a small molecule toll-like receptor (TLR) 7/8 agonist. Initial results of the Phase 3 'immunobridging and broadening' trial are allegedly forthcoming sometime in January, so in that sense, no 'huge experiments' are needed (i.e. for a small molecule agonist). In this case it has been given to those who had received either mRNA or AdV primary series to evaluate seroconversion to other non-spike proteins, particularly the nucleocapsid. In my view what would be interesting is if the immune responses for those getting Covaxin as heterologous vaccination were on par with those of the vaccine naive, as there is evidence from both UK HSA Surveillance data and NIAID/Moderna paper (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1) that the nucleocapsid seropositivty post-mrna vaccination appears to be diminished upon subsequent covid infection (i.e. potential adaptive immune suppression).
Who knows if these effects - e.g. stimulating broader immune response, the immune modulation giving rise to the IgG4 type responses, etc. - are coincident, but given the seeming ever increasing connections being found between the innate and adaptive immune systems, I think it may merit a closer look for having a possible remediative effect.
So yes, it could be possible that 'a' (not 'the') potential cure for bad 'vaccines' could be more vaccines. Would someone really close off the notion of using a 'vaccine' which actually might have the desired (secondary, non-specific) effect(s) out of spite because the original implementation of the broader vaccination campaign was such a shit show?
The respiratory virus dummy refers to the inability to erradicate it with the vaccines used and thus the nonsensical (coerced) mass vaccination.
There was early treatment. But putting people on ventilators so fast and without corticosteroids probably killed a lot more people. And go ahead and show me the valid Randomised Controlled Trial that proves that such treatment saves lives in covid. In contrast lots of cheap early treatment has been proposed that was rejected and even sabotaged by the establishment.
"Was not observed" does not mean it doesn't occur. Is it so difficult to understand? The antibodies generated are influenced by the frequency, duration and interval of same antigen exposure. Nothing has been injected so frequently as those mRNA jabs...
Also adenovirus vector DNA vaccines are subject to the same problem as also the extreme high levels of circulating SARS-CoV-2 and repeated infections are. And that situation is obviously caused by the total mismanagement of the pandemic.
When you mention adjuvants for TLR7/8 it makes me laugh. It's a tradional addition in many vaccines since long.
The truth is that you and even the top experts of the medical establishment only understand a tiny tiny bit of the very complex virology-immunology-evolutionary biology - molecular biology etc. etc.
Hence you people are dangerous. It's like putting a little kids on the controls of a cockpit. Isn't it then safer to leave it on autopilot?
Not sure what you're talking about re:early treatment - I mentioned no specifics there and consider ventilation and remdesivir as equating to "no early treatment". Instead, what I have been suggesting is, with the evident immune dysfunction seemingly related to mRNA shots, that perhaps potential NSE of other vaccinations should be examined more closely in order to help understand what may be going on, including the possibility (however remote) that they could have a remediative effect...is that so difficult to understand?
And on that note, still waiting for any actual thoughts you might have on potential solutions for this emerging issue. I get it though, you reject the "The Science" - and rightly so as many of us do - but also it seems anything else if it doesn't adhere to your "The Science" - cause somehow neither I (as admittedly not a Julliard trained immunologist/virologist) nor the "top experts understand the very complex virology-immunology-evolutionary biology", but evidently you do (being conspicuously absent from that list). So anyone else's thoughts should be relegated to the trash bin, simply because you said so.
Reminds me of sooo many people I used to work with - we called them "anecdotals". Anecdotals reject anything with not much more than a "that won't work" - seldom if ever refuting anything with actual evidence or data. e.g. you had an opportunity to enlighten us with all the approved vaccines out there which use a TLR7/8 adjuvant - instead you just laugh. And so like many good anecdotals, there's not much more than a confident facade and mish mash of pejoratives, more time spent arguing why nothing will work than cultivating potential solutions through discussion with other curious people. Why not instead teach the little kid to fly the plane from such an elevated and learned state?
And I also love how "you people", who ask questions and are interested in discussion of potential solutions, "are dangerous". Did you get that from KJP? If so, you forgot the "and a threat to our democracy" part.
Anyway, I submit - you "win" whatever game was played here.
I'm not saying that there is an "evident immune dysfunction seemingly related to mRNA shots", am I?
Immunity is always a delicate balance between missing pathogens and cancer cells OR autoimmunity. And there are most likely many complex mechanisms behind this (several are known and have been demonstrated in the lab but many others are not known or are unproven hypotheses). The repetitive antigen exposure effect on immune cell epigenetics seems pretty well established.
I don't claim I know it all better because this science is still very immature. But I do know it's very immature and all my predictions have become true because they were built upon the most essential observations and at least the essence of immunity and evolutionary biology.
If I could get it right, then what does that say about the official experts?
And no. No new vaccines are not going to solve this. Unknowingly people are looking for eternal life. The Covid pandemic could have passed largely without interventions and turned endemic. Yes many people would have died. But many people would have died anyway. Most covid deaths were deaths "with covid". We don't know the end result. But knowing that a natural coronavirus pandemic would have probably only weeded out mostly the weak elderly, like HCOV-OC43 did, and seeing the results of intervention, I'm betting the objective conclusion in a couple of decades will be that the cure was worse than the disease. And that does not even include the effects on society. And since there is absolutely no proof that my bet is wrong, it should be considered the default outcome.
So the solution is : there is no solution. It's life and death.
If either mRNA or the repetitive use of it or the repetitive infections at short interval lead to what you call immune dysfunction, then there will still be many other unknown mechanisms to counter that in a large number of people. For example, the virus might become a latent infection like with HCMV. Or many people will die of a Covid-AIDS but a large group with (epi)genetic differences will survive. I'm not saying that's a great outcome but we do live in a dangerous way. We are constantly exposed to thousands of pathogens and many opportunistic ones in our own body. We constantly produce (pre-)cancerous cells. There's only one certainty: death.
I'm not against research. I find it extremely interesting. Including all the covid and vaccine related research. But there is so much that should be researched. The obsession with covid and in particular vaccines should stop.
I'm in favour of novel evidence-based medical treatments. But they need to be personalized for treatment or prevention for particular persons at real risk. Thus they must have a very clear proven benefits-risks advantage - also long-term if that is relevant.
Any large scale interventions, like mass vaccinations, need to be done very very cautiously, with sufficient proof that also ecological-evolutionary aspects are well understood - like I have argued from the start. If we had done that for the covid jabs, then they wouldn't have been approved (yet). Now we did a huge experiment that may be turning really bad. But how many people will know this?
Your suggestion unfortunately falls in the same trap of overestimated knowledge. Unless it will take decades to apply and then it will probably be obsolete.
And sorry I'm not going to describe here what my plan would be to get us out of this mess with the minimum damage. That would require a whole book. And nobody is going to apply it anyway. Because in the end it's all about money and politics.
You argument well. It crossed my mind that the studies done on allergen immuniation, could tell us something. Its my experience, that immunisation Against pollen and other allergens actually wanes with years. That might give some hope.
Long ago, end of 2021, a few sane people with integrity at EMA, warned for "immune exhaustion" due to repetitive (same) antigen presentation with frequent boosters (and re-infections).
Lots of studies exist from long ago that show that the epigenetic program of immune cells changes every time the same antigen is encountered. This makes sense because our immunity needs to have an inbuilt brake on autoimmunity. Yet it is also known that viruses like cytomegalovirus or EBV can exploit this "feature" and thus remain in our bodies forever. That doesn't bode well. Such virus can become carcinogenic or assisting cancer in other ways. Or like in the case of HIV it can lead to terminal disease in the longer term.
But don't worry. Lots of new mRNA vaccines are being made now to deal with those opportunistic diseases and cancer that are possibly being triggered by the covid mRNA injections.
It's gift that keeps on giving. If you are a Pfizer shareholder.