Source: Voice For Science And Solidarity
There is no greater impotence in all the world like knowing you are right and that the wave of the world is wrong, yet the wave crashes upon you.
– Norman Mailer
One can continue to write about the lamentable way in which this pandemic – now largely contained according to the WHO – is perceived and interpreted by elite groups of scientists. Whether they contradict themselves, offer a logical explanation for their ‘evolving’ insights, or hold a one-sided opinion, it no longer matters. Their institutions are overflowing with money and publications, which is why they seem to have a monopoly on science. – Compare that profile, for example, with that of a certain Geert Vanden Bossche. The man is a veterinarian by education, has no recent noteworthy publications, and is not even affiliated with a university or any other scientific institution. The man is a recluse, and the peculiar opinions he holds are only published in a pseudo-scientific book and on his dubious website…..These are the criteria that are currently used by the masses and their master, the mainstream media. It seems that no one relies any longer on that archaic sense that has now fallen into disuse or oblivion: common sense. This sense is currently wondering why a coronavirus like SARS-CoVid-2 seems to have emerged as the most spectacular and difficult-to-understand virus ever, why the immune response to it is so different from that against other acute viral infections, and how it induces a new form of ‘herd immunity’ that apparently protects against disease but not infection. This same common sense also teaches us that the truth is not always proclaimed by those who shout the loudest and, due to glaring conflicts of interest, shamelessly continue to speak on behalf of those whose bread they eat. Also, the realization that complex problems usually cannot be solved by one-sided approaches and by the world’s best specialists and experts who, however, have long lost sight of the forest for the trees, was actually already a no-brainer.
It is widely accepted that science sometimes can only uncover the truth through approaches that begin with a hypothesis and are based on existing theories and laws specific to the various disciplines involved in the given issue. This so-called ‘deductive’ scientific approach tests the predicted specific results of its analysis against as many observations as possible in each of the related subfields to validate the hypothesis or its specific predictions. If the numerous and diverse observations align with this, the truth of the predictions becomes increasingly difficult to deny (“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”- Sherlock Holmes – Sir Arthur Conan Doyle).
That not only the common man but also the scientists no longer understand the whole picture is why wild theories are now circulating among both parties, regardless of whether they are pro-, anti-, mono-, or omni-vaxxers. Because they do not understand the evolutionary dynamics of the virus and the adapting response of the immune system, many conspiracy theories are flourishing, explaining how deliberate genetic manipulation brought the pandemic to life and how it was subsequently artificially sustained by the vaccine industry in the form of new ‘Omicron’ variants, the astonishing result of a new genetic intervention in the virus (Raw data for “Unnatural evolutionary processes of SARS-CoVid-2 variants and possibility of deliberate natural selection” | Zenodo; Could Omicron Have Been Intentionally Engineered and Released? (substack.com) )! They are likely also the ones who will claim that the increased virulence that SARS-CoVid-2 will ultimately exhibit is nothing less than the result of yet another genetic intervention – one that ‘the new world order’ has planned to deliver the ‘coup de grâce’ once the vaccines have generated enough profits for the architects of this plan.
According to others who seek further scientific fame and glory, the virus continues to surprise. This is evidenced by the account of the spectacular results recently generated by some scientific luminaries (https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/early-lab-tests-suggest-new-covid-19-variant-ba286-may-be-less-contagious-and-less-immune-evasive-than-feared/ar-AA1gbO2l) and eagerly used by Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers to further nurture the vaccination hype (https://investors.modernatx.com/news/news-details/2023/Moderna-Clinical-Trial-Data-Confirm-Its-Updated-Covid-19-Vaccine-Generates-Strong-Immune-Response-in-Humans-Against-BA.2.86/default.aspx). They, too, now seem to be taking a different approach. While at least one of these researchers had sworn by the cross-protection of the vaccinated, or those who had acquired natural infection, through T cells until recently, he now seems to assume – although he did not expect it at all – that the protection the population still enjoys against the most exotic variants that are currently circulating is due to the neutralizing activity of the antibodies present in the blood! They reached these conclusions based on the results of virus-neutralization assays performed on plasma samples from Covid-19 vaccine recipients or individuals who had recently recovered from an XBB infection.
No one understands how such divergent variants (FL.1.5.1, AA.2.86 EG.5…) can still be neutralized by antibodies generated by Covid-19 vaccines (including the updated vaccine targeted at XBB.1.5), or by infection with previous Omicron descendants. This defies the imagination of virology and immunology. Nonetheless, it doesn’t matter because there can be no doubt about the accuracy of these results since the neutralization assays were conducted in 2 independent lAntibodies, and even repeated, with the exact same outcome. Why does no one raise an eyebrow at this cheap interpretation? For example, no one seems to wonder whether this alleged neutralization also occurs in vivo and whether the protection against disease with which the population is reassured is durable (in other words, whether it has an immunological memory). Suddenly, the theory of immune escape variants has been debunked! But how is it possible that the greater the difference between the currently circulating variants and those that circulated before, the more effectively our immune system can combat them?
As I have repeatedly documented in my writings (https://www.anhinternational.org/news/whats-driving-turbo-cancers-and-autoimmune-flare-ups/; https://braintrain.mykajabi.com/the-inescapable-immune-escape-pandemic), individuals who recovered from previous Omicron infections (e.g., caused by XBB variants) develop broadly neutralizing antibodies as a result of immune refocusing whereas Covid-19 vaccine recipients experiencing vaccine breakthrough infections due to currently circulating Omicron descendants exhibit increased titers of broadly cross-reactive, isotype-switched IgG4 antibodies. These broadly cross-functional antibodies are directed against immune recessive neutralizing epitopes on the spike protein. In vivo, these antibodies can only bind to the virus after a breakthrough infection with Omicron (or its descendants) has occurred in a previously infection- or vaccine-primed individual. The reason for this is that more/ highly infectious Omicron(-derived) virus is taken up so rapidly by the susceptible epithelial cells of the upper respiratory tract that there is not enough time for these cross-neutralizing antibodies to bind to the virus. However, in virus-neutralization tests performed in vitro, the virus is first incubated with the antibodies (contained in plasma or serum) for some time (the pre-incubation period typically ranges from 30 minutes to a few hours) before this suspension is inoculated onto susceptible cells. In this way, broadly neutralizing Antibodies directed to more conserved, immunorecessive spike-associated domains can indeed react with a broad spectrum of variants and neutralize them in vitro (the researchers demonstrated significant virus-neutralizing activity of the collected samples against 10 different Omicron subvariants). As these antibodies target immune recessive regions of the spike protein (located outside of the receptor-binding region of the spike protein), their neutralizing capacity is rather weak, as mentioned in the referenced article (https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/early-lab-tests-suggest-new-covid-19-variant-ba286-may-be-less-contagious-and-less-immune-evasive-than-feared/ar-AA1gbO2l).
This leads me to conclude that the in vitro neutralization data generated by these scientists are artefactual and cannot explain the existing in vivo protection against disease, which still prevails in the majority of the population for the time being. As described in my book, the cause of prolonged protection against severe Covid-19 disease in Covid-19 vaccine recipients should be sought in the polyreactive, non-neutralizing antibodies (Polyreactive, non-neutralizing antibodies). These antibodies are elicited as a result of the diminished virus-neutralizing capacity of the vaccine-induced antibodies and have a virulence-inhibiting effect in Covid-19 vaccine recipients. It can be assumed that due to the decline in vaccine-induced antibodies, the in vivo synthesis of these Polyreactive, non-neutralizing antibodies is decreasing over time. Since these antibodies have a short lifespan, it is also likely that their concentration is now decreasing in a growing portion of the vaccinated population to a level that no longer optimally inhibits the virus’s virulence. On the other hand, viral spread remains significant, as the circulating variants are highly infectious and can be transmitted asymptomatically by Covid-19 vaccinees. It is therefore feared that widespread occurrence of suboptimal Polyreactive, non-neutralizing antibodies-mediated immune pressure on viral virulence will lead to the emergence of new variants that develop high virulence in vaccinated individuals, causing widespread cases of hyperacute (i.e., due to Polyreactive, non-neutralizing antibodies-mediated retention of high viral infectiousness) and severe COVID-19 disease in highly vaccinated populations. But according to world-renowned scientists and experts, there is nothing to worry about; based on their spectacular but unexpected research results, they are making the population believe that the behavior of these new variants represents a harmful change to their biological properties! They understand that ‘this is not the second coming of Omicron’ but what they don’t grasp is that this will be the first and only coming of Highly Virulent Omicron descendant .
It seems that no one notices that the recurring appearance of seemingly spectacular variants and the equally enigmatic immune response are merely the result of a continually changing and evolving immune selection pressure exerted by highly vaccinated populations on the virus. This dynamic selection pressure on SARS-CoVid-2 ’s infectiousness initially arose as a result of mass vaccination with non-sterilizing vaccines against the spike protein (which happens to be responsible for the infectiousness of SARS-CoVid-2 ) during the pandemic. After this immune selection pressure eventually led to the natural selection and dominant spread of Omicron, new selection pressure was created by Omicron itself, as an indirect consequence of breakthrough infections it caused in vaccinated individuals.
Those who do not understand the immunological consequences of mass vaccination will also never understand why, with the arrival of Omicron, the opportunity for the population to develop herd immunity irrevocably melted away, and mass vaccination instead turned into an unprecedented and life-threatening “gain-of-function” experiment with the global population as guinea pigs. Just as Omicron came like a thief in the night, so too will Highly Virulent Omicron descendant surprise society.
In my opinion, all efforts to support conspiracy theories or to fuel personal academic interests through hasty and cheap interpretations of isolated research results are a massive waste of time and money. Almost everyone is currently focused on the bait rather than the real target. It is high time for the population to realize that all those who are not well-versed in the complex adaptations of the immune system to the virus’s massive immune evasion should refrain from making predictions and forecasts, regardless of their credentials, titles, and curriculum. With their arrogance, know-it-all attitude, and inconsistent messages and conclusions, they not only blind themselves but also the people. In this way, they – once again – deceive outright the majority of the population who largely got vaccinated based on their recommendations. It is only when soon the statistics will show excess mortality due to both Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccine-related immune-mediated diseases to abundantly occur in the vaccinated (i.e., the many vaccinated individuals who could not build natural immunity due to the timing of vaccination) that it will become undeniable that humanity will need to rely on the once-hated unvaccinated to serve as a foundation for building a new society.
About the Author:
Geert Vanden Bossche received his DVM from the University of Ghent, Belgium, and his PhD degree in Virology from the University of Hohenheim, Germany. He held adjunct faculty appointments at universities in Belgium and Germany. After his career in Academia, Geert joined several vaccine companies (GSK Biologicals, Novartis Vaccines, Solvay Biologicals) to serve various roles in vaccine R&D as well as in late vaccine development.
Geert then moved on to join the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Global Health Discovery team in Seattle (USA) as Senior Program Officer; he then worked with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) in Geneva as Senior Ebola Program Manager. At GAVI he tracked efforts to develop an Ebola vaccine. He also represented GAVI in fora with other partners, including WHO, to review progress on the fight against Ebola and to build plans for global pandemic preparedness.
Back in 2015, Geert scrutinized and questioned the safety of the Ebola vaccine that was used in ring vaccination trials conducted by WHO in Guinea. His critical scientific analysis and report on the data published by WHO in the Lancet in 2015 was sent to all international health and regulatory authorities involved in the Ebola vaccination program. After working for GAVI, Geert joined the German Center for Infection Research in Cologne as Head of the Vaccine Development Office. He is at present primarily serving as a Biotech / Vaccine consultant while also conducting his own research on Natural Killer cell-based vaccines.