Grim Forecast: The Pandemic of the Vaccinated Looks Set To Explode

I made a comment on a blog yesterday, regarding herd immunity. Here’s what I wrote:

Permanent herd immunity was never going to happen with a coronavirus like SC-2. What we got in summer 2020 was transient community immunity, where about 15% of the populace were infected and recovered, helped greatly by the warmer weather. That was when Johnson made masks mandatory! Then, as we progressed into autumn 2020, SC-2 became more prevalent, especially as children and students went back to school and university; thereafter a functional seasonal herd immunity of 40% infected was quickly achieved. SC-2 would have been endemic after that, returning each winter season with more or less virulence, but never as bad as the first emergence.
But the public health fanatics and novel ‘vaccine’ fanatics made sure that didn’t happen. They started injecting first the vulnerable with their non-sterilising gene therapies which actually produced a second winter peak in deaths very soon after the rollout. Then they absurdly argued that a demonstrably ‘leaky’ vaccine which did not, could not, ever stop transmission, was the key to obtaining a ‘safe’ herd immunity threshold of 80% and promptly set about injecting anything that moved.
The results are in and they are looking increasingly catastrophic for public health. Instead of providing sterilising herd immunity, the ‘vaccines’ have actually made people MORE susceptible to infection, especially with the Omicron variant. Covid is probably not going away any time soon, neither will it settle down into stable endemicity in highly vaccinated populations. If you want to know the probable reasons why this is, I would suggest reading Geert Vanden Bossche’s latest detailed paper. Once again, he could be wrong, but I fear not.

I sincerely believe that without the mass vaccination campaigns, the pandemic would have been over and done with by the end of winter 2020/21 and the SC-2 virus would now be a stable, seasonally recurrent endemic disease, probably on a par with seasonal ‘flu. The mRNA and DNA ‘vaccines’ have radically altered the course of the pandemic and extended seasonally incoherent waves of rapidly spreading infections and disease indefinitely. Along with the huge, unprecedented volume of serious adverse reactions and deaths soon after injection, we are looking at a public health catastrophe without parallel in the history of pharmaceutical medicine.

The link to Geert’s latest paper can be found here. It’s very technical in parts and I am not qualified to comment on much of what he says, but it does not take an expert to appreciate the grave seriousness of Geert’s warnings or to appreciate that what he is saying is firmly grounded in established epidemiology. GVDB may be wrong, but he’s been right about a lot so far, since first warning of the dangers of mass vaccination with ‘leaky’ vaccines over a year ago. Whether or not his predictions turn out to be correct or not is beside the point. The fact is, his dire warnings have been completely ignored by those ‘experts’ running the vaccination campaigns and that is a matter of serious concern, given his qualifications and experience.

Only now are we hearing from ‘experts’ like Vallance who says:

A coronavirus variant which escapes vaccine immunity could take the world by surprise, Sir Patrick Vallance has warned.

Unfortunately, given his two year history of crying wolf on Covid, few people now believe him, excepting of course the dedicated Covid bedwetters who never want the pandemic or restrictions to end and are happy to be pointlessly muzzled for the rest of their short miserable lives.

Alex Berenson tends to be a bit of a weather vane on things Covid, which is probably why they kicked him off of Twitter. He says:

I spend a lot of time looking at the trees: What’s with infections in Britain? What are the newest myocarditis numbers?

We have reached a strange moment in Covid. The epidemic has now gone on longer than any flu epidemic – yet it shows few signs of easing.

Actually, that’s not true. In poor nations, Covid appears to have vanished as a problem, to the extent it ever was one. Even countries like India that had big Omicron waves didn’t have many deaths.

But wealthier countries now have extraordinary numbers of infections. Scotland just reported that 9 percent of its people were infected at once, equal to about 30 million Americans. All those infections are translating into lots of deaths, too. South Korea has suffered about half of ALL its Covid deaths this month.

So what is actually going on? GVDB provides a possible answer, based on actual science, and it’s not for the spike-hearted.

  • There isn’t even any hope that the current epidemiological situation could lead to herd immunity any time soon
  • There are increasing signs of more generalized immune suppression in vaccinees as indicated by a steadily growing number of reports rising incidences of other respiratory illnesses, other viral diseases and even cancer.
  • There is substantial evidence that Omicron is enabling a highly vaccinated population to exert immune pressure on its pathogenicity

Key message
I SERIOUSLY expect that a series of new highly virulent and highly infectious SARS-CoV-2 (SC-2) variants will now rapidly and independently emerge in highly vaccinated countries all over the world and that they will soon spread at high pace. I expect the current pattern of repetitive infections and relatively mild disease in vaccinees to soon aggravate and be replaced by severe disease and death. Unfortunately, there is no way vaccinees can rely on assistance from their innate immune system to protect against coronaviruses1 as their relevant2 innate IgM antibodies are increasingly being outcompeted by infection-enhancing vaccinal Abs, which are continuously recalled due to the circulation of highly infectious Omicron variants. In contrast, Omicron’s high infectiousness would enable the non-vaccinated to train their innate immune defense against SC-2 while the infectious and pathogenic capacity of the new SC-2 variants would be debilitated in the non-vaccinated for lack of infection-enhancing Abs in their blood. Unless we immediately implement large scale antiviral prophylaxis campaigns in highly vaccinated countries, there shall be no doubt that the pandemic will end by taking a huge toll on human lives.

‘More infectious’ variants have been reported to break through protection against infection conferred by vaccine-induced neutralizing Abs. Although vaccinees have now become more susceptible to infection, their vaccinal Abs still largely protect them from severe disease. However, cases of hospitalization in fully vaccinated people are now increasingly reported in some highly vaccinated countries (e.g., UK, Israel, South-Korea). This could indicate that some new variants are now breaking through protection (against severe disease) conferred by the C-19 vaccines and that it may only be a matter of time before additional mutations are incorporated that allow a more virulent variant to replace Omicron. The evolutionary dynamics of this pandemic are highly suspicious of mass vaccination shifting the course of a natural pandemic by promoting the expansion in prevalence of more infectious immune escape variants.

For those interested in the more technical explanation of what might be happening, here it is:

It has been established that non-neutralizing antibodies (Abs) directed at epitopes comprised within the conserved ‘enhancing’ site within the N-terminal domain (NTD) of S (S-NTD) not only contribute to Omicron’s enhanced infectiousness in vaccinees but are also likely to mitigate disease as the course of Omicron infections is rather mild. As Omicron is highly infectious, individuals are now at risk of rapid re-exposure to the virus. It follows that highly vaccinated populations are now placing more and more immune pressure on the infection-enhancing site within the S-NTD to prevent Omicron from causing systemic disease. I posit that this immune pressure is now at risk of driving natural selection of new SC-2 variants (‘Newco variants’) that will be endowed with one or more O-glycosylation sites that can shield the conserved NTD region comprising the non-neutralizing enhancing epitopes and thereby escape the disease-mitigating effect exerted by the enhancing anti-NTD Abs in vaccinees. Hence, natural selection of mutations enabling more extensive O-glycosylation of spike protein would not only make Newco variants fully resistant to all potentially neutralizing vaccine-induced Abs directed at spike protein (S), and thereby enable an even higher level of viral infectiousness, but also render these new immune escape variants more virulent for vaccinees. As site-specific O-glycosylation of S would abrogate Ab-mediated protection against severe disease in vaccinees, Ab-dependent enhancement of viral infectiousness (ADEI) would now directly translate into Ab-dependent enhancement of C-19 disease (ADED). This would ultimately result in a tsunami of hospitalizations and deaths in highly vaccinated populations whereas the unvaccinated would be better and better protected against the Newco variants thanks to their ‘enhanced’ (i.e., trained) innate immunity and because of reduced infectiousness and trans infectiousness of the virus in the upper and lower respiratory tract, respectively.

Geert makes this plea to his readers, which, given the extreme seriousness of what he is postulating as a possible evolutionary path of the pandemic, is not unreasonable, especially given the current situation in highly vaccinated countries:

Why this call?
I know this is a bad time to share my deep concerns about the future evolution of this pandemic. I know the world is currently getting more than enough of very concerning news; in addition, scary predictions about the future evolution of this pandemic are never welcome. The only reason why I nevertheless continue to express my concerns is that I cannot refrain from urging national and international public health agencies to immediately engage their populations in large scale antiviral chemoprophylactic campaigns, especially in highly vaccinated countries. Given the high infectivity rate that characterizes the spread of Omicron, the rather ‘mild’ course of infections we are currently witnessing cannot be considered the endgame prelude of this pandemic.

What do we get instead? FDA authorising 4th and 5th shots; UK dishing out shots to 5-11 year olds! Even when it has now been proven that Pfizer committed fraud in their trials and covered up deaths and very serious adverse reactions. What dark forces are driving this madness?

Natural Herd Immunity Vs. Mass Vaccination

Here is what GVDB says about herd immunity and the natural progression of disease, which basically tallies with what I said in my blog comment above.

It has been reported that vaccinees are, indeed, more susceptible to infection but that this enhanced susceptibility does not translate in more (cases of) severe disease ( It seems, therefore, as if the vaccine is responsible for promoting the vaccinee’s susceptibility to infection while hampering progression of infection to severe disease. This is in sharp contrast to the course of a natural pandemic in an unvaccinated population, in which waves of infection are associated with a substantial surge in morbidity and mortality, typically in the most vulnerable part of the population. These surges are typically followed by a dramatic reduction of the infection rate and it typically only takes a few waves for a natural pandemic to transition into endemicity as this is what it takes to protect the remaining vulnerable part of the population by herd immunity.

So what’s the problem? Folks might be getting infected but they’re protected from severe disease, right? Wrong. As we are seeing, people are still being hospitalised, not in great numbers at the moment, but in increasing numbers, and the vast majority of those are double or triple jabbed. Says GVDB:

Why should we care about lack of herd immunity when infections in vaccinees barely cause any severe disease, let alone death?
A word of caution needs to be said about this naïve question. Whereas Omicron might rather benefit the unvaccinated part of the population, in which repeated exposure to this highly infectious variant is training the innate immune response, this virus is likely to behave very differently in the vaccinated part of the population.
As usual, the devil is in the detail and the detail is often about getting down to the nitty-gritty of the evolutionary dynamics of the interplay between the virus and the host immune system. As this interplay has been profoundly disturbed by thoughtless human intervention, it seems completely counterintuitive that the relatively low hospitalization and mortality rates are the consequence of herd immunity.

GVDB explains why herd immunity can never be achieved with these ‘vaccines’ (even with endless boosters and injections for children) and why this is so dangerous:

In the case of recent natural or C-19 vaccine-mediated boosting7 of vaccinees (or their re-vaccination with an updated C-19 vaccine that better matches the S protein on the circulating variant) or in the case of vaccination of subjects who previously recovered from C-19 disease. In all these cases, previously vaccine-induced Abs will be recalled. The recall will result in disproportionally high titers and/ or disproportionally high binding affinity of non-neutralizing anti-S Abs, which not only outcompete innate polyreactive IgMs but also enhance viral infectiousness (see further below). This implies that in countries with high vaccine coverage rates, vaccinees are now more susceptible to infection with the circulating virus, which is likely to predominantly boost their infection enhancing anti-NTD Abs8. Under these circumstances, additional booster vaccinations are unlikely to change the impact of mass vaccination on population-level immunity and the course of the pandemic.
Consequently, there can be no doubt that the continuation of mass vaccination campaigns, which are now increasingly targeting children and focusing on booster shots (or Omicron-specific vaccinations), will result in a significant loss of the population’s capacity to generate herd immunity.

High Rates of Infection In The Vaccinated Will Exert Unnatural Immune Pressure on SC-2 To Evolve More Virulent Variants

There is substantial evidence that Omicron is enabling highly vaccinated populations to exert immune pressure on its pathogenicity

A highly vaccinated population that continues to be exposed to a SC-2 variant that is largely resistant to neutralization by S-directed Abs will be featured by a steadily increasing prevalence of elevated anti-NTD Ab titers and, therefore, become increasingly susceptible to infection. It is reasonable to postulate that in vaccinees, who are boosted as a result of their exposure to Omicron, especially the infection enhancing anti-NTD Abs will benefit from a strong recall effect9. This would imply that even after having contracted C-19 disease, vaccinees remain highly susceptible to infection while serving as an important source of selective (i.e., Omicron-specific) transmission.

GVDB goes through a very long and technical explanation (involving many ‘temptations’ to arrive at conclusions) which suggests that the current highly unnatural situation with Covid and mass vaccinations may evolve into one where we see wave upon wave of increasingly infectious and virulent SC-2 viral variants sweep through the populace. The mechanism driving this is glycosylation.

How would the O-glycosylated Newcos evolve in a highly vaccinated population and what would be their impact on individual and public health?
From the evolutionary dynamics discussed above, it becomes already apparent that increased population-level immune pressure on the conserved enhancing NTD site will result in natural selection of more abundantly glycosylated and, therefore, more virulent and more infectious variants. Since the O-glycosite mutations, as well as the required accompanying amino acid mutations within the variable domains of NTD, would have to keep up with the steadily increasing immune pressure exerted by the vaccinated population on the conserved infection-enhancing NTD site, both virulence and infectiousness of naturally selected variants would steadily rise too. More infectious and more virulent Newco variants that have a competitive fitness advantage over Omicron would successively be replaced by other Newco variants with an even higher level of infectiousness and virulence and, therefore, with an even higher fitness advantage in the context of a highly vaccinated population. With each more infectious and more virulent selected Newco the number of infections causing severe disease and death would gradually but rapidly increase whereas the corresponding fitness intervals would become shorter and shorter (see fig. 7). In highly vaccinated countries waves would rapidly add up one on top of the other to finally build a massive wave of severe morbidity and death that could last for as long as viral infectivity rates and, therefore, the prevalence of elevated ‘infection-enhancing’ Ab titers rises.

Is he correct? Are his fears plausible? I have no idea. But it is beyond doubt now that ADEI (Anti-Body Dependent Enhancement of Infection) is happening in those who have been jabbed and ‘boosted’ and that this is a highly unnatural occurrence which is the complete opposite of natural herd immunity. That this may lead soon to ADED (antibody dependent enhancement of disease) is a matter which should be urgently investigated and in the meantime it would seem to be a prudent precaution to immediately cease vaccinations and concentrate instead upon the large scale provision of safe preventative antiviral treatments. That’s not happening. Why?

How long have we got before these new, more virulent viruses emerge? GVDB thinks it may be only a couple of months.

How long will it take for more pathogenic SC-2 variants to become dominant?
As the adequate combination of O-glycosite mutations on RBD and amino acid mutations within NTD may take time to select, it is reasonable to expect that it will take ‘some more time’ for the first Newcos to emerge. However, there are several different reasons that make me believe that the virus will now rapidly evolve into more virulent and more infectious variants. In other words, I expect the lag time for a first more virulent variant to cross the valley of fitness and begin to replace Omicron to be rather short (i.e., within 2 months following this date of writing).

Are the non-vaccinated at risk? GVDB doesn’t think so.

In healthy non-vaccinated individuals, O-glycosylated Newcos will only cause asymptomatic to mild disease

In conclusion: For the vast majority of the unvaccinated, the price to pay for training of their innate immune effector capacity will not exceed mild to moderate upper respiratory symptoms. For this part of the population, new, more densely O-glycosylated variants could even be considered improved editions of a ‘live attenuated vaccine’ due to their steadily increasing intrinsic attenuation (because of the growing O-glycosylation).

This is not the time for an ‘I told you so moment’ so I can only recommend to those who are jabbed, then please don’t get any more shots and think very carefully about provisioning yourself with any anti-viral treatments you can get your hands on.

There is much I have left out here in GVDB’s very long paper, but I do recommend you struggle through to read it all. It may actually save your life.

The Cat Has Caught Up With What I Was Saying About Covid & Climate In 2020

Not wishing to blow my own trumpet, I shall content myself with strumming gently and forlornly upon my own little violin. I was saying nearly two years ago (actually it was two years ago) that Covid and Climate Change were basically two sides of the same coin and both thus essentially socio-political agendas hijacking ‘science’ in order to inject their false prospectus deep into our lives (and even, as it turned out, our actual bodies). Very few listened to me and quite a few criticised me, often in less than polite terms.

In April 2020 I wrote this article:

They got it wrong the second time because they relied upon an epidemiological model (adapted from an old ‘flu model) which predicted 510,000 deaths from a virus which we knew virtually nothing about. Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College, London said ‘DO SOMETHING OR PEOPLE WILL DIE!’ So the government did something and people still died, not in their hundreds of thousands, but, it would seem, in numbers probably irrespective of a lockdown which was initiated too late in the day and was nowhere near strict enough to have a measurable effect on what is probably an exceptionally contagious virus. American IMHE modellers got it wrong a third time, predicting loads more deaths in the UK and the US, even in lockdown, than actually occurred.

People are still scared by Covid-19; they’re scared of dying, naturally, not in many years’ time because of bad weather, but next week, due to some horrible illness which probably escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China. The government and the Medicine Men currently in control of control of government decision-making, use that fear to control us and to convince us of the legitimacy of their policy. 

Climate change modellers never get it wrong, simply because even when their models don’t agree with reality, this is either because the observations are wrong, or because they still ‘do a reasonable job’ of modelling past and present climate change (especially when inconvenient ‘blips’ are ironed out by retrospective adjustments to the data), but principally because the subject of their claimed modelling expertise lies many years off in the future – climate change to be expected in 2050 or 2100, when the real impacts will begin to be felt. Imperial’s and IMHE’s worst case scenarios look way off, just weeks after they were proposed and after governments acted on the modeller’s advice. Their assumptions are being rapidly challenged by new data and research. Nothing similar happens in climate change land. Their worst case scenario (RCP8.5), though comprehensively debunked, still lives on and is still being defended by Met Office scientists on the basis that ‘carbon feedbacks (however unlikely) cannot be ruled out’.

Then in July 2020 I followed up with this:

It is an article of faith: climate change is dangerous. Dare to criticise that view and, as a non scientist, you will be labelled a ‘climate denier’ and a crank. As a scientist, you will also be called a denier and a crank, as well as being ex-communicated, ostracised, hounded, disciplined, humiliated, vilified, cancelled, forced out of your job even. Dare to question the validity of epidemiological models which portray Covid-19 as a killer pandemic which, without lockdown, will cut through the populace like a knife, claiming hundreds of thousands of lives and overwhelming health services and you are similarly frowned upon by the prevailing epidemiological oligarchy.

As you can see from the comments, it didn’t go down too well because by then we were deep into mass formation psychosis territory.

But fast forward to 2022: the catastrophe of governments’ insane reliance upon Russian oil and gas and the fallout from the batshit crazy decisions by European governments to abandon nuclear generation and domestic fossil fuel extraction in order to virtue-signal a ‘just’ transition to ‘clean green energy’ in order to ‘save the planet’ have become all too obvious. Business, industries and domestic energy consumers are hurting badly, especially after governments already nuked their economies with idiot, absurd, equally catastrophic Covid ‘mitigation’ measures.

Enter the Cat:

zero carbon and zero covid are the same grift

the covid grift and the climate grift have an astonishing amount in common. it’s why it’s so easy to pivot from one to the other.

they both use hallucinatory models of imminent catastrophe that fail to conform to reality to generate scare stories and emergencies as a pretext for collectivist and globalist action and mandate.

they both make outlandish demands to change lives and lifestyles but only in VERY specific ways.

they focus entirely on that which necessitates control and submission and exclude with utter vehemence anything that actually works.

they are not about solving problems and never were.

they were everywhere and always about just one thing:

“accumulating power in the form of unaccountable socio/political authority and rent seeking wealth for the cronies that backstop it.”

and it’s the exact same playbook. hell, half the plays the covidians ran were drawn up by the climate crowd 20 years ago. it was a full blown carbon copy. (sorry)

So, it’s welcome aboard to the El Gato Malo feline, but the German Shepherd got there first by quite a wide margin (actually, that should be Alsatian because we’re using politically correct wartime terminology now).

Covid ‘Vaccines’: You Really Don’t Want To Follow The Science. Look Away Now.

If you’ve been jabbed, you probably don’t want to know this. If you have or haven’t been jabbed, then they don’t want you to know this. So it’s probably best you don’t read this.

For the small number of feline readers whose curiosity almost always gets the better of them, I shall continue now and try to communicate the main findings of a very technical recently published preprint authored by Kevin McKernan, Anthony M. Kyriakopoulos and Peter A. McCullough.

It is entitled ‘Differences in Vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 Replication Derived mRNA: Implications for Cell Biology and Future Disease’ . . . . . which doesn’t give much away. You have to actually read the paper and much of it is incomprehensible unfortunately because of the complexity of the science involved and the use of unfamiliar technical terms. But I slogged on regardless, cherry-picking the more comprehensible plain English passages, to arrive at what I think is a representative summary of the science.

By doing so, I myself risk doing something which the authors warn about in their introduction: creating a false consensus, alternatively known as introducing confirmation bias. So I strongly advise the reader to attempt for themselves to go through the actual preprint and to seek alternative explanations/interpretations of the text.

SARS-CoV-2 is a retrovirus, meaning that it exists in the form of RNA which invades the host cell and, using an enzyme known as reverse transcriptase, transforms itself to DNA in order to replicate. Included in the set of instructions for the replication of the whole virus from RNA to DNA is a little sequence coding for the dreaded S1/S2 full length so called ‘spike protein’ which is on the surface of the virus and plays a vital role in allowing the virus to attach itself to host cells.

So, if you’re still with me, the Covid mRNA ‘vaccines’ introduce into your body millions and millions of little pieces of messenger RNA which code for the formation of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. These tiny foreign mRNA segments are enclosed in lipid nanoparticles so as to avoid them being immediately destroyed by your body’s natural defences. The lipids find their way into your cells, release their little package of messenger RNA and hey presto, the cell nucleus obligingly begins the manufacture of spike proteins, the antigen which the ‘vaccines’ require to elicit a supposedly ‘safe and effective’ controlled immune response to SARS-CoV-2, without the risk of a full viral infection. That’s the theory. They didn’t much test the theory, but that’s another story.

The whole technical process of producing an injectable synthetic mRNA which codes for the production viral spike proteins is known as codon optimization, so this statement by the authors should now be reasonably intelligible:

They’re basically saying that the artificially manufactured spike protein may not necessarily be biochemically identical to the native viral spike protein and may in fact function slightly differently to the viral spike, once inside the body. Nobody knows for sure of course. This is all pretty novel stuff, cutting edge science. That’s why, if you got jabbed, you are part of the answer and thus your body is a part of the grand experiment currently being conducted upon humanity by a megalomanic software developer and billionaire friends. Isn’t that exciting? Not that the Jab fanatics would agree. As far as they’re concerned, this is the most safe, effective, rigorously tested vaccine evah!TM in the history of medicine and anyone who doesn’t line up for pricks one, two, three and even four is a nutty ‘anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorist’ and a granny-killer who should be banished from society forever, complete with frozen bank account and head trampled by police horse’s hooves.

The authors actually analysed the native and vaccine spike proteins using open source software and they found distinct structural differences:

One consequence of these structural changes is that both the synthetic vaccine mRNA and the vaccine-derived spike are more robust inside the body. We’ve already seen that they have been observed to be extraordinarily persistent in lymph nodes. This could be a problem as regards the innate and adaptive immune response of the person who’s been jabbed. We’ve had hints of this occurring via data from the UKHSA, re. nucleocapsid immune response. The authors write:

Herpes Zoster is shingles, which is the re-activation of the chickenpox virus, latent in the body following childhood chickenpox infection. It usually occurs as a result of the immune system becoming temporarily depressed. I got it once when I was feeling particularly down. Despite efforts to deny it happening, it is a documented fact that many people are developing shingles post vaccination, suggesting that the body’s immune defences are being undermined.

Then there’s the possibility of the ‘vaccines’ being implicated in the re-emergence of cancers in remission or even causing new cancers. Steve Kirsch got booted off Twitter for writing about this potentially extremely serious occurrence. Twitter would rather risk lives and neuter ‘vaccine hesitancy’ via sledgehammer censorship than let users stray from the official narrative by actually following the emerging science.

The spike protein, even the native spike protein in infected patients, has been found to persist for 15 months. How long does the vaccine-derived spike protein, which is more robust, and produced in numbers an order of magnitude greater than is seen during natural infection, persist? Nobody knows for sure. The vaccines have not been tested long enough to find out, but it stands to reason that if you keep jabbing people with this stuff every few months, then it’s going to be topped up and hang around for longer than it would do otherwise.

You’ll note that the authors also talk about the possibility of toxic spike proteins actually being exhaled by vaccinated persons. Might this explain why some unjabbed women have reported disruptions to their periods following contacting with jabbed work colleagues, friends or family? Who knows. Nobody knows. That’s the point.

The authors reaffirm that the spike protein – both native and vaccine-expressed – is indeed highly toxic, not just in one specific way, but in several.

The above explains the hyper-coagulatory and inflammatory aspects of the spike, but the authors also repeat the warning about possible carcinogenic effects:

All in all, it’s not good news, but the concluding remarks of this paper are staggering and self explanatory:

The Quantities of Vaccine Spikes Massively Outweigh Infection and the Way they are Introduced into the Body is Very Different
Breath-taking Medical Negligence and Political Malfeasance

The UK government just authorised these shots for 5-11 year olds, who 100% without a doubt do not need them. Think about that.

Covid Prior Immunity and Common Cold Cross-Reactive T-Cells

This is quite technical and I’m not sure I understand it fully myself, but I’m going to have a go at trying to explain a point of disagreement between scientists arguing that cross-reactive T-cells have been responsible for protecting some people from Covid in the past and vaccine expert Geert Vanden Bossche who believes that there is no evidence for this phenomenon.

The Torygraph excitedly proclaims:

If you go to the article itself, written by Sarah Knapton, you read:

Large numbers of Britons were already protected from coronavirus before the pandemic began because of previous exposure to common colds, a groundbreaking new study suggests.

Researchers at Imperial College found that half of people living with an infected person in the second wave – before vaccines were available – were carrying high levels of memory T-cells from colds that may have stopped them picking up the virus.

First off, Knapton is pretty hopeless at identifying and citing her specific references. She confuses the reader by referring to two Imperial College studies, one published today (January 10th, 2022) and the other published much earlier, before the ‘vaccines’ rollout. She also throws in an unreferenced University College London study for good measure:

Early on in the pandemic, studies showed that some people carried immune cells that could recognise Covid-19 even though they had never been infected.

University College London even discovered that blood samples taken before the pandemic carried this immunity, but it was not known if it was actually stopping people picking up the virus.

To answer the question, Imperial recruited several hundred households in London last winter before the vaccine programme began, and took blood samples to measure levels of memory T-cells from colds before waiting to see who caught the virus.

Amidst this confusion of references and citations from various authors, we get to the real knub of the issue. It’s not that prior cross-reactive immunity meant that the populace was not equally susceptible to Covid infection – as claimed by Ferguson and the modellers at Imperial and as claimed by Whitty, Vallance etc. in defence of extreme control measures. It’s not that this incorrect assumption was used wrongly in the models to predict the occurrence of many more infections and deaths, thus justifying the initial, catastrophically harmful lockdown (and the two subsequent lockdowns). Oh no, that’s not even mentioned by Knapton. It’s all about developing new ‘vaccines’ on the basis of this ‘new, groundbreaking’ research:

Prof Lalvani added: “We’ve finally reached the Holy Grail which shows that those who were exposed but didn’t get infected had these types of T-cells. These are people who would have picked up a cold, one, two, three years before and their immune cells were in a memory state.

“Coronaviruses are a wide tribe, and these common cold viruses are quite far apart, yet even the T-cells targeting these distant relatives can cross-protect, so imagine if you took one of the core proteins of Sars-Cov-2 and put in a vaccine. The T-cells would cross-recognise variants which opens the door to a universal vaccine that will protect you against all current and future mutant strains as they arise.

“Such a vaccine would not need to be given as frequently because the memory T-cells last longer than the antibodies. We’re in this awful position where we need boosters every three months, but with T-cells you could cut it down to every year or two years.”

Pretty shabby ‘journalism’ from the Torygraph, as we’ve come to expect.

Geert Vanden Bossche is a bit of a hero in my opinion. Perhaps the most unlikely of heroes. A mild-mannered Belgian vaccine expert and former employee of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I do often wonder what happens when he comes across a phone booth!

He has warned from the word go about the dangers of mass vaccination with ‘leaky’ (non-sterilizing) vaccines and he has been almost universally ignored by the consensus ‘experts’. But he hasn’t given up and he keeps plugging actual science even if, at times, it’s a little hard for non-experts like myself to follow and interpret.

This is Geert’s advice for the unvaccinated:

The situation for the unvaccinated is now becoming increasingly difficult because of unjustifiable discrimination. However, I keep saying that the unvaccinated should now less and less worry about their health. Provided they were gradually increasing their contacts, their innate immune system should be well trained by now. Training will only pay off provided you’re in good health and you respect the rules (!) of a healthy lifestyle (which should be well known by now).

So, ‘yes’ even contacts with HEALTHY vaccinees should become less of a problem. It is critical though that people take their supplements (certainly vit C, Zinc) as soon as they don’t feel 100% fit. And keep taking your vitamin D during winter. Regular use of ginger and curcuma are a good idea too! Avoid large and frequent gatherings but make sure your immune system stays trained (so regular contacts are key!).

Last, but not least: mental health is critical, make sure you are in good company and do not fall victim of fear!

Can’t argue with that. Good man. He’s on our side, but more importantly he’s on the side of science and medical ethics.

When it comes down to actual science, he’s hard to beat, but also a little hard to understand at times! But this is what Geert has to say about the ‘hypothesis’ of cross-reactive immune T-cells:

I don’t know how many more contributions I need to write to kill this idea.

Quite recently I was once again confronted with a paper (L. Swadling et al. 2021; 1) leading some scientists to believe that pre-existing cross-reactive T cells against Coronavirus (CoV) replication-transcription complex (RTC) can abort infection and thereby prevent seroconversion against SARS-CoV-2 (SC-2).

The Swadling et al paper is yet another study, published November 2021, this time by University College London, which is not mentioned by Knapton, but is also on the subject of cross-reactive T-cells. The abstract says:

Here we hypothesize that pre-existing memory T cell responses, with cross-protective potential against SARS-CoV-2 (refs. 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11), would expand in vivo to support rapid viral control, aborting infection.

It also says:

Our data highlight RTC-specific T cells as targets for vaccines against endemic and emerging Coronaviridae.

So it’s another ‘vaccine’ pushing study, which is not surprising, considering mass vaccination salesman, Professor Bollox himself, is listed as one of those involved:

So anyway, back to what GVDB says:

Firstly, the authors don’t even claim what many seem to infer from their publication—it merely suggests a role of these pre-existing RTC-specific T cells in aborting SC-2 infection (e.g., ‘we hypothesize that pre-existing memory T cell responses would expand to support rapid viral control, aborting infection’; ‘Pre-existing RTC-specific T cells would be expected to favor early control, explaining their enrichment after abortive compared to classical infection’ or: ‘suggesting abortive infection’, or: ‘supporting a potential role [of NSP12- specific T cells] in protection from PCR-detectable infection and seroconversion’). Secondly, I will illustrate below why this [peer-reviewed] paper does nothing to prove that pre-existing RTC-specific T cells with cross-reactive potential abort infection.

There is no single piece of evidence showing that natural CoV infection (or even any of the C-19 vaccines) induces Ag-specific cytolytic T memory cells. One is therefore unable to reasonably speculate that CoV-specific T memory cells prevent disease.

That seems fairly straightforward. So, here’s where it gets a bit more complicated and difficult to interpret what GVDB is actually saying:

Lack of consensus that immune protection against CoV (and likely against Flu as well) is primarily provided by self-centered innate immune effector lymphocytes (e.g., innate antibody [Ab]-secreting B cells and NK cells) and not by conventional foreign-centered T and B cells is only grist to the mill of those who advocate for C-19 vaccination across all age groups. So, not surprisingly, the authors of this article are proposing that ‘The boosting of such T cells may offer durable pan-Coronaviridae reactivity against endemic and emerging viruses, arguing for their inclusion and assessment as an adjunct to spike-specific antibodies in next-generation vaccines.’ On the other hand, however, they seem to realize that they may be missing the key mechanism that is responsible for abortion of SC-2 infection and that expansion of pre-existing RTC-specific T cells in seronegative (SN) health care workers (HCWs) is only the result of asymptomatic infection but not the cause: ‘A caveat of this work is that we analysed only peripheral immunity; it is plausible that mucosal-sequestered antibodies had a role in our seronegative cohort. It also remains possible that innate immunity mediates control in abortive infections, with RTC-biased T cell responses being generated as a biomarker of low-grade infection.’ And furthermore: ‘A transient/abortive infection that is not detectable by PCR or seroconversion could conceivably result from a lower viral inoculum and/or from a more efficient innate and/or adaptive immune response.’

Here’s what I think GVDB is saying:

/ Protection from SARS-CoV-2 can be achieved via the innate immune system, which is our first line of defence against pathogens, and includes the mucosal immune system which I previously wrote about. With respect to an airborne respiratory virus, the defensive role played by the mucosal immune system consisting of the mucus membranes inside the nose and throat is obviously very important. We’ll come back to this. The authors confirm that the mucosal innate immune system may be playing a part in preventing infection when they say: A caveat of this work is that we analysed only peripheral immunity; it is plausible that mucosal-sequestered antibodies had a role in our seronegative cohort.

/ Immune protection from cross-reactive adaptive B and T-cells is not the primary reason why immune naive (i.e. those not previously exposed) people don’t get infected with SARS-2. Indeed, the existence of this immune response is not evidence of prior cross-reactive immunity, it is evidence of prior infection with SARS-2. The authors confirm this as a possibility when they say: It also remains possible that innate immunity mediates control in abortive infections, with RTC-biased T cell responses being generated as a biomarker of low-grade infection.

/GVDB points out quite rightly that the study is being used as a platform for the development of next generation ‘vaccines’ across all age groups. On this aspect he is particularly scathing:

It’s also difficult to understand why the authors of this and similar SC-2 T cell-dedicated papers are not more skeptical about their own conclusions or postulates on using conserved, cross-reactive T cell epitopes in future C-19 vaccines. Are they unaware that there are no licensed or ‘successful’ candidate vaccines that (universally!) induce T cell-based abrogation of infectious transmission?  Or that no vaccines exist that use non-structural proteins as targets for fighting infectious pathogens? All fields in infectious diseases, whether dealing with viruses, bacteria, or parasites, have explored T cell-based immune interventions to abrogate infection and prevent or cure disease, but all have miserably failed. In contrast to what the authors state, T cells don’t seem to be particularly effective vaccine targets.

In conclusion, GVDB dismisses T-cells as being functionally important in preventing infection in immune naive or previously exposed individuals or terminating infection in such individuals:

SC-2 reactive T memory cells are neither responsible for early nor for late abrogation of SC-2 infection and, therefore, can neither prevent nor terminate C-19 disease. 

So this is where it gets interesting because it appears that something did indeed prevent many people early on in the pandemic from getting infected with SARS-CoV-2 or suffering moderate to severe symptoms. If it wasn’t cross-reactive T-cells from prior infection with the common cold viruses, what was it? Maybe this study gives us a clue:

Interestingly, circulating SARS-CoV-2–reactive T cells have been described in SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals, and it has been suggested that they may have arisen from encounters with related coronaviruses (610).

The authors acknowledge the common cold cross-reactive T-cell hypothesis. But here’s what they find:

Epidemiological studies indicate that asymptomatic infections or infections with a mild course of disease can frequently represent the majority of the study population (15). These observations suggest that the mucosal immune system of the upper respiratory tract may play a role in limiting disease severity in a significant percentage of SARS-CoV-2 infections. This prompted us to explore the presence of mucosal SARS-CoV-2–reactive B cells in tonsillar tissue specimens collected from pediatric patients 3 or more years prior to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In this study, we report the identification of pre-existing mucosal SARS-CoV-2–reactive Abs. These Abs are encoded by naive and Ag-experienced B cells, exhibit neutralizing potential, and do not recognize endemic human coronaviruses.

This is quite an extraordinary finding. They identify SC-2 reactive mucosal B-cells in children from before the pandemic, but these same cells are not reactive to the common cold viruses, so it’s not a case of cross-reactivity via exposure to other common coronaviruses.

Recent studies showing S-protein reactivity of sera collected from SARS-CoV-2–negative individuals suggest that a previous encounter with endemic HCoV may be a potential source of pre-existing circulating S-protein–reactive Abs (1113).

We observed that our panel of Abs readily recognized the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 S-proteins with a small subset of Abs also binding to the S-protein of SARS-CoV but that none of the Abs showed reactivity to the S-proteins of the endemic HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-229E coronaviruses (Fig. 3D3E).

The authors clearly identify a role for the innate mucosal immune system in the prevention of infection from SARS-CoV-2, which has nothing to do with cross-reactive T-cells.

Our detection of pre-existing SARS-CoV-2–reactive Abs in the mucosal immune system of the upper respiratory tract that, although lacking the potency of neutralizing Abs isolated from Covid-19 convalescent individuals, exhibit the ability to partially block ACE2 binding in vitro provides an as-yet-unexplored contribution of the mucosal adaptive immune system to pathogen protection.

Prepandemic serum samples were reported to cross react to SARS-CoV-2, indicating that humoral immune responses to endemic HCoV may engage the viral pathogen following infection but they do not correlate with protection from SARS-CoV-2 (1113). In our analysis, we did not observe cross-reactivity of the mAbs with the endemic HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-229E

Humoral immune responses are those which occur in the blood and the lymphatic fluid, as distinct from mucosal. The authors here identify prepandemic mucosal neutralising antibodies which have played a role in preventing people from getting infected with, or seriously suffering from SARS-CoV-2, which are not related to previous exposure to the common cold. The origin of this pre-existing immunity is therefore a bit of a mystery, but it does explain why children in particular are less susceptible to infection with SARS-CoV-2.

We are left to contemplate how important T-cells actually are in preventing infection and serious disease from Covid versus the importance of mucosal immunity mediated via immune cells in the upper respiratory tract. We are also left to contemplate what role each played in the protection of the populace from the newly emergent SARS-CoV-2 virus very early on in the pandemic and how that prior immunity actually arose, if it was not from exposure to the common cold.


It would appear that the Imperial College London study was started in September 2020 but has only just now been published. This is a ridiculously long time to take to publish data which was collected over a year ago.

It’s good to have further confirmation of this from Imperial (and also recently from UCL), but it has to be said it’s pretty late to the party, and it’s not clear why a study which began in September 2020 during a public health emergency has taken 16 months to report, particularly when vaccines were brought to market in 10 months. 

Black Swan? No, Indiana’s Quadruple 3-Sigma Event Is More Like The Black Death

In Indiana, people aged 18-64 are dying in huge, unprecedented numbers. More specifically, employees of large companies who benefit from group life insurance policies negotiated by their employer are dying in huge numbers. A forty percent increase in 2021 over pre-pandemic levels. It ain’t Covid. It ain’t even the Black Death (Bubonic/pneumonic/septicaemic Plague – which wiped out 40% of Europe’s population in the mid 14th century). Most deaths are recorded as due to a variety of other causes. So what is it? Whatever it is, it’s bad, really bad, this bad:

Davison said the increase in deaths represents “huge, huge numbers,” and that’s it’s not elderly people who are dying, but “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica.

“And what we saw just in third quarter, we’re seeing it continue into fourth quarter, is that death rates are up 40% over what they were pre-pandemic,” he said.

“Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.””

Jessica Rose sarcastically calls it a ‘quatastrophe’:

So we’re talking about levels that are 4 times worse that what would be considered a catastrophe. Wait, doesn’t that make it a quatastrophe? Hardy har har. 

Steve Kirsch definitely thinks it’s the ‘vaccines’ and gives his reasons why:

  1. These deaths started only after the vaccines rolled out
  2. The deaths are “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica. That’s not to say 65 and over aren’t affected as well. What’s key is that we’re seeing effects in young people.
  3. There are more excess deaths than anytime in history, so it is likely caused by a new threat, never seen before in history, like a novel vaccine that has never been used before or something new like that that a huge number of people would be exposed to (such as by a state that pushes vaccination).
  4. Not due to COVID (COVID deaths are way down).
  5. They are dying from a variety of causes, not just a single cause. So this rules out food or air-based pathogens. I note that the variety of causes of death is consistent with the wide range of adverse events caused by the COVID vaccines, for example.
  6. It has to affect massive numbers of people to get an effect size that high. So it is something new affecting at least half the population, like a new mandated vaccine for example.
  7. There is a huge push for vaccines by the Indiana governor, he wants to have everyone vaccinated. Interesting. “Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb doubled down on the drive to get everyone in the state vaccinated.”
  8. Useful fact: Adults 65 and older account for 16% of the US population but 80% of COVID-19 deaths in the US, somewhat higher than their share of deaths from all causes (75%) over the same period. We’ll use that 75% stat later.
  9. It isn’t just the one life insurance company, they are all seeing this huge rises at other insurance companies. So this is something huge and national in scope, like a vaccine mandate in the entire US, or something like that.

It doesn’t look good. We can probably assume that a high percentage of the people who died have been double or triple-jabbed, probably higher than the adult population in general, but even so, if it is the vaccines which are primarily causing these premature deaths, this is going to play out in the population as a whole and it is going to be an absolutely huge, unprecedented public health catastrophe, moreover an avoidable catastrophe, one which our governments and health authorities must at least have been aware of quite early on as a realistic possibility, given the extremely poor safety profile of the ‘vaccines’, even as revealed by Pfizer’s trials prior to emergency use authorisation. The fact that the ‘vaccines’ were not withdrawn much earlier is a crime; very likely it is a crime against humanity on a scale which exceeds considerably any comparable crimes in the 20th century. I do not think that is an exaggeration. It is not hyperbole now and, in retrospect, it was not hyperbole back in July 2020 when I first raised this spectre in relation to enforced wearing of masks. Tyranny proceeds in small steps, until one day you wake up and realise that a genocide has been slipped under the rug when you weren’t looking. You might prefer to call it mass corporate manslaughter or democide as a resultant of malfeasance in public office. Robert Malone hints darkly that it may be something more sinister even than that:

As Jan Jekielek (a senior editor with The Epoch Times) recently said to me, it is getting harder and harder to tell which ones are mere conspiracy theories and which are true reality. 

One farm visitor told me of his foreshadowing massive numbers of deaths within three years consequent to the genetic vaccines, and that this was all about the “Great Reset” and the depopulation agenda of the World Economic Forum (WEF).  I tried to reassure him that, in my opinion, this was highly unlikely.

But I am wandering from a point that I am afraid to clearly state. 

It is starting to look to me like the largest experiment on human beings in recorded history has failed.  And, if this rather dry report from a senior Indiana life insurance executive holds true, then Reiner Fuellmich’s “Crimes against Humanity” push for convening new Nuremberg trials starts to look a lot less quixotic and a lot more prophetic.

Jessica Rose is rather more blunt:

So what does this tell us? It tells us that we are potentially in a huge steaming pile of shit. To be frank. These indications from our friend at the insurance company are simply that – indications. If what we are seeing in VAERS, and the other adverse event reporting systems, is the mere reflection of what is actually going on with regards to injuries, which I presume it is, then we ain’t seen nothing yet. And if what is being reported with regards to immune deficiencies associated with these injections is not simply anecdotal or representative of a small sub-cohort of individuals, we could be looking at a government imposed complete health disaster.

Covid ‘Vaccines’ – The Unpalatable Truth Plus Why Scientists and Politicians May Have Committed Original Antigenic Sin

This is going to be a long article. There’s a lot to cover. I’ll try to break it up into bite-sized pieces so it’s easier to digest, but even the bite sized pieces are going to be pretty hard to swallow for some who’ve been suckered into getting jabbed. If you have, what’s done is done, but please, whatever you do, don’t get a ‘booster’ jab and don’t, if you have an ounce of decency and common sense, allow your kids to get jabbed. In the words of Dr Sucharit Bhakdi:

If you’re going for your third, write your will first.

The Vaccinated Superspread Hypothesis (is backed up by data)

We’ve already seen evidence for virtually unhindered viral transmission amongst double-jabbed health care workers in a hospital in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam:

Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people.

There’s a lot more data coming through though which is suggesting that not only are the double-jabbed just as likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 as the unjabbed, that not only do they harbour a similar viral load as the unjabbed but they are actually more likely to become infected than the unjabbed. First, let’s look at Israel again. This video has been posted on Twitter; a clip from Israeli TV news:

The commentator explains that 90% of cases recorded yesterday were in the double-jabbed and just 10% in the ‘unvaccinated’. However, ‘unvaccinated’ includes partially vaccinated so we don’t know for sure what percentage of cases were in the completely unjabbed, but it’s probably rather less than 10%, maybe much less. He then goes on to say that the proportion of double-jabbed in Israel is 94%, which means that being double jabbed offers essentially no protection against being infected with delta, now the dominant circulating variant in Israel. What it doesn’t tell us is the infection rate in the unjabbed compared to the double or single-jabbed. Supposedly, the ‘booster’ rollout will address this problem, but it hasn’t; infections are still running at record highs, meaning the government is now recommending a fourth jab in a few months time and then a fifth, and sixth, ad nauseum. Absolutely absurd. Essentially, if you get aboard the Covid ‘vaccine’ conveyor belt, then you are expected to be jabbed every few months as each new variant makes an appearance. You’re hooked for life, which with that number of synthetic mRNA injections (coding for a cytotoxic spike protein, which finds its way into most organs of your body including the brain) is likely to be short and increasingly unpleasant.

So, back to the data. Here we have a study titled “Shedding of Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Despite Vaccination” which might equally have been called “Shedding of Infectious SARSCoV2 Because of Vaccination”. Why? Because here is what they found:

Low Ct values were detected in vaccinated people regardless of symptoms at the time of testing (Figure 1C). Ct values <25 were detected in 7 of 24 unvaccinated (29%; CI: 13-51%) and 9 of 11 fully vaccinated asymptomatic individuals (82%; CI: 48-97%), and 158 of 232 unvaccinated (68%, CI: 62- 74%) and 156 of 225 fully vaccinated (69%; CI: 63-75%) symptomatic individuals. Time from symptom onset to testing did not vary by vaccination status (p=0.40; Supplemental Figure 2). Infectious virus was detected in the sole specimen tested from an asymptomatic fully vaccinated individual. Although few asymptomatic individuals were sampled, these results indicate that even asymptomatic, fully vaccinated people might shed infectious virus.

Only 29% of unjabbed asymptomatic carriers were highly infectious (Ct<25). A massive 82% of double-jabbed asymptomatic carriers, on the other hand, were similarly highly infectious. This implies that being jabbed makes you a highly infectious asymptomatic superspreader. In those with symptoms, 68% of unjabbed were infectious vs. 69% of those double-jabbed, so no real difference in the symptomatic spreaders.

El Gato Malo’s superspread hypothesis is looking more likely according to the data:

the current surge in covid deaths is caused by the vaccinated.

the covid vaccines are extremely leaky and may well accelerate contracting and carrying covid.

they allow for very high viral loads to go unnoticed and generate a new and severe asymptomatic spread vector to where none existed before.

the high viral loads lead to greater contagion. they may lead to greater severity (but this data is iffy and contested)

vaccine campaigns cause superspread events because vaccination leads to a 2 week window of 40-100% more covid risk that then gets counted as “unvaccinated” because the definitions are bad.

this combination makes those vaccinated with one dose or more into superspread bombs.

If you’re still not convinced, we have more very recent data from the UK. According to The Daily Sceptic and according to PHE’s own data:

None of this concept-policing does anything to alter the facts, however. In recent weeks reported infection rates have been higher in the double vaccinated than in the unvaccinated for the over-40s. That means that, for this period, (unadjusted) vaccine effectiveness is negative in those age groups.

It shows that in the two weeks since my article the vaccine effectiveness has dropped further, with unadjusted vaccine effectiveness in the over-40s now hitting as low as minus-53% among people in their 60s. This means that, on this data for this age group, the double vaccinated experienced a 53% higher reported infection rate than the unvaccinated in the past month. And that’s a fact.

So, it now looks like those people who were jabbed early on (people in their 60s) actually have an increased risk of being infected compared to those who are not jabbed and reliant upon their own natural immunity. This appears to confirm what Geert Vanden Bossche was warning about as early as March this year when he indicated the possibility that immunising people against a narrow part of the virus (which is proving to be highly mutable) might make those immunised more vulnerable when a new variant becomes dominant because the now largely ineffective vaccinated immune response against the new variant might nonetheless suppress the innate immune response. This is the phenomenon known as original antigenic sin and I was warning people about it some time ago on Twitter:

This is what the experts have to say:

The basis of “original antigenic sin” requires immunological memory, and our immune system ability to autocorrect. In the context of viral infections, it is expected that if we are exposed to a native strain of a pathogen, we should be able to mount a secondary immune response on subsequent exposure to the same pathogen. “Original antigenic sin” will not contradict this well-established immunological process, as long as the subsequent infectious antigen is identical to the original one. But “original antigenic sin” implies that when the epitope varies slightly, then the immune system relies on memory of the earlier infection, rather than mount another primary or secondary response to the new epitope which would allow faster and stronger responses. The result is that the immunological response may be inadequate against the new strain, because the immune system does not adapt and instead relies on its memory to mount a response. In the case of vaccines, if we only immunize to a single strain or epitope, and if that strain/epitope changes over time, then the immune system is unable to mount an accurate secondary response. In addition, depending of the first viral exposure the secondary immune response can result in an antibody-dependent enhancement of the disease or at the opposite, it could induce anergy. Both of them triggering loss of pathogen control and inducing aberrant clinical consequences.

Doesn’t sound good does it? In the case of the broad spectrum infection acquired immunity to Covid, original antigenic sin would appear not to be an issue because not only does our immune system remember the whole virus (not just a single spike protein), it is also remarkably good at ‘guessing’ how the virus will mutate in future. In the case of a vaccine-induced narrow spectrum immune response (to the spike region), this looks like it could be a potential problem and now the data is pointing in that direction with regard to delta infections.

Finally, here is another study of vaccine effectiveness of the mRNA ‘vaccines’ in 5.6 million Americans aged over 65. The key findings are that since delta appeared, vaccine effectivness has waned considerably, more so in those jabbed early on.

How Effective Are the Vaccines at Preventing Covid Hospitalisations and Deaths?

Remember, this is the key metric by which governments originally sold us the jabs. They would supposedly stop the old and the vulnerable from getting sick and dying in such great numbers, so that when this key cohort was fully jabbed we could rejoice and celebrate the return of our freedoms according to Wanksock. That didn’t last long did it? Mission creep turned into an express train. So how are the old and the vulnerable, who got their first jabs six or more months ago, actually doing? Great, according to the ONS:

Some deaths are expected in vaccinated individuals as the number of people who are vaccinated is high and no vaccine is 100% effective. Between 2 January and 2 July 2021, there were 640 deaths involving COVID-19 in people who had received both vaccine doses, which is 1.2% of all deaths involving COVID-19 in that period (51,281 deaths). There were 458 deaths involving COVID-19 in people who received their second dose at least 21 days before the date of death. Deaths involving COVID-19 accounted for 0.8% of all deaths in this group, compared with 37.4% in unvaccinated individuals.

OMG, the unjabbed are dropping like flies compared to the double-jabbed! But the Daily Sceptic exposes the scam:

The ONS has published a new study on Covid deaths which purports to show how few vaccinated people die of Covid. Here’s how the Telegraph reported the headline claim: “Only 59 fully vaccinated people without serious health conditions died from COVID-19 out of more than 50,000 deaths in England this year, new figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show.”

These statistics appear remarkable – until you realise what they’ve done. Although the data is presented as “this year” in fact the cut-off date is July 2nd. That is significant because it is just before the Delta surge got going. This means the data all comes from the Alpha surge, when almost no-one was vaccinated and tens of thousands of Covid deaths were reported, and from the quiet spring and early summer when many were vaccinated but almost no-one died (see chart below).

Comparing the number of deaths in the vaccinated and unvaccinated over this period and presenting it as a percentage is meaningless and to imply it tells us anything about the effectiveness of the vaccines is misleading.

What we need to know is how many jabbed people are dying with the current delta surge. DS provides the answer, using PHE data:

The important question is what the death rates were by vaccination status during the Delta surge, not prior to it.

Public Health England published a report last week which gave us this data for the period of August 9th to September 5th. Here is the table of deaths broken down by vaccination status and age.

This shows that of 2,381 deaths in this period, 1,659 or 69.7%, more than two thirds, were in the double vaccinated. Six hundred deaths or 25.2% were in the unvaccinated. This is very different to the ONS statistics as quoted in the press that 99% of deaths were in those not double vaccinated. Yet no major media outlet compared or contrasted the ONS data with the PHE data released just days ago and asked why there was such a gaping discrepancy.
In the over-50s, the PHE report showed that 1,621 of 2,222 deaths or 73% were in the double vaccinated compared to 499 or 22.5% in the unvaccinated. Once you take into account the proportions of the over-50s vaccinated and unvaccinated this works out at a vaccine effectiveness against death of 68.1% – respectable, but a far cry from the kind of claims being made by the ONS and parroted by the media.

Clearly, with the arrival of delta, the ‘vaccines’ are not nearly as effective in preventing deaths as was originally claimed and it looks like as time goes on, their effectiveness in preventing infection, serious disease and death is waning considerably.

El Gato Malo has been looking at the deaths and hosptalisations data in US states and detects a clear seasonal signal, varying with latitude, as expected for a seasonal disease. However:

But most worrying is that despite vaccination and despite much more real herd immunity from disease recovery AND a milder variant that, while a bit more contagious, is ~2/3 less lethal, we’re seeing higher cases, deaths, and hospitalizations.

Something is clearly very wrong.

The south and west are dropping in line with seasonal expectation, but the northeast and midwest are rising and are at worse levels than last year by 5X in the NE (most vaccinated part of US) and 2.7X in the MW. testing is about 2X this time last year, so this adjusts down to 2.5X and 1.35X respectively.

And overall hospitalizations are up, not down vs year ago and so are deaths, both by wide margins. (2.5X and 2.7X respectively)

This is not at ALL what one would expect if vaccines were working to stop deaths and hospitalizations (as they seem to be in UK, albeit at closer to 50% VE than the 90’s promised) and with a much lower CFR variant (delta) now predominant. and no, low delta CFR does not look to be a function of vaccines.

Summary So Far

Since the appearance of the delta variant and its dominance in recorded cases:

/ Cases have increased

/ Those double-jabbed have as much virus in their nose and throat as unjabbed people

/ Delta spreads very easily between double-jabbed individuals – the ‘vaccines’ are having virtually no effect on reducing transmission

/ The double-jabbed appear to be asymptomatic/presymptomatic superspreaders

/ It is looking like those people double-jabbed early on are now more likely to become infected with delta than the unjabbed

/ Ominously, it’s looking like highly jabbed populations are experiencing an increase in Covid deaths and hospitalisations as ‘vaccine’ effectiveness wanes and the jabbed become superspreaders

It Gets Worse – The Jabbed Are Dying in Disproportionate Numbers

The ONS appear to have slipped up again and inadvertently released data which shows the ‘vaccinated’ are dying in disproportionate numbers from all causes compared to those unjabbed. It’s the same data they publicly aired to supposedly ‘prove’ that the ‘vaccines’ were effective at preventing deaths, ending July 2nd, which the Daily Sceptic pulled to pieces above. The Expose writes:

This means the unvaccinated account for just 30.3% of deaths, the partly vaccinated account for 37.6% of deaths, and the fully vaccinated account for 32% of deaths due to all causes excluding Covid-19 during the first six months of 2021. Therefore, people who had received a Covid-19 vaccine account for 69.7% of deaths due to all causes excluding Covid-19, with a total of 145,968 people having died.

At first glance you could argue that this would be expected due to the majority of the population allegedly having received a Covid-19 vaccine. However, these deaths did not all occur once the majority of the population had been vaccinated.

60% of deaths due to all causes between January 2nd 2021 and July 2nd 2021 occurred during the first three months, the majority of these occurring in January, followed by February, and then March.

By the end of these three months 47.6% of the population had received a single dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, and just 7.4% of the population had received a second dose of a Covid-19 vaccine.

Even by July 2nd 2021 just 67.6% of the population had received a single dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, whilst 50.2% of the population had received a second dose of a Covid-19 vaccine.

We cannot say for sure that the unjabbed are dying in disproportionate numbers because of the limitations of the ONS data, but it very much looks that way from the data they have supplied.

It would be helpful to have more data on deaths by vaccination status, such as the date of occurrence, in order to come to a firm conclusion.

However, what we do know is that the majority of deaths due to all causes occurred during the first three months of 2021 when the number of people to have received a single dose of a Covid-19 vaccine ranged from 2% to 47.6% and the number of people to have received a second dose ranged from 0% to just 7.4%.

Couple the above with data published by Public Health England which shows 72% of Covid-19 deaths due to the Delta Covid-19 variant have been among the vaccinated population since February 1st up to September 12th, and 74% of Covid-19 deaths due to the Delta Covid-19 variant have been among the vaccinated population since August 2nd and September 12th, then it is possible to conclude that the Covid-19 vaccines are not working, and have killed thousands.

Of course, The Expose is a ‘conspiracy’ site. We know this because it keeps getting banned by Twitter, therefore we can’t believe the facts which they publish online, so for completeness let’s look at what Queen Mary College London analysts Norman Fenton and Martin Neil have to say on their Probability and Risk blog:

The UK Government’s own data does not support the claims made for vaccine effectiveness/safety. 

In a previous post we argued that the most reliable long-term measure of Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness/safety is the age adjusted all-cause mortality rate. If, over a reasonably prolonged period, fewer vaccinated people die, from whatever cause, including Covid-19, than unvaccinated people then we could conclude that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks.

The  latest Office for National Statistics report on mortality rates by Covid vaccination status provides data on all deaths – Covid related and non-Covid related for the period Jan-July 2021 for the unvaccinated and the different categories of vaccinated (‘within 21 days of first dose’, ’21 days or more after first dose’, ‘second dose’). 

We believe there are severe weaknesses and possible errors in the ONS data (see foonote**). But importantly, while it does not provide the raw age categorized data, it does provide “age standardized” mortality rates***. This means the ONS have calculated the overall mortality rate in a way which (they believe) adjusts for the confounding effect of age, and this is ‘baked into’ the mortality rates they have published.  However, while they report this age adjusted mortality rate for each of the three separate categories of vaccinated people they do not report it for the combined set of vaccinated people. In our analysis, and in the absence of the actual age stratified data, we compute a population weighted age adjusted all-cause mortality rate by using the ONS’s published population sizes for each of the three categories of vaccinated. This is not ideal because the ONS age adjusted rates are so opaque and are not ‘abolute numbers’. However, in the absence of detailed data this should provide a reasonable estimate of what the ONS age adjusted all-cause mortality rate would be for all unvaccinated if they had bothered to report it. We will call this the ‘weighted vaccinated mortality rate’. The data table derived from the ONS data and used to compute this rate is given at the end of this post.

It turns out that, even using this age adjusted mortality rate, the death rate is currently higher among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated.  

Because of the limitations and possible errors in the ONS data**, there are many caveats that need to be applied to our crude analysis (including some which are covered in the previous post). But we can conclude that the ONS’s own data does not support the claims made for vaccine effectiveness/safety.  

So there you have it. A more rigorous analysis of the ONS data, by expert statisticians, confirms that the jabbed are dying at a greater rate from all causes, not just Covid, than are the unjabbed. How on earth could this be you ask? The ‘vaccines are supposed to save lives, not expedite our demise. Some of the answers to that question have been staring us in the face for months and I’ve provided quite a few hints here on my own humble blog.

Covid ‘Vaccine’ Harms

Sarah Knapton at the Telegraph published an interesting article yesterday, highlighting facts for a change, not opinion or gossip, which most of the MSM has excelled in for 18 months. It’s titled, provocatively:

Thousands more people than usual are dying … but it’s not from Covid

She writes:

While focus remains firmly fixed on Covid-19, a second health crisis is quietly emerging in Britain. Since the beginning of July, there have been thousands of excess deaths that were not caused by coronavirus.

According to health experts, this is highly unusual for the summer. Although excess deaths are expected during the winter months, when cold weather and seasonal infections combine to place pressure on the NHS, summer generally sees a lull.

This year is a worrying outlier. 

Whatever can be wrong? Sarah puts it all down to delays in treatment and compromised population immunity due to lockdowns. Without doubt, these must be factors, especially the dirt poor ‘health’ service now very reluctantly granted grudgingly as a favour to citizens by elitist NHS GPs intent on not seeing patients. Many urgent, life threatening cases are going undiagnosed as a result, but still there is a huge backlog of outpatient appointments at hospitals. However, what our national newspaper science editor fails to reveal is the very analysis above which reveals that the jabbed are dying at a greater rate than the unjabbed. There is a clue in her article though as to what is killing significant numbers of people and, as it happens, this appears to coincide with reported serious adverse reactions to the jabs:

Data from Public Health England (PHE) shows that during that period there were 2,103 extra death registrations with ischemic heart disease, 1,552 with heart failure, as well as an extra 760 deaths with cerebrovascular diseases such as stroke and aneurysm and 3,915 with other circulatory diseases.

Nothing like investigative science journalism which is short on investigation and leaves out relevant science, eh? Wouldn’t want to upset Pol Pot Belly and Rabid Jabid though. So must tread carefully.

At the recent FDA advisory group meeting where the board voted 16-2 not to roll out mRNA booster jabs to the general populace, Steve Kirsch, Executive Director of the Covid-19 Early Treatment Fund, made a remarkable claim:

“I’m going to focus my remarks today on the elephant in the room that nobody likes to talk about, that the vaccines kill more than they save.”

“We were led to believe that the vaccines were perfectly safe but this is simply not true, for example there are four times as many heart attacks in the treatment group in the Pfizer 6 month file report, that wasn’t just bad luck. VAERS shows heart attacks happen 71 times more often following these vaccines compared to any other vaccine,

“Only the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) are statistically significant, but the other numbers are troubling.

“Even if the vaccines have 100% protection, it still means we kill 2 people to save 1 life.

“Four experts did analysis using completely different non US data sources and all of them came up with approximately the same number of excess vaccine related deaths, about 411 deaths per million doses. That translates into 115,000 people have died (due to the Covid-19 vaccines).

“The real numbers confirm that we kill more than we save. And I would love to look at the Israel ministry of health data on the 90+ year olds where we went from a 94.4% vaccinated group to 82.9% vaccinated in the last 4 months.

“In the most optimistic [case] it means that 50% of the vaccinated people died and 0% of unvaccinated people died. Unless you can explain that to the public you cannot approve the boosters.”

Steve Kirsch, who is also a ‘conspiracy theorist’, having been banned from Twitter, can be found on Gab. He has recently dug up this devastating paper, appearing in Toxicology Reports. The findings of this study should seriously concern everyone. The Abstract says:

This article examines issues related to COVID-19 inoculations for children. The bulk of the official COVID-19-attributed deaths per capita occur in the elderly with high comorbidities, and the COVID-19 attributed deaths per capita are negligible in children. The bulk of the normalized post-inoculation deaths also occur in the elderly with high comorbidities, while the normalized post-inoculation deaths are small, but not negligible, in children. Clinical trials for these inoculations were very short-term (a few months), had samples not representative of the total population, and for adolescents/children, had poor predictive power because of their small size. Further, the clinical trials did not address changes in biomarkers that could serve as early warning indicators of elevated predisposition to serious diseases. Most importantly, the clinical trials did not address long-term effects that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades.

A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19 in the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. The risk of death from COVID-19 decreases drastically as age decreases, and the longer-term effects of the inoculations on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.

Here is a list of the known and potential side effects of the Covid ‘vaccines’, according to the authors:

We believe that mid-or long-term adverse effects are possible based
on the recent emergence of evidence that would support the probability
of mid-and long-term adverse effects from the COVID-19 inoculants,
such as:
1) The spike protein itself can be a toxin/pathogenic protein:
2) S protein alone can damage vascular endothelial cells (ECs) by
downregulating ACE2 and consequently inhibiting mitochondrial
function [37].
3) it is concluded that ACE2 and endothelial damage is a central part
of SARS-CoV2 pathology and may be induced by the spike protein
alone [38].
4) the spike protein of SARS-CoV-1 (without the rest of the virus)
reduces ACE2 expression, increases angiotensin II levels, exacerbates
lung injury, and triggers cell signaling events that may
promote pulmonary vascular remodeling and Pulmonary Arterial
Hypertension (PAH) as well as possibly other cardiovascular
complications [39].
5) the recombinant S protein alone elicits functional alterations in
cardiac vascular pericytes (PCs) [40]. This was documented as:
6) increased migration
7) reduced ability to support EC network formation on Matrigel
8) secretion of pro-inflammatory molecules typically involved in the
cytokine storm
9) production of pro-apoptotic factors responsible for EC death.
Furthermore, the S protein stimulates the phosphorylation/activation
of the extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2)
through the CD147 receptor, but not ACE2, in cardiac PCs, the S
protein may elicit vascular cell dysfunction, potentially amplifying,
or perpetuating, the damage caused by the whole coronavirus
10) “even in the absence of the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2
receptors, the S1 subunit from SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binding
to neutral phospholipid membranes leads to their mechanical
destabilization and permeabilization. A similar cytotoxic effect of
the protein was seen in human lung epithelial cells.” [125].
11) The LNP layer encapsulating the mRNA of the inoculant is highly
inflammatory in both intradermal and intranasal inoculation
[41] and “Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a cause of anaphylaxis to
the Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA COVID-19 vaccine” [42]. “Humans
are likely developing PEG antibodies because of exposure to
everyday products containing PEG. Therefore, some of the immediate
allergic responses observed with the first shot of
mRNA-LNP vaccines might be related to pre-existing PEG antibodies.
Since these vaccines often require a booster shot,
anti-PEG antibody formation is expected after the first shot. Thus,
the allergic events are likely to increase upon re-vaccination”
There is also the possibility that the components of the LNP
shell could induce the ASIA Syndrome (autoimmune/
inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants), as
shown by studies on post-inoculation thyroid hyperactivity [44]
and post-inoculation subacute thyroiditis [45].
12 The spike protein has been found in the plasma of postinoculation
individuals, implying that it could circulate to, and
impact adversely, any part of the body [46].
13 The spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 crosses the blood-brain barrier
in mice [47], and “the SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins trigger a
pro-inflammatory response on brain endothelial cells that may
contribute to an altered state of BBB function” [48].
14 The spike proteins manufactured in vivo by the present COVID-19
inoculations could potentially “precipitate the onset of autoimmunity
in susceptible subgroups, and potentially exacerbate
autoimmunity in subjects that have pre-existing autoimmune
diseases”, based on the finding that anti-SARS-CoV-2 protein

antibodies cross-reacted with 28 of 55 diverse human tissue antigens

15 “The biodistribution of ChaAdOx1 [Astra Zeneca’s recombinant
adenovirus vaccine candidate against SARS-CoV-2] in mice
confirmed the delivery of vaccine into the brain tissues [50]. The
vaccine may therefore spur the brain cells to produce CoViD spike
proteins that may lead to an immune response against brain cells,
or it may spark a spike protein-induced thrombosis. This may
explain the peculiar incidences of the fatal cerebral venous sinus
thrombosis (CVST) observed with viral vector-based CoViD-19
vaccines” [51,52].
A complementary perspective to explain adenovirus-based
vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia is that “transcription of
wildtype and codon-optimized Spike open reading frames enables
alternative splice events that lead to C-terminal truncated,
soluble Spike protein variants. These soluble Spike variants may
initiate severe side effects when binding to ACE2-expressing
endothelial cells in blood vessels.” [100].
16 A Pfizer Confidential study performed in Japan showed that
“modRNA encoding luciferase formulated in LNP comparable to
BNT162b2′′ injected intramuscularly concentrated in many organs/
tissues in addition to the injection site [53]. The main
organs/sites identified were adrenal glands, liver, spleen, bone
marrow, and ovaries. While damage to any of these organs/sites
could be serious (if real for humans), adverse effects on the
ovaries could be potentially catastrophic for women of childbearing
or pre-childbearing age.

Talking of the effect of spike proteins on the endothelial lining of the blood vessels, the authors state the following:

These effects can occur throughout the body in the short term, as we
are seeing with the VAERS results. They can occur in the mid- and longterm
as well, due to the time required for destructive processes to have
full effect and the administration of further inoculations. For example,
micro-clots resulting from the inoculation that were insufficient to cause
observable symptoms could in effect raise the baseline for thrombotic
disease [92]. Lifestyle activities that contribute to enhanced blood
clotting would have less distance to travel to produce observable
symptoms, and thus the serious effects of clotting would have been
accelerated [59,60]. As an example: the risk of venous thrombosis is
approximately 2- to 4-fold increased after air travel [61]. How much this
rate would increase after the inoculations, where microthrombi have
formed in some recipients, is unknown. These potential baseline-raising
effects could impact the interpretation of the VAERS results, as we show
at the end of Appendix 1.

The authors perform a cost-benefit analysis using the VAERS data, known clinical pathology associated with injection of the ‘vaccines’ and projections of long and mid term effects and they come to this devastating conclusion:

Thus, our extremely conservative estimate for risk-benefit ratio is about 5/1. In plain English, people in the 65+ demographic are five times as likely to die from the inoculation as from COVID-19 under the most favorable assumptions! This demographic is the most vulnerable to adverse effects from COVID-19. As the age demographics go below about 35 years old, the chances of death from COVID-19 become very small, and when they go below 18, become negligible.

It should be remembered that the deaths from the inoculations shown in VAERS are short-term only (˜six months for those inoculated initially), and for children, extremely short-term (˜one month) [3]. Intermediate and long-term deaths remain to be identified, and are possible from ADE, autoimmune effects, further clotting and vascular diseases, etc., that take time to develop. Thus, the long-term cost-benefit ratio under the best-case scenario could well be on the order of 10/1, 20/1, or more for all the demographics, increasing with decreasing age, and an order-of-magnitude higher under real-world scenarios! In summary, the value of these COVID-19 inoculations is not obvious from a cost-benefit perspective for the most vulnerable age demographic, and is not obvious from any perspective for the least vulnerable age demographic.

Is Now The Winter Of Our Discontent?

It certainly looks like it in the UK. We’re looking at soaring energy bills, possible major blackouts, fuel shortages, possibly food shortages, a crisis of health care (all mostly manufactured by the media and by government incompetence/calculated planning), soaring respiratory infections and escalating deaths due to all causes, a government chomping at the bit to introduce more restrictions and lockdowns and justify the introduction of totally useless vaccine passports whose only real purpose is to act as an entry-level digital ID for a globally enforced social credit system allied with digitalised central bank currencies. Then there’s the alleged ‘climate crisis’ (a Guardian style guide invention) which we’ll be plugged with ad nauseum in the run up to COP 26 and have our journeys interrupted by paid ‘climate protestors’ blocking roads (assuming we can fill up the car). Not to put too fine a point on it, some people (maybe a lot of people are not going to make it through this coming hell winter and a large part of the blame for the coming carnage will fall at the feet of our politicians and a craven main stream media who have created the ‘crises’ which we will be facing. Original sinners, one and all, who most likely have also committed original antigenic sin; thus the last word must go to Geert Vanden Bossche in his recent article, The Last Post:

It’s important to note that a high background level of innate population-level immunity will prevent the virus from wiping out a whole population. Part of this immunological capacity will be eroded as the infectious pressure rises; however, it will subsequently be replaced by robust, naturally acquired immunity when people who became vulnerable recover from the disease. This mechanism enables the host population to keep the virus under control while – in return – providing the virus with a renewable reservoir for asymptomatic transmission (i.e., by virtue of asymptomatically infected people). This is how Sars-CoV-2 could have become endemic.

Let’s now consider the additional impact of human intervention on the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic. Human intervention too may have both detrimental and beneficial effects which may be age-dependent as well and equally evolve over time. More importantly, influences from human intervention will interfere with those caused by the evolutionary dynamics of a natural pandemic. Infection prevention measures may, for example, have a beneficial short-time effect in that they diminish viral transmission and, therefore, reduce morbidity rates in vulnerable people (i.e., primarily in the elderly). In the longer run, however, they may lead to insufficient training of innate immune mechanisms, which would primarily become manifest in those who primarily rely on innate immunity as a first line of immune defense (i.e., children).

There should be no doubt that non-transmission-blocking vaccines (i.e., so-called ‘leaky’ or ‘imperfect’ vaccines) can never ever control a pandemic, even though they may temporarily protect against disease.

Given the globally increasing immune pressure and concomitant infectious viral pressure, genomic epidemiologists have no doubt that this pandemic roller coaster will not stop before it takes us over the cliff into the abyss of complete viral resistance to anti-spike (S) antibodies. That is where all runaway trains of the different ongoing pandemics of highly infectious variants will be coming together and converge into a big whirl where they can no longer be distinguished from one another. The first stages of this evolution is what we now begin to see in countries which have already massively vaccinated their population (e.g., Israel). There is no doubt that other countries like the United Kingdom and the United States will soon go down the same path. Due to increasing resistance to neutralizing anti-S antibodies (Abs), these countries are now even beginning to shift from a primarily beneficial (i.e., less susceptible to severe disease) to a primarily detrimental effect (more susceptible to severe disease) in the vaccinated as compared to the unvaccinated (

The current situation is highly problematic as ALL segments of the population will dramatically suffer from a situation where anti-S Abs still bind strongly enough to suppress the vaccinee’s innate immune response against non-mutable, highly conserved Coronavirus (CoV) motifs while no longer being able to sufficiently neutralize highly infectious variants. Instead, poor binding affinity of anti-RBD (receptor-binding domain) Abs to Sars-CoV-2 S protein as a result of mutations in the N-terminal domain (NTD) could tip the scale in favor of infection-enhancing Abs and thereby make vaccinees prone to suffering Ab-dependent enhancement (ADE) of Covid-19 disease (1) (Liu et al., 2021; Yahi N et al., 2021).

Viral resistance to these S-specific Abs is a terrifying thought as spike protein is not only required but sufficient for enabling CoV infectiousness and pathogenicity (Belouzard S, 2012; Weiss and Navas-Martin, 2005).

The mass vaccination hype will undoubtedly enter history as the most reckless experiment in the history of medicine. It will be cited as the unequivocal proof of how overuse or misuse of man-made antimicrobials leads to antimicrobial resistance, regardless of whether the antimicrobial is an antibiotic or an antibody administered through passive immunization or elicited via active immunization. Mass vaccination campaigns conducted in the middle of a viral pandemic will, for generations to come, become the most sobering example of the boundaries of human intervention in nature in general and of the boundaries of conventional vaccinology in particular. This irrational experiment will unambiguously highlight the clear-cut limitations of conventional vaccine approaches. It will convincingly illustrate that – unlike natural acute self-limiting infection or disease – ‘modern’ technologies alone do not suffice to develop vaccines that are capable of preventing viral transmission or immune escape.

Summary of ‘Vaccine’ Harms

/ Huge and unprecedented numbers of serious adverse reactions and deaths compared to other vaccines

/ ‘Vaccines’ killing more people than saving, potentially killing a lot more people in the medium to long term

/ Well defined set of clinical symptoms associated with adverse reactions and deaths due to ‘vaccination’

/ Spike proteins and lipid mRNA envelope causing a lot of the clinical symptoms – microclots a long term risk multiplier.

/ Data showing that the death rate from all causes in the double-jabbed exceeds that of the unjabbed

/ Mass vaccination with leaky vaccines will potentially extend the pandemic and make matters a lot worse

/ Booster jabs will ony exacerbate the situation and quite likely seriously harm many individuals who get them

My advice to those jabbed and unjabbed. Get some Ivermectin in stock and take Vitamin D supplements throughout the dark winter months. Don’t let your kids get jabbed. Do not get a booster jab at any price. Let’s stay warm, stay healthy and let’s hopefully stay together through this very challenging coming winter (not forgetting an extremely challenging coming summer for our friends Down Under).

Update 26th September:

This research article was brought to my attention on Twitter:

Review of data from the three COVID-19 vaccines marketed in the US shows complete lack of a health benefit and even an increase in severe events among vaccine recipients. The proper scientific clinical trial endpoint, “all cause severe morbidity” was created by combining all severe and or life threatening events, both infectious and non-infectious, occurring in the vaccinated and placebo control groups respectively. The data (Table 1) shows there are clearly more severe events in the vaccinated groups. The results are highly statistically significant. The use of a true scientific measure of health as an endpoint for a vaccine trial gives a contrasting result compared to the use of a non-scientific surrogate endpoint of heath, severe infections with COVID-19.

Ernst Wolff – Uncovering The Corona Narrative August 2021

I’ve been reading a lot recently, not only about science but finance and economics, a topic which I have never found easy to understand and have shied away from trying to understand for most of my life.

I still fail to grasp even the basics of global economics except now for this one thing: the global financial system was on the brink of collapse in 2008 and was only prevented from doing so by bailing out the ‘too big to fail banks’. But that just delayed the inevitable and just before the ‘pandemic’, the system was on the brink of collapse once again.

The solution – the final solution – was to destroy the old financial system deliberately in order to bring about a Great Reset of the world economy, allowing the big stakeholders complete control over our lives and all financial transactions via programmable central bank digital currencies, a digitised Universal Basic Income, to be administered via universal digital IDs. The so called ‘vaccine passport’, necessary to control deadly infections supposedly, but now exposed as absurdly unfit for purpose, was to be the entry-level digital ID and it is still being brought in and enforced by governments worldwide, even though it is obvious that it has nothing whatsoever to do with public health. They have to you see, they can’t do anything else. They set in motion the Great Reset in desperation to secure their financial assets. It cannot be reversed. They have committed themselves absolutely and either it will succeed and humanity will be subjected to a horrifying totalitarian New World Order of top-down global governance with the total loss of all our basic human rights and freedoms, or it will not.

This video makes it all crystal clear for me now. I guessed almost from the word go that the ‘Covid crisis’ was a scam, that the response was globally planned and coordinated and that Klaus Schwab’s WEF was probably intimately involved. What I didn’t know was why, what was the prime motive for such a horrifyingly harmful and destructive scheme, implemented in virtual unison by governments all over the world? It turns out that the drivers were simple: greed and control. The corporate ‘stakeholders’ have vastly increased their wealth over the last 18 months at the expense of humanity in general. Even pre-Covid, the elite ruling technocracy and the bankers were gaining far too much power and influence via the digital revolution. They saw that the collapse of the old world economic system was inevitable precisely as a result of their unrestrained greed and lust for power, so they devised a new system whereby not only would they increase their wealth spectacularly, but they would have total control over every human being on the planet. Needless to say, they are extremely dangerous psychopaths, megalomaniac malignant narcissists who think nothing about inflicting poverty and misery upon billions and killing many millions of people in order to achieve their aims.

This video explains it all. It also explains why, hopefully their evil plan cannot possibly succeed, even though they may inflict huge damage upon humanity in the process. Please watch it. Please also read this article, which explains in further detail why, in the words of the IMF itself, “vaccine policy is economic policy”.

Hold the line people. They are going to be coming for us all and it’s not going to be pleasant. But to paraphrase Ernst Wolff, this nightmare is the greatest opportunity humanity has ever had to wake up en masse and change things for the better, to finally rid ourselves of the elite psychopaths who have governed our lives for far too long now. What we must not do is allow them to provoke civil war and widescale violent rioting. That’s what they want: chaos and disorder, so they can impose their own order upon us. We need to resist them peacefully and in huge numbers, using non-compliance as our weapon, even though they will attempt the violent repression of dissenters I’m certain.$/embed/Ernst-Wolf-speech—summary/3b94703ae61bde7db09866674cf4a6234f43c56e

**BREAKING** Covidgate: The Emails – Part 1

Journalist Aya Velazquez has got hold of 59 emails written in March 2020 which document the very beginning of the Coronavirus scare in Germany. They are explosive, even more so by the looks than the infamous Climategate emails and they document the corruption of science by politics and vested interests and the calculated, deliberate, highly successful manipulation of the public consciousness using psychological scare-tactics developed and employed by behavioural scientists.

This post is by way of introduction. The emails are all written in German. so it will take me a while to start translating them if they have not already been translated into English and compiled somewhere. But here’s a taster from Aya herself, who has analysed and personally interpreted them and has put up this very long thread on Twitter:

This is not going away. It will get bigger. Much bigger. Exactly the same tactics were employed by the British government and vested interest scientific ‘experts’. In fact, the same general process was adopted globally and more or less simultaneously in Spring 2020.

Watch this space.

Afghanistan, Dogs, Humans, and the Decline of America and the West.

History in the making is intersectional. You might wonder what dogs have to do with the Covidian ‘new normal’, with American foreign policy, with humanity and civilisation and their apparent decline here in the West. Maybe nothing. maybe a lot. But, ‘Events dear boy, events’. Big and small.

First, Pen Farthing. A former Royal Marine in Afghanistan who set up Nowzad dog rescue, based in Afghanistan. In their own words, how it started:

In November 2006 the men of Kilo Company of 42 Commando Royal Marines arrived in the war torn town of ‘Now Zad’ in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Their mission; provide stability for the local people during a period of ever decreasing security.

The Royal Marines soon realised that it wasn’t only the local people that needed their help. Many of the stray dogs that roamed the town of ‘Now Zad’ now had a guardian for the first time in their lives; in the form of Royal Marine Sergeant ‘Pen’ Farthing.

Breaking up an organised dog fight that was taking place right outside their remote compound, Pen never realised that one of those fighting dogs would then befriend him.

The Royal Marine Sergeant couldn’t say no to those big sad eyes and the now former fighting dog became the Sergeant’s battle buddy. The dog received his first ever name – “Nowzad

How it went:

We have reunited over 1600 soldiers with the dogs and cats that they rescue and bond with on the front lines in Afghanistan and we continue to be there for the brave men and women who show compassion to animals during their deployment. 

Nowzad manages a dog shelter currently looking after over 140 dogs (most available for adoption!!) along with a cat shelter (over 40 cats and most available for adoption!) supported by a modern veterinary clinic staffed by a team of 24 Afghan nationals (including Afghanistan’s first female veterinarians) delivering care and attention to animals in distress.

We have also opened the first ever donkey sanctuary in Afghanistan; a vital facility for the overburdened donkeys worked remorselessly on the streets of Kabul.

How it turned out:

No word on the donkey sanctuary. Let’s hope the Taliban are supporters of donkey sanctuaries. I mean, they don’t have a glowing record as far as human rights are concerned, especially the human rights of women, but let’s hope they are lovers of cute, docile, inoffensive little horsey type creatures, so horribly treated by so many other cruel and ignorant Afghans who think they are nothing more than machines to be worked until they drop dead.

Now there’s been a lot of nasty tittle tattle on social media from people aggrieved that Operation Ark and its supporters put ‘pets before people’. Well for a start, they’re rescue animals, saved from horrific abuse in Afghanistan, and some are actually service animals. They never took the place of people and in fact Pen Farthing was devastated that his Afghan staff could not seek sanctuary with the animals because the American government changed the rules at the last moment before they were due to depart and then the Taliban denied those staff exit. He tried very hard to get them out. But don’t let the facts interfere with a good virtue signalling rant, eh. One Twatter user even suggested that Farthing’s animals should have been shot on the runway. Hartley-Brewer decried:

I’m a psychopath, because I believe that all lives matter (well, I’ll draw the line at flies, mosquitoes, midges and ticks!) and it’s never a simple straightforward judgement as to which lives matter ‘more’. I would lay down my own life to protect my ‘pets’ (extended canine family members) and I know that they would do the same for me. I wonder if the oh so virtuous Twatter elite sounding off about ‘pets before people’ supported the wearing of masks in school, the systematic abuse of children during lockdown and now the killing and harming of innocent children by ‘vaccination’? Were they equally vocal in their opposition to such cruelties imposed upon innocent, defenceless children? JHB was very happy to wear a mask. She was happy to get jabbed despite having suffered from Covid early on and therefore effectively having long term, robust, natural immunity. She made it much easier for a fascist government to then insist that children also get masked up and get jabbed. But people who put ‘pets before humans’ are psychopaths. Period.

Tell me though, who are the real psychopaths? Please stand up. This happened today. Geronimo the Alpaca was dragged, terrified, by Defra officials flanked by police, to his death in the back of a van whilst his loving owner screamed with horror and distress.

So hang on. A veterinary surgeon who was caring for Geronimo the Alpaca, who was working with Nowzad to get human beings left behind in Kabul by the MOD out of the country to safety, learns today that Defra have gone in strong-armed with the help of the dedicated officers of the Thin Blue Muzzle and have dragged his terrified charge needlessly to his death. Remind us again who the psychos are Julia.

Other ‘pets’ rescued in Afghanistan, this time thanks to a big-hearted American woman called Charlotte Maxwell-Jones, who founded Kabul Small Animal Rescue, were not so lucky, including Charlotte herself, who remains trapped in Afghanistan, after refusing to dispose of the disabled rescue puppy she was carrying in order to be allowed onto the plane. The Biden regime Dept. of Defense decreed that none of her 250 dogs (including 51 former service dogs) would be allowed transit out of Kabul airport. The US military instead set them free to roam the streets of Kabul, where they will no doubt be rounded up by the Taliban and shot, or even worse, tortured and maimed. Some of these dogs fought alongside their human companions against the Taliban. They will be shown no mercy. The US left its own people in Afghanistan and it abandoned its own faithful K9 warriors, as well as defenceless rescue animals. Biden also left behind billions in military hardware so the Taliban must be well pleased. Biden is an utter disgrace to America and to human decency. He is the very embodiment of the decline of America and the decline of western civilisation and democracy in general. He is in fact destroying the US, deliberately in my view, and if Harris takes over, she will be even worse.

Then there’s Australia, now effectively a full on Communist-fascist dictatorship, where movement across state borders is banned and the hapless residents are not permitted to leave the prison continent. Rather like the early days then. The authorities there have apparently abandoned Western values and compassion for animals too. Recently, Bourke Shire Council, in New South Wales, rather than allowing rescuers to travel to pick up pound dogs, decided to shoot dead the 15 dogs (including puppies) so as to comply with Covid restrictions. They executed 15 innocent animals supposedly to stop people spreading a bad cold. The state and federal governments of Australia are also destroying the economy, rolling out a mandatory bio-weapon, destroying people’s businesses, imprisoning people in their homes, causing widespread mental anguish, preventing people from seeing their families and friends, and shooting protestors with rubber bullets, all to supposedly ‘protect’ people from a nasty cold virus.

Apparently, when the Nazis rounded up the Jews, they inisted that they euthanized their pets before being transported to the ‘resettlement camps’. So maybe when the Covid Nazis come to take us unvaccinated away to the ‘quarantine centres’, they’ll also kill our cats and dogs too. Humans’ symbiotic evolutionary relationship with canines goes back 40,000 years, into the depths of the last Ice Age, predating any civilisation, let alone Western Civilisation. So if the West does fall, I would not expect that relationship to fall with it. Those few scattered bands of unjabbed humans, ekeing out a meagre existence on the edge of the mega cities full of jabbed, genetically altered and compliant bipedal drones, will probably still have dogs as their companions and they will recount tales around the fireside (in the depths of the new Little Ice Age) of how the Biden Demon cast the faithful K9 warriors into the hands of the barbaric Taliban hordes – and then the Chinese took over the country and ate all the remaining dogs.