https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-and-self-proclaimed-experts-have-been-aligning-their-interpretation-of-serological-data-from-updated-covid-19-vaccine-boosters-with-the-mainstream-narrative-thereby-conveying-a-dangerously-misleading-public-health-message

The explanation of Geert Vanden Bossche about what is happening with sars cov 2, and what will happen, is the only scientific explanation that is out there. Basically he predicts mortality of decimation of highly vaccinated populations by up to 30 or 40 percent.

Other explanations do not actually explain the underlying mechanisms, but just express surprise at what happens, in the place where an explanation should be.

Supposedly at this stage the JN.1 variant is causing a CT cell response, which CT cell response inhibits the T cell response, which T cells are neccessary for the production of the disease mitigating antibodies.

Then these antibodies get low, and then only a change in the sugarcoating of the virus will then cause severe disease for the vaccinated.

Although I don't really understand, because if the disease mitigating antibodies get low, then it seems to me that would already cause severe disease, and why would it then need another change in sugarcoating for the virus to get virulent?

Also the question remains if this new highly virulent virus would evolve 1 or a few times, and then spread to the rest of the population from there, or that it would evolve in many individuals independently.

The ultimate cause of the catastrophe, Geert vanden Bossche asserts, is a reductionist approach in the scientific system which only benefits fame, and not good science.

But I think that is just mistaken, you cannot set up a system without temptation, although you might reduce it some ways. It is mainly required for scientists individually to pay dedicated attention to subjective issues, so that they have emotional maturity, so that they can resist inevitable temptations. A culture of paying dedicated attention to subjective issues.

That the scientific community does not acknowledge the entire subjective part of reality, and actively opposes the acknowledgment of it, means that falling for temptations is a certainty.

The scientific community must accept the foundations of reasoning, the concepts of both fact & opinion, with creationism. Instead of just focusing on facts, and marginalizing opinion.

1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact

Where choosing is explained in terms of spontaneity, that a decision can turn out one way or another in the moment. And subjective means, identified with a chosen opinion, and objective means, identified with a model of it.

Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in common discourse.

On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24 PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-and-self-proclaimed-experts-have-been-aligning-their-interpretation-of-serological-data-from-updated-covid-19-vaccine-boosters-with-the-mainstream-narrative-thereby-conveying-a-dangerously-misleading-public-health-message
>
> The explanation of Geert Vanden Bossche about what is happening with sars cov 2, and what will happen, is the only scientific explanation that is out there. Basically he predicts mortality of decimation of highly vaccinated populations by up to 30 or 40 percent.
>
> Other explanations do not actually explain the underlying mechanisms, but just express surprise at what happens, in the place where an explanation should be.
>
> Supposedly at this stage the JN.1 variant is causing a CT cell response, which CT cell response inhibits the T cell response, which T cells are neccessary for the production of the disease mitigating antibodies.
>
> Then these antibodies get low, and then only a change in the sugarcoating of the virus will then cause severe disease for the vaccinated.
>
> Although I don't really understand, because if the disease mitigating antibodies get low, then it seems to me that would already cause severe disease, and why would it then need another change in sugarcoating for the virus to get virulent?
>
> Also the question remains if this new highly virulent virus would evolve 1 or a few times, and then spread to the rest of the population from there, or that it would evolve in many individuals independently.
>
> The ultimate cause of the catastrophe, Geert vanden Bossche asserts, is a reductionist approach in the scientific system which only benefits fame, and not good science.
>
> But I think that is just mistaken, you cannot set up a system without temptation, although you might reduce it some ways. It is mainly required for scientists individually to pay dedicated attention to subjective issues, so that they have emotional maturity, so that they can resist inevitable temptations. A culture of paying dedicated attention to subjective issues.
>
> That the scientific community does not acknowledge the entire subjective part of reality, and actively opposes the acknowledgment of it, means that falling for temptations is a certainty.
>
> The scientific community must accept the foundations of reasoning, the concepts of both fact & opinion, with creationism. Instead of just focusing on facts, and marginalizing opinion.
>
> 1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
> 2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
>
> Where choosing is explained in terms of spontaneity, that a decision can turn out one way or another in the moment. And subjective means, identified with a chosen opinion, and objective means, identified with a model of it.
>
> Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in common discourse.

..
I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and relatives,
exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall of 2023. Believe him
everybody. He's never been wrong yet.

Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel.daggett@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
> > https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
[-]
> > Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
> > evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
> > common discourse.
>
> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
> relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
> of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.

Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,

Jan

On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 10:17:26 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
> > > https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
> [-]
> > > Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
> > > evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
> > > common discourse.
> >
> > I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
> > relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
> > of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.
> Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
> Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,
>
> Jan

Well Ron Dean told me I was dead to him. Surely he wouldn't exaggerate?

On 1/1/24 8:21 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 10:17:26 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
>>>> https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
>> [-]
>>>> Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
>>>> evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
>>>> common discourse.
>>>
>>> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
>>> relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
>>> of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.
>> Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
>> Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,
>>
>> Jan
>
> Well Ron Dean told me I was dead to him. Surely he wouldn't exaggerate?
>
Nah. He just fired you.

Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is a certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also accept that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way out other than mass death.

If this were a population of chickens, or cows, then you would also predict mass death. I think you are just holding out hope of a solution, because it's about human beings.

Op zondag 31 december 2023 om 11:32:26 UTC+1 schreef Lawyer Daggett:
> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24 PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> > https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-and-self-proclaimed-experts-have-been-aligning-their-interpretation-of-serological-data-from-updated-covid-19-vaccine-boosters-with-the-mainstream-narrative-thereby-conveying-a-dangerously-misleading-public-health-message
> >
> > The explanation of Geert Vanden Bossche about what is happening with sars cov 2, and what will happen, is the only scientific explanation that is out there. Basically he predicts mortality of decimation of highly vaccinated populations by up to 30 or 40 percent.
> >
> > Other explanations do not actually explain the underlying mechanisms, but just express surprise at what happens, in the place where an explanation should be.
> >
> > Supposedly at this stage the JN.1 variant is causing a CT cell response, which CT cell response inhibits the T cell response, which T cells are neccessary for the production of the disease mitigating antibodies.
> >
> > Then these antibodies get low, and then only a change in the sugarcoating of the virus will then cause severe disease for the vaccinated.
> >
> > Although I don't really understand, because if the disease mitigating antibodies get low, then it seems to me that would already cause severe disease, and why would it then need another change in sugarcoating for the virus to get virulent?
> >
> > Also the question remains if this new highly virulent virus would evolve 1 or a few times, and then spread to the rest of the population from there, or that it would evolve in many individuals independently.
> >
> > The ultimate cause of the catastrophe, Geert vanden Bossche asserts, is a reductionist approach in the scientific system which only benefits fame, and not good science.
> >
> > But I think that is just mistaken, you cannot set up a system without temptation, although you might reduce it some ways. It is mainly required for scientists individually to pay dedicated attention to subjective issues, so that they have emotional maturity, so that they can resist inevitable temptations. A culture of paying dedicated attention to subjective issues.
> >
> > That the scientific community does not acknowledge the entire subjective part of reality, and actively opposes the acknowledgment of it, means that falling for temptations is a certainty.
> >
> > The scientific community must accept the foundations of reasoning, the concepts of both fact & opinion, with creationism. Instead of just focusing on facts, and marginalizing opinion.
> >
> > 1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
> > 2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
> >
> > Where choosing is explained in terms of spontaneity, that a decision can turn out one way or another in the moment. And subjective means, identified with a chosen opinion, and objective means, identified with a model of it.
> >
> > Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in common discourse.
> .
> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and relatives,
> exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall of 2023. Believe him
> everybody. He's never been wrong yet.

On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 1:07:26 PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is a certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also accept that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way out other than mass death.
>
> If this were a population of chickens, or cows, then you would also predict mass death. I think you are just holding out hope of a solution, because it's about human beings.

Don't worry. It may take a few decades, but eventually 40% of the people who got the first series of covid vaccines will have died.
>
>
> Op zondag 31 december 2023 om 11:32:26 UTC+1 schreef Lawyer Daggett:
> > On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24 PM UTC-5, mohammad....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-and-self-proclaimed-experts-have-been-aligning-their-interpretation-of-serological-data-from-updated-covid-19-vaccine-boosters-with-the-mainstream-narrative-thereby-conveying-a-dangerously-misleading-public-health-message
> > >
> > > The explanation of Geert Vanden Bossche about what is happening with sars cov 2, and what will happen, is the only scientific explanation that is out there. Basically he predicts mortality of decimation of highly vaccinated populations by up to 30 or 40 percent.
> > >
> > > Other explanations do not actually explain the underlying mechanisms, but just express surprise at what happens, in the place where an explanation should be.
> > >
> > > Supposedly at this stage the JN.1 variant is causing a CT cell response, which CT cell response inhibits the T cell response, which T cells are neccessary for the production of the disease mitigating antibodies.
> > >
> > > Then these antibodies get low, and then only a change in the sugarcoating of the virus will then cause severe disease for the vaccinated.
> > >
> > > Although I don't really understand, because if the disease mitigating antibodies get low, then it seems to me that would already cause severe disease, and why would it then need another change in sugarcoating for the virus to get virulent?
> > >
> > > Also the question remains if this new highly virulent virus would evolve 1 or a few times, and then spread to the rest of the population from there, or that it would evolve in many individuals independently.
> > >
> > > The ultimate cause of the catastrophe, Geert vanden Bossche asserts, is a reductionist approach in the scientific system which only benefits fame, and not good science.
> > >
> > > But I think that is just mistaken, you cannot set up a system without temptation, although you might reduce it some ways. It is mainly required for scientists individually to pay dedicated attention to subjective issues, so that they have emotional maturity, so that they can resist inevitable temptations. A culture of paying dedicated attention to subjective issues.
> > >
> > > That the scientific community does not acknowledge the entire subjective part of reality, and actively opposes the acknowledgment of it, means that falling for temptations is a certainty.
> > >
> > > The scientific community must accept the foundations of reasoning, the concepts of both fact & opinion, with creationism. Instead of just focusing on facts, and marginalizing opinion.
> > >
> > > 1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
> > > 2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
> > >
> > > Where choosing is explained in terms of spontaneity, that a decision can turn out one way or another in the moment. And subjective means, identified with a chosen opinion, and objective means, identified with a model of it.
> > >
> > > Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in common discourse.
> > .
> > I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and relatives,
> > exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall of 2023. Believe him
> > everybody. He's never been wrong yet.

On 1/1/2024 11:21 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 10:17:26 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
>>>> https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
>> [-]
>>>> Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
>>>> evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
>>>> common discourse.
>>>
>>> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
>>> relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
>>> of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.
>> Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
>> Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,
>>
>> Jan
>
> Well Ron Dean told me I was dead to him. Surely he wouldn't exaggerate?
>

"she's not only merely dead
She's really most sincerely dead"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vFRB61xyls

--
Add xx to reply

On Wednesday, January 3, 2024 at 8:02:28 PM UTC, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/1/2024 11:21 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
> > On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 10:17:26 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
> >>>> https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
> >> [-]
> >>>> Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
> >>>> evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
> >>>> common discourse.
> >>>
> >>> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
> >>> relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
> >>> of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.
> >> Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
> >> Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,
> >>
> >> Jan
> >
> > Well Ron Dean told me I was dead to him. Surely he wouldn't exaggerate?
> >
> "she's not only merely dead
> She's really most sincerely dead"
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vFRB61xyls
>
> --
You mean he's a stiff? Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace?
'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig?
'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil,
run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7olYJ5I9uyo

On 1/3/2024 3:15 PM, Burkhard wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 3, 2024 at 8:02:28 PM UTC, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 1/1/2024 11:21 AM, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 1, 2024 at 10:17:26 AM UTC-5, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> Lawyer Daggett <j.nobel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, December 30, 2023 at 10:07:24?PM UTC-5, mohammad...@gmail.com:
>>>>>> https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/scientists-
>>>> [-]
>>>>>> Which creationism can be easily confirmed to be true by looking at the
>>>>>> evidence of how subjective words, like the word beautiful, are used in
>>>>>> common discourse.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would respond but I'm dead, along with 40% of my vaccinated friends and
>>>>> relatives, exactly as you predicted 8 months ago would happen in the fall
>>>>> of 2023. Believe him everybody. He's never been wrong yet.
>>>> Fortunately you are only subjectively dead.
>>>> Those rumours of you being objectively so have been greatly exaggerated,
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>
>>> Well Ron Dean told me I was dead to him. Surely he wouldn't exaggerate?
>>>
>> "she's not only merely dead
>> She's really most sincerely dead"
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vFRB61xyls
>>
>> --
> You mean he's a stiff? Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace?
> 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig?
> 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil,
> run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7olYJ5I9uyo

E's not dead, E's pinin' for the fjords....

And now for something completely different:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdf5EXo6I68
>

--
Add xx to reply

mohammad...@gmail.com <mohammadnursyamsu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is
> essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving
> virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is
> a certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also
> accept that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way
> out other than mass death.
>
> If this were a population of chickens, or cows, then you would also
> predict mass death. I think you are just holding out hope of a solution,
> because it's about human beings.
>
So multiple infections over time with SARS-CoV-2 would be preferable to
being vaccinated multiple times instead? If infected by the virus which has
had spike variants over time, which vaccine makers try to anticipate and
match in a real life arms race, why aren’t serial infectees in a similar
boat per imprinting or original sin as vaccinees? In reality many people
have been vaccinated and infected multiple times resulting in a hybrid
immunity which will wax and wane.

Original sin is a real concern for sure:
https://virology.ws/2024/01/04/the-problem-of-original-antigenic-sin/

But maybe hypermutation resulting in immunoglobulin gene alleles better
suited toward COVID variants occurs and B-cells don’t wind up as inbred
sister fucking hillbillies toward Wuhan strain or the previous booster
strain before XBB. At this point individuals have quite different
vaccination and infection histories which might make them more or less
resilient toward future variants. I really don’t know how stuck we become
on the adaptive hill of what we were exposed to first, but I can’t see pure
natural immunity faring any better than being vaccinated too. If you
disagree please tell me how that works out in detail in the real world,
which cares not for your subjectivity.

Here’s a fascinating video on clonal dynamics, hypermutation, affinity
maturation and the hyperdarwinian hellhole for B-cells known as a germinal
center. They do talk a bit about fight club:

https://youtu.be/6P28a3TmVyg?si=lFrW7QBdATDg44Qk

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Here’s a fascinating video on clonal dynamics, hypermutation, affinity
> maturation and the hyperdarwinian hellhole for B-cells known as a germinal
> center. They do talk a bit about fight club:
>
> https://youtu.be/6P28a3TmVyg?si=lFrW7QBdATDg44Qk
>
>
At around 48:28 this Gabriel Victora guy is talking about how if naive or
affinity matured memory B-cells enter germinal centers upon subsequent
variant antigen exposure this may influence the phenomenon of original sin!
Wow!

Because the natural immunity, if you survive the infection, provides sterilizing immunity, killing the virus. While the covid vaccines, only mitigate the disease, but still spread the virus. Including spreading it to the unvaccinated people. So people in most African countries, where they did not do much vaccination, already have herd immunity now, killing the virus. So that is much less virus going around. So basically covid is endemic there, and not pandemic, like it is in the Netherlands.

Somehow the vaccines cause the body to only provide the antibody response, and not train the natural immunity. I don't know why the body would be this dumb, but it is. There is the established name for it, anti body dependent enhancement of infection and disease. So it's a known mechanism.

It can also occur in unvaccinated in some scenarios, like I think when getting reinfected very quickly with a different variant, or something like that. A situation where the anti-bodies are not matured yet, and then they can be manipulated somehow by a new variant that the antibodies do not fit very well.

Op zaterdag 6 januari 2024 om 03:52:31 UTC+1 schreef *Hemidactylus*:
> mohammad...@gmail.com <mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is
> > essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving
> > virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is
> > a certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also
> > accept that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way
> > out other than mass death.
> >
> > If this were a population of chickens, or cows, then you would also
> > predict mass death. I think you are just holding out hope of a solution,
> > because it's about human beings.
> >
> So multiple infections over time with SARS-CoV-2 would be preferable to
> being vaccinated multiple times instead? If infected by the virus which has
> had spike variants over time, which vaccine makers try to anticipate and
> match in a real life arms race, why aren’t serial infectees in a similar
> boat per imprinting or original sin as vaccinees? In reality many people
> have been vaccinated and infected multiple times resulting in a hybrid
> immunity which will wax and wane.
>
> Original sin is a real concern for sure:
> https://virology.ws/2024/01/04/the-problem-of-original-antigenic-sin/
>
> But maybe hypermutation resulting in immunoglobulin gene alleles better
> suited toward COVID variants occurs and B-cells don’t wind up as inbred
> sister fucking hillbillies toward Wuhan strain or the previous booster
> strain before XBB. At this point individuals have quite different
> vaccination and infection histories which might make them more or less
> resilient toward future variants. I really don’t know how stuck we become
> on the adaptive hill of what we were exposed to first, but I can’t see pure
> natural immunity faring any better than being vaccinated too. If you
> disagree please tell me how that works out in detail in the real world,
> which cares not for your subjectivity.
>
> Here’s a fascinating video on clonal dynamics, hypermutation, affinity
> maturation and the hyperdarwinian hellhole for B-cells known as a germinal
> center. They do talk a bit about fight club:
>
> https://youtu.be/6P28a3TmVyg?si=lFrW7QBdATDg44Qk

Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:
> Because the natural immunity, if you survive the infection, provides
> sterilizing immunity, killing the virus.

Why are people without immunization history getting reinfected then. I’m
not saying vaccination is completely sterilizing either.

> While the covid vaccines, only mitigate the disease, but still spread the
> virus. Including spreading it to the unvaccinated people. So people in
> most African countries, where they did not do much vaccination, already
> have herd immunity now, killing the virus. So that is much less virus
> going around. So basically covid is endemic there, and not pandemic, like
> it is in the Netherlands.
>
Cite to peer reviewed literature on that.
>
> Somehow the vaccines cause the body to only provide the antibody
> response, and not train the natural immunity.
>
So infection doesn’t provide antibody response? Vaccination isn’t a
training ground for immunity?
>
> I don't know why the body would be this dumb, but it is. There is the
> established name for it, anti body dependent enhancement of infection and
> disease. So it's a known mechanism.
>
I think they accounted for this in construction of the spike. And why is it
not happening?
>
> It can also occur in unvaccinated in some scenarios, like I think when
> getting reinfected very quickly with a different variant, or something
> like that. A situation where the anti-bodies are not matured yet, and
> then they can be manipulated somehow by a new variant that the antibodies
> do not fit very well.
>
I think vaccination is the safer way to train the immune system. Infection
has way more risks. People get long COVID. Vaccinated people may get it
too, but I would presume vaccination tweaks the odds a bit. I actually
don’t know if I have ever been exposed or infected. I have not had a
respiratory issue since before 2020. I have had six COVID shots. I should
be dead right? Why am I still here. 3 coworkers had been sick in the recent
wave, one vaccinated in October and got pretty sick. I must be lucky. It
may catch up to me soon. But many of my coworkers have been infected. I
haven’t. It is a crapshoot.

https://healthpolicy.fsi.stanford.edu/news/how-has-africa-largely-evaded-covid-19-pandemic-0

I only reference this article to establish the fact that most Africa has herd immunity, and not for any other speculative nonsense that might be talked about in the article.

The covid reinfection for uvaccinated is just basically the same as flu reinfection. It just depends on factors like how much virus they get infected with, and how healthy they are at the time of infection.

For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.

But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.

You should buy antivirals, and then watch the news, when people start dying en masse, then start taking them preventively. Because once the mitigation of the disease of the antibodies is overcome, then you have no defense. So it means that when you get infected, you will get very sick very quickly, and be dead within a day.

Op zaterdag 6 januari 2024 om 06:42:30 UTC+1 schreef *Hemidactylus*:
> Nando Ronteltap <nando_r...@live.nl> wrote:
> > Because the natural immunity, if you survive the infection, provides
> > sterilizing immunity, killing the virus.
> Why are people without immunization history getting reinfected then. I’m
> not saying vaccination is completely sterilizing either.
> > While the covid vaccines, only mitigate the disease, but still spread the
> > virus. Including spreading it to the unvaccinated people. So people in
> > most African countries, where they did not do much vaccination, already
> > have herd immunity now, killing the virus. So that is much less virus
> > going around. So basically covid is endemic there, and not pandemic, like
> > it is in the Netherlands.
> >
> Cite to peer reviewed literature on that.
> >
> > Somehow the vaccines cause the body to only provide the antibody
> > response, and not train the natural immunity.
> >
> So infection doesn’t provide antibody response? Vaccination isn’t a
> training ground for immunity?
> >
> > I don't know why the body would be this dumb, but it is. There is the
> > established name for it, anti body dependent enhancement of infection and
> > disease. So it's a known mechanism.
> >
> I think they accounted for this in construction of the spike. And why is it
> not happening?
> >
> > It can also occur in unvaccinated in some scenarios, like I think when
> > getting reinfected very quickly with a different variant, or something
> > like that. A situation where the anti-bodies are not matured yet, and
> > then they can be manipulated somehow by a new variant that the antibodies
> > do not fit very well.
> >
> I think vaccination is the safer way to train the immune system. Infection
> has way more risks. People get long COVID. Vaccinated people may get it
> too, but I would presume vaccination tweaks the odds a bit. I actually
> don’t know if I have ever been exposed or infected. I have not had a
> respiratory issue since before 2020. I have had six COVID shots. I should
> be dead right? Why am I still here. 3 coworkers had been sick in the recent
> wave, one vaccinated in October and got pretty sick. I must be lucky. It
> may catch up to me soon. But many of my coworkers have been infected. I
> haven’t. It is a crapshoot.

mohammad...@gmail.com <mohammadnursyamsu@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is
> essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving
> virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is a
> certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also accept
> that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way out
> other than mass death.

That's just a subjective certainty...

Jan

On 1/5/2024 11:56 PM, Nando Ronteltap wrote:
> Because the natural immunity, if you survive the infection, provides sterilizing immunity, killing the virus. While the covid vaccines, only mitigate the disease, but still spread the virus. Including spreading it to the unvaccinated people. So people in most African countries, where they did not do much vaccination, already have herd immunity now, killing the virus. So that is much less virus going around. So basically covid is endemic there, and not pandemic, like it is in the Netherlands.
>
> Somehow the vaccines cause the body to only provide the antibody response, and not train the natural immunity. I don't know why the body would be this dumb, but it is.

I guess whoever designed a system that dumb must be a real idiot

There is the established name for it, anti body dependent enhancement
of infection and disease. So it's a known mechanism.
>
> It can also occur in unvaccinated in some scenarios, like I think when getting reinfected very quickly with a different variant, or something like that. A situation where the anti-bodies are not matured yet, and then they can be manipulated somehow by a new variant that the antibodies do not fit very well.
>
>
>
> Op zaterdag 6 januari 2024 om 03:52:31 UTC+1 schreef *Hemidactylus*:
>> mohammad...@gmail.com <mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes it does take longer than expected, but for all this time it is
>>> essentially the same situation for the vaccinated, of a wildly evolving
>>> virus, with no possiblity of reaching herd immunity. So given that it is
>>> a certainty that herd immunity is impossible, and given that you also
>>> accept that immune escape could lead to mass death, then there is no way
>>> out other than mass death.
>>>
>>> If this were a population of chickens, or cows, then you would also
>>> predict mass death. I think you are just holding out hope of a solution,
>>> because it's about human beings.
>>>
>> So multiple infections over time with SARS-CoV-2 would be preferable to
>> being vaccinated multiple times instead? If infected by the virus which has
>> had spike variants over time, which vaccine makers try to anticipate and
>> match in a real life arms race, why aren’t serial infectees in a similar
>> boat per imprinting or original sin as vaccinees? In reality many people
>> have been vaccinated and infected multiple times resulting in a hybrid
>> immunity which will wax and wane.
>>
>> Original sin is a real concern for sure:
>> https://virology.ws/2024/01/04/the-problem-of-original-antigenic-sin/
>>
>> But maybe hypermutation resulting in immunoglobulin gene alleles better
>> suited toward COVID variants occurs and B-cells don’t wind up as inbred
>> sister fucking hillbillies toward Wuhan strain or the previous booster
>> strain before XBB. At this point individuals have quite different
>> vaccination and infection histories which might make them more or less
>> resilient toward future variants. I really don’t know how stuck we become
>> on the adaptive hill of what we were exposed to first, but I can’t see pure
>> natural immunity faring any better than being vaccinated too. If you
>> disagree please tell me how that works out in detail in the real world,
>> which cares not for your subjectivity.
>>
>> Here’s a fascinating video on clonal dynamics, hypermutation, affinity
>> maturation and the hyperdarwinian hellhole for B-cells known as a germinal
>> center. They do talk a bit about fight club:
>>
>> https://youtu.be/6P28a3TmVyg?si=lFrW7QBdATDg44Qk
>

Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and
> then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of
> the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the
> antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.
>
> But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only
> have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody
> dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is
> now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.
>
How is innate immunity “trained”? It is innate and lacks the rearrangement
of receptor genes found in immunocytes and the hypermutation found in
B-cells. The key feature of adaptive over innate immunity is trainability.
It remembers specific antigens.

Are you confusing innate immunity with natural immunity associated
popularly with an adaptive response to infection, instead of vaccination,
because “natural” means better if one merely appeals to Nature?

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:
>>
> [snip]
>>
>> For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and
>> then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of
>> the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the
>> antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.
>>
>> But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only
>> have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody
>> dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is
>> now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.
>>
> How is innate immunity “trained”? It is innate and lacks the rearrangement
> of receptor genes found in immunocytes and the hypermutation found in
> B-cells. The key feature of adaptive over innate immunity is trainability.
> It remembers specific antigens.
>
> Are you confusing innate immunity with natural immunity associated
> popularly with an adaptive response to infection, instead of vaccination,
> because “natural” means better if one merely appeals to Nature?
>
Oops. My bad. Due to Nando’s prodding I fell down a rabbit hole I hadn’t
realized existed until today. Ignorance remedied is bliss:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41581-022-00633-5

Innate immunity can be trained due to epigenetic reprogramming in certain
cells and there is a form of cellular memory. Kinda cool. Carry on nothing
to see here!

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>> Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:
>>>
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and
>>> then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of
>>> the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the
>>> antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.
>>>
>>> But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only
>>> have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody
>>> dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is
>>> now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.
>>>
>> How is innate immunity “trained”? It is innate and lacks the rearrangement
>> of receptor genes found in immunocytes and the hypermutation found in
>> B-cells. The key feature of adaptive over innate immunity is trainability.
>> It remembers specific antigens.
>>
>> Are you confusing innate immunity with natural immunity associated
>> popularly with an adaptive response to infection, instead of vaccination,
>> because “natural” means better if one merely appeals to Nature?
>>
> Oops. My bad. Due to Nando’s prodding I fell down a rabbit hole I hadn’t
> realized existed until today. Ignorance remedied is bliss:
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41581-022-00633-5
>
> Innate immunity can be trained due to epigenetic reprogramming in certain
> cells and there is a form of cellular memory. Kinda cool. Carry on nothing
> to see here!
>
In a further appeal to Nature:
“An increasing body of evidence suggests that trained immunity plays a
critical role in humans. First, an extensive collection of epidemiological
data argues that live vaccines such as the BCG vaccine, measles vaccine,
smallpox vaccine and oral polio vaccine have beneficial, non-specific
protective effects against infections other than the target
diseases40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47 (for a review, see also ref.48).
Subsequently, proof-of-principle trials with the BCG vaccine in adults23,49
and children50,51 demonstrated that this vaccine induces non-specific
activation of innate immune cells. Interestingly, both epidemiological and
immunological studies have shown that the vaccine effects may last for
months, but may also be modified or even reversed when a non-live vaccine
is given52,53.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-0285-6

Nando had said: “But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never
trained.” which is a bit of a problematic assertion there, huh?

Also falling even deeper down the rabbit hole:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265767/
“Finally, one of the most intriguing possibilities regarding the role of
trained immunity in the vaccination against COVID-19 is that the novel
specific vaccines currently in use may also exert trained immunity effects
that could contribute to their efficacy. While the mRNA-based platform,
which is at the basis of one of the most successful anti-COVID-19 vaccines,
is known to induce strong inflammation,74 very recent studies have shown
that the mRNA vaccines also induce long-term transcriptional reprogramming
of myeloid cells.75 This results in functional changes of both innate and
adaptive immune cells, and the former can be considered a de facto
induction of trained immunity.76 Whether the mRNA vaccines can thus induce
also cross-protection against other infections and whether these properties
affect their effects against COVID-19 remain to be investigated.
Interestingly, a very recent study reported that vaccination of Hong Kong
residents with either the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or the inactivated virus
vaccine CoronaVac indeed may have enhanced resistance to TB.77 On the other
hand, the role of such effects in mediating some of the rare but severe
inflammatory complications of vaccination (such as myocarditis and
pericarditis)78 needs to be investigated.”

And given my MMR vaccination in mid-2019: “Although BCG was by far the most
in-depth studied vaccine in the context of heterologous effects on
COVID-19, other vaccines have also been previously reported to induce
non-specific protection against infections. One of the most consistent
inducers of protective effects against all-cause mortality in children are
the measles-containing vaccines.61 Though fewer studies have been performed
with measles-containing vaccines, one randomized trial with MMR
revaccination in Brazil reported a significant decrease in the severity
(but not susceptibility) to COVID-19,62 mirroring the effects reported for
BCG. The results of a larger international study (CROWN-CORONATION) remain
to be reported (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04333732).”

One of their boxed conclusions: “SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce
inappropriately strong induction of trained immunity in some individuals,
which can contribute to the long-term inflammatory complications.”

So about this trained immunity thing Nando?

On 06/01/2024 18:01, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
>
> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>> *Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
>>> Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and
>>>> then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of
>>>> the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the
>>>> antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.
>>>>
>>>> But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only
>>>> have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody
>>>> dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is
>>>> now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.
>>>>
>>> How is innate immunity “trained”? It is innate and lacks the rearrangement
>>> of receptor genes found in immunocytes and the hypermutation found in
>>> B-cells. The key feature of adaptive over innate immunity is trainability.
>>> It remembers specific antigens.
>>>
>>> Are you confusing innate immunity with natural immunity associated
>>> popularly with an adaptive response to infection, instead of vaccination,
>>> because “natural” means better if one merely appeals to Nature?
>>>
>> Oops. My bad. Due to Nando’s prodding I fell down a rabbit hole I hadn’t
>> realized existed until today. Ignorance remedied is bliss:
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41581-022-00633-5
>>
>> Innate immunity can be trained due to epigenetic reprogramming in certain
>> cells and there is a form of cellular memory. Kinda cool. Carry on nothing
>> to see here!
>>
> In a further appeal to Nature:
> “An increasing body of evidence suggests that trained immunity plays a
> critical role in humans. First, an extensive collection of epidemiological
> data argues that live vaccines such as the BCG vaccine, measles vaccine,
> smallpox vaccine and oral polio vaccine have beneficial, non-specific
> protective effects against infections other than the target
> diseases40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47 (for a review, see also ref.48).
> Subsequently, proof-of-principle trials with the BCG vaccine in adults23,49
> and children50,51 demonstrated that this vaccine induces non-specific
> activation of innate immune cells. Interestingly, both epidemiological and
> immunological studies have shown that the vaccine effects may last for
> months, but may also be modified or even reversed when a non-live vaccine
> is given52,53.”
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-0285-6
>
> Nando had said: “But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never
> trained.” which is a bit of a problematic assertion there, huh?
>
> Also falling even deeper down the rabbit hole:
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265767/
> “Finally, one of the most intriguing possibilities regarding the role of
> trained immunity in the vaccination against COVID-19 is that the novel
> specific vaccines currently in use may also exert trained immunity effects
> that could contribute to their efficacy. While the mRNA-based platform,
> which is at the basis of one of the most successful anti-COVID-19 vaccines,
> is known to induce strong inflammation,74 very recent studies have shown
> that the mRNA vaccines also induce long-term transcriptional reprogramming
> of myeloid cells.75 This results in functional changes of both innate and
> adaptive immune cells, and the former can be considered a de facto
> induction of trained immunity.76 Whether the mRNA vaccines can thus induce
> also cross-protection against other infections and whether these properties
> affect their effects against COVID-19 remain to be investigated.
> Interestingly, a very recent study reported that vaccination of Hong Kong
> residents with either the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or the inactivated virus
> vaccine CoronaVac indeed may have enhanced resistance to TB.77 On the other
> hand, the role of such effects in mediating some of the rare but severe
> inflammatory complications of vaccination (such as myocarditis and
> pericarditis)78 needs to be investigated.”
>
> And given my MMR vaccination in mid-2019: “Although BCG was by far the most
> in-depth studied vaccine in the context of heterologous effects on
> COVID-19, other vaccines have also been previously reported to induce
> non-specific protection against infections. One of the most consistent
> inducers of protective effects against all-cause mortality in children are
> the measles-containing vaccines.61 Though fewer studies have been performed
> with measles-containing vaccines, one randomized trial with MMR
> revaccination in Brazil reported a significant decrease in the severity
> (but not susceptibility) to COVID-19,62 mirroring the effects reported for
> BCG. The results of a larger international study (CROWN-CORONATION) remain
> to be reported (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04333732).”
>
> One of their boxed conclusions: “SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce
> inappropriately strong induction of trained immunity in some individuals,
> which can contribute to the long-term inflammatory complications.”
>
> So about this trained immunity thing Nando?
>

I had had some reluctance to assume that innate immunity was unaffected
by infections, which would seem to have been correct, though I didn't
have any specific reason to assume the contrary.

The question which now arises in my mind - is the training of innate
immunity just a general upregulation, or do more specific changes occur?

--
alias Ernest Major

A live vaccine, provides trained immunity, but not just passive spikes. It says so in your reference a non live vaccine, may even reverse the training..

I think these are just arbitrary details.

Op zaterdag 6 januari 2024 om 19:07:31 UTC+1 schreef *Hemidactylus*:
> *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> > *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid> wrote:
> >> Nando Ronteltap <nando_r...@live.nl> wrote:
> >>>
> >> [snip]
> >>>
> >>> For someone unvaccinated to get infected, then they might get sick, and
> >>> then the innate immune system is trained, and only at the last stage of
> >>> the being sick, when the virus is mostly cleared already, are the
> >>> antibodies introduced. So then you get a trained innate immunity, and antibodies.
> >>>
> >>> But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never trained. They only
> >>> have the mitigation of disease from the antibodies, which is now antibody
> >>> dependent enhancement of infection. And then with some evolution that is
> >>> now ongoing, it will be antibody dependent enhancement of disease.
> >>>
> >> How is innate immunity “trained”? It is innate and lacks the rearrangement
> >> of receptor genes found in immunocytes and the hypermutation found in
> >> B-cells. The key feature of adaptive over innate immunity is trainability.
> >> It remembers specific antigens.
> >>
> >> Are you confusing innate immunity with natural immunity associated
> >> popularly with an adaptive response to infection, instead of vaccination,
> >> because “natural” means better if one merely appeals to Nature?
> >>
> > Oops. My bad. Due to Nando’s prodding I fell down a rabbit hole I hadn’t
> > realized existed until today. Ignorance remedied is bliss:
> >
> > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41581-022-00633-5
> >
> > Innate immunity can be trained due to epigenetic reprogramming in certain
> > cells and there is a form of cellular memory. Kinda cool. Carry on nothing
> > to see here!
> >
> In a further appeal to Nature:
> “An increasing body of evidence suggests that trained immunity plays a
> critical role in humans. First, an extensive collection of epidemiological
> data argues that live vaccines such as the BCG vaccine, measles vaccine,
> smallpox vaccine and oral polio vaccine have beneficial, non-specific
> protective effects against infections other than the target
> diseases40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47 (for a review, see also ref.48).
> Subsequently, proof-of-principle trials with the BCG vaccine in adults23,49
> and children50,51 demonstrated that this vaccine induces non-specific
> activation of innate immune cells. Interestingly, both epidemiological and
> immunological studies have shown that the vaccine effects may last for
> months, but may also be modified or even reversed when a non-live vaccine
> is given52,53.”
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-0285-6
>
> Nando had said: “But for the vaccinated, their innate immunity is never
> trained.” which is a bit of a problematic assertion there, huh?
>
> Also falling even deeper down the rabbit hole:
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10265767/
> “Finally, one of the most intriguing possibilities regarding the role of
> trained immunity in the vaccination against COVID-19 is that the novel
> specific vaccines currently in use may also exert trained immunity effects
> that could contribute to their efficacy. While the mRNA-based platform,
> which is at the basis of one of the most successful anti-COVID-19 vaccines,
> is known to induce strong inflammation,74 very recent studies have shown
> that the mRNA vaccines also induce long-term transcriptional reprogramming
> of myeloid cells.75 This results in functional changes of both innate and
> adaptive immune cells, and the former can be considered a de facto
> induction of trained immunity.76 Whether the mRNA vaccines can thus induce
> also cross-protection against other infections and whether these properties
> affect their effects against COVID-19 remain to be investigated.
> Interestingly, a very recent study reported that vaccination of Hong Kong
> residents with either the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine or the inactivated virus
> vaccine CoronaVac indeed may have enhanced resistance to TB.77 On the other
> hand, the role of such effects in mediating some of the rare but severe
> inflammatory complications of vaccination (such as myocarditis and
> pericarditis)78 needs to be investigated.”
>
> And given my MMR vaccination in mid-2019: “Although BCG was by far the most
> in-depth studied vaccine in the context of heterologous effects on
> COVID-19, other vaccines have also been previously reported to induce
> non-specific protection against infections. One of the most consistent
> inducers of protective effects against all-cause mortality in children are
> the measles-containing vaccines.61 Though fewer studies have been performed
> with measles-containing vaccines, one randomized trial with MMR
> revaccination in Brazil reported a significant decrease in the severity
> (but not susceptibility) to COVID-19,62 mirroring the effects reported for
> BCG. The results of a larger international study (CROWN-CORONATION) remain
> to be reported (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04333732).”
>
> One of their boxed conclusions: “SARS-CoV-2 infection can induce
> inappropriately strong induction of trained immunity in some individuals,
> which can contribute to the long-term inflammatory complications.”
>
> So about this trained immunity thing Nando?

On Sat, 6 Jan 2024 17:39:56 -0800 (PST)
Nando Ronteltap <nando_ronteltap@live.nl> wrote:

> A live vaccine, provides trained immunity, but not just passive
> spikes. It says so in your reference a non live vaccine, may even
> reverse the training.
>
> I think these are just arbitrary details.

This COVIDian virus hoax makes the story of the Emperor's New Clothes
look like a documentary by comparison. Go read that story to see how
stupid and servile vaxxers seem to normal people who aren't
criminally insane.

There is no virus. Not one shred of scientific evidence corroborates
any such virus. No one has ever seen the virus. No one has ever
isolated the virus. That is because there is no virus. It is a scam.
And vaxxers are criminal scammers for regurgitating this vax vomit.

The virus and vax is a religion. The name of the Church of the Vax is
the Cult of the Branch Covidian. The inner circle of psyop fake virus
warlocks is the Branch Covidian Fellowship of the Vax.

You who believe this psyop are fools, and your life is a delusion. You
deserve to be slaves. And slaves you are!

Let it sink in. The so-called 'science' is on par with Joseph Smith's
peepstones in a hat helping him translate the Book of Mormon. They have
'antibodies' in a vat helping them translate the RNA code. Because of
their religious belief, they are supporting the medical murder of your
neighbors and children.

Wizard's First Rule: People are stupid. -- Terry Goodkind

--
The Church of the Holy Needle
Branch Covidian Fellowship of the Vax
Salvation by Serum