Tag: vaccines

There will never be a vaccine for respiratory viruses to prevent infection or spread; RSV is no exception

Countless concerned parents have asked the WCH about the new RSV vaccines. In this post, we look at what they are, as well as the virus itself, with the aim of helping readers make their own informed decisions. The post is in two parts. First, a summary of the most salient points. Then, a more academic paper into the context and science for health professionals and others looking to gain a deeper perspective.

Part 1: The “TLDR” Summary

[Note: “TDLR” is an abbreviation for “too long; didn’t read.” It is used to indicate that one didn’t read the whole text or to indicate that what follows is a summary of the overly long text.]

  • RSV symptoms are mild and mimic the common cold. Most babies have been infected with RSV by their second birthday. In the EU, more than 90% of hospitalised adult RSV patients are over 65 years old.
  • It is easily treated with nebuliser therapy. Urgent care and hospitalisation can occur for serious cases and if treated early, infant mortality should not be a concern. Among the 22.4 million children under 5 years old in the US, the annual risk of RSV hospitalisation is well under 1%.
  • RSV “vaccines” only reduce the risk of hospitalisation from RSV by 1%.
  • So-called RSV “vaccines” fall into three categories: monoclonal antibodies, a protein-based “vaccine,” and mRNA technology.
  • The monoclonal antibody treatment is called nirsevimab and is given in a single dose. There are serious safety concerns around nirsevimab. The clinical trials had limitations and there is little to no long-term safety data. Ambiguity around its classification also complicates safety monitoring and accountability.
  • Some reports link nirsevimab to infant deaths. Many treated infants still end up in hospital, and resistant strains of the virus are emerging. Antibody-dependent enhancement (“ADE”) is also a concern.
  • Recent vaccines developed by GSK and Pfizer for pregnant women have shown a 2% increase in premature births and higher rates of neonatal deaths in trials.
  • Moderna’s mResvia mRNA vaccine is recommended by the European Medicines Agency for the over-sixties, yet with no data showing it’s either safe or effective. The same safety concerns exist for mResvia as for any other mRNA “vaccine,” namely myocarditis, auto-immunity, genomic integration and cancer.
  • There are alternatives. Studies show a clear inverse relationship of severity of RSV symptoms and vitamin D levels. Better vitamin D levels may lower the incidence of RSV-associated bronchiolitis in infants, and vitamin D helps enhance immune response, reduce inflammation and helps stop RSV getting into cells. Quercetin and zinc are also worth consideration as part of a treatment protocol.

If you’d like to discuss these points with your doctor or other health professional, consider sharing the following detailed paper with them. It includes aspects many vaccinating doctors have not been informed about so please discuss it with them before potential injections.

Keep reading

There is only myocarditis and pericarditis in covid vaccinated children, study finds

A study was published in May 2024 by the Bennet Institute for Applied Data Science, a multidisciplinary team based at the University of Oxford. It was an observational study to assess the safety and effectiveness of the first and second doses of Pfizer-BioNTech’s (BNT162b2) covid injection in children and adolescents in England.  The injection was offered to this age group from September 2021 as part of the Government’s national covid injection campaign.

The study used the OpenSAFELY-TPP database and included adolescents aged 12-15 years and children aged 5-11 years, comparing unvaccinated and single-vaccinated children with those receiving a second dose.

It compared data for at least 1,678,668 children and adolescents comprising:

  • 820,926 unvaccinated adolescents.
  • 441,858 adolescents who had received a first dose.
  • 283,422 unvaccinated children.
  • 132,462 children who had received a first dose
  • There is no indication of how many adolescents and children who had received a second dose were included in the study.

The study used the incidence rate ratio (“IRR”), separately for children and adolescents, to compare unvaccinated outcomes to vaccinated outcomes and the first does (single-vaccinated) to those who had two doses of Pfizer’s “vaccine.”

IRR measures the relative difference in incidence rates between two groups.  An IRR greater than 1 indicates a higher incidence rate in one group compared to the other group. An IRR less than 1 indicates a lower incidence rate in one group compared to the other group. An IRR of 1 indicates no significant difference in incidence rates between the two groups.

Keep reading

Whistleblower Serves Connecticut Officials Notice of Covid Vaccine Deaths

On August 21, 2024, John Beaudoin, Sr., President and CEO of Summa Logica LLC, filed a whistleblower complaint with the Auditors of Public Accounts of Connecticut. The allegations pertain to forgery of death records under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-139 (2023). More than 100 Connecticut death records list “Covid” as a cause of death though the deaths are certified as “accidental” and involve blunt force trauma or fentanyl overdose. Other records were found to be Covid vaccine deaths, but the vaccine is fraudulently omitted from the death records.

The whistleblower complaint was accompanied by THE CONNECTICUT MEMORANDA SERIES Volume II (CT Memo Vol. II) comprising nearly 250 pages of factual allegations gleaned from Connecticut’s official vital records database of death records.

Four death records expressly state that a Covid vaccine was involved in the deaths. One boy 16 years old died due to “Stress Cardiomyopathy Following Second Dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech.” Dalcie, 73 years old, died from Guillain Barre Syndrome. Her record also states, “second Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine 28 days before start of symptoms.” Juana, 39 years old, died from “Sudden Cardiac Death,” “Probable … myocarditis.” Juana’s record states that myocarditis resulted from Covid. This is odd because her record also states she was vaccinated for Covid. Myocarditis is known to occur from Covid vaccines, but not from Covid. Lorraine was 85 years old and died from congestive heart failure only two days after vaccination. Only the boy’s record lists “Y59.0,” which means, “Viral vaccines.” The other three records omit any code related to vaccines even though the records clearly state that a Covid vaccine was a cause or contributing condition of death.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses software that reads the English words in the causes of death on the records and then automatically outputs the ICD-10 codes, which are international symptom diagnostic codes. “Y59.0” is an ICD-10 code. If “vaccination” or “vaccine” are on the death record and “Y59.0” is missing after the software executes, it is highly likely that someone deleted “Y59.0,” else someone manually added “Y59.0” for the boy and did not add “Y.59.0” for the other three.

Keep reading

‘Should Not Be Used in Any Infants’: Higher Death Risk in Beyfortus RSV Shot Clinical Trials

Infants treated for RSV with the monoclonal antibody nirsevimab have significantly higher mortality rates than those treated with a different monoclonal antibody or with a placebo, according to an analysis by the Japanese journal Med Check of three major randomized control trials.

The report reanalyzed clinical trial data showing that nirsevimab — marketed by Sanofi and AstraZeneca as Beyfortus — reduced RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection and hospitalizations in both high-risk and healthy infants.

However, babies treated with the drug had a higher mortality rate likely linked to adverse effects — including thrombosis (blood clotting) — from the drug itself, the study found.

“Due to the increased mortality, nirsevimab should not be used in any infants,” the study concluded. “Do not use nirsevimab for universal immunization.”

Shortly after its approval by the European Medicines Association in October 2022, and fast-track approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in July 2023, the U.S., France, Spain and Luxembourg launched universal Beyfortus infant immunization campaigns for the 2023-24 RSV season.

Med Check published its appraisal of the clinical trials shortly after France’s National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) published its first pharmacovigilance data on the drug, compiled during the 2023-24 season.

The ANSM report tracked adverse events related to Beyfortus in France between Sept. 11, 2023, and April 30, 2024. Of 244,495 doses delivered, 198 adverse events were reported to the pharmacovigilance system, of which 153 were considered serious.

The report identified safety signals for stroke, respiratory conditions and hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes — when an infant suddenly loses muscle strength and becomes “floppy.” Hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes also are associated with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, or Tdap, vaccine and other vaccines.

There were also three reports of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), although researchers said at least one of them was likely not linked to the drug.

The ANSM said each of the signals would be closely monitored in the future, but that a causal link between Beyfortus and those adverse events had not yet been established. The agency concluded the results confirm that the benefits of using the drug to treat bronchiolitis, an RSV infection, outweigh the risks.

The ANSM continues to recommend all newborn babies receive the Beyfortus shot this RSV season.

Keep reading

Covid Shots Trigger Deadly Cytokine Storms and Anaphylaxis — Study

A study published October 1 documented the pathology of mRNA Covid vaccine-triggered cytokine storms (an overreaction of the immune system) and anaphylaxis (an allergic reaction to an antigen).

“Acute adverse reactions to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are a major concern, as autopsy reports indicate that deaths most commonly occur on the same day of or one day following vaccination. These acute reactions may be due to cytokine storms triggered by lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) and anaphylaxis induced by polyethene glycol (PEG), both of which are vital constituents of the mRNA-LNP vaccines,” the study said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

The pathology of the lethal Covid injections and the mechanisms of harm they inflict were further elaborated on by the researchers.

“Kounis syndrome, in which anaphylaxis triggers acute coronary syndrome (ACS), may also be responsible for these cardiovascular events. Furthermore, COVID-19 mRNA-LNP vaccines encompass adjuvants, such as LNPs, which trigger inflammatory cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-6. These vaccines also produce spike proteins which facilitate the release of inflammatory cytokines. Apart from this, histamine released from mast cells during allergic reactions plays a critical role in IL-6 secretion, which intensifies inflammatory responses. In light of these events, early reduction of IL-1β and IL-6 is imperative for managing post-vaccine cytokine storms, ACS, and myocarditis,” the study said in the ‘Abstract’ section.

The researchers also provided a flowchart depicting the deadly path from vaccination to cytokine storm.

Keep reading

COVID vaccine science catching up with ‘conspiracy theorists’

Two new peer-reviewed medical journal articles indicate that the science is starting to catch up with the ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’ such as myself, also known as people that rationally asked questions of novel products that were rushed out the door, to help stem a pandemic that was far less deadly than all other causes, including cardiovascular disease, cancer, and even tobacco use (and note that COVID-19 deaths tend to be inflated). Publishing in the Polish Annals of Medicine, Thoene conducts a limited literature review on the reporting of COVID-19 vaccine severe adverse events in scientific journals, finding:

“From 2020 to 2024, the literature has gone from claiming there are absolutely no SAEs from mRNA based vaccines (2020/2021) to an acknowledgment of a significant number of various SAEs (2023/2024); including but not limited to neurological complications, myocarditis, pericarditis and thrombosis. … The early scientific literature was biased, so as not to report SAEs, due to social and political concerns and overwhelming corporate greed. Only in the last year have scientists been able to publish articles that acknow- ledge a high number of SAEs linked to mRNA based vaccines. This should act as a warning that science should be completely objective when evaluating health risks, but can often be influenced by social and economic considerations.” Source.

Proving once again that Eastern Europeans are based (the Hungarians stand up to the EU on immigration [source], and the Bulgarians published my little study on the correlation between COVID-19 vaccination and European excess mortality), the Polish journal kindly accepted my brief response, entitled ‘Scientific views around mRNA based covid vaccines are changing, but to what end?’, praising them and Thoene for this important paper, and noting that this is only the tip of the iceberg. Source. 

Keep reading

Japan Approves World’s First ‘Self-amplifying’ mRNA COVID Shot — Is the U.S. Next?

Japan is offering a self-amplifying mRNA vaccine as one of the five routine COVID-19 vaccines available to the public for the 2024-2025 fall and winter seasons.

Japanese regulators approved the ARCT-154 shot in November 2023. According to a press release, ARCT-154 is the world’s first self-amplifying mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare approved the vaccine for adults. It is jointly produced by the biotechnology firm CSL and Arcturus Therapeutics.

“The approval is based on positive clinical data from several ARCT-154 studies … which achieved higher immunogenicity results and a favorable safety profile compared to a standard mRNA COVID-19 vaccine comparator,” CSL said.

Japan’s vaccination program will offer the vaccines to people 65 and over, and 60- to 64-year-olds with severe underlying conditions, at a maximum cost of 7,000 yen (approximately $47). People not in these two categories can also receive the shots, but the fee will not be capped.

Keep reading

‘Striking Evidence’ COVID Shots May Increase Kids’ Risk of Asthma

A new analysis of over 200,000 U.S. children’s health records suggests that mRNA COVID-19 vaccination increases children’s risk of asthma, Alex Berenson reported Tuesday.

Berenson, a former New York Times reporter who now reports on his Unreported Truths Substack, revealed communications with Taiwanese researchers showing they found “striking evidence” that the shots themselves may cause asthma, which leads to lung damage.

Asthma is a chronic lung disease affecting nearly 5 million U.S. children, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). While usually not fatal, severe asthma attacks can be life-threatening in children, according to the Mayo Clinic.

The Taiwanese researchers’ analysis — which the researchers are still reviewing — used electronic medical records from TriNetX, which touts itself as the “largest global source of real-world data.”

The study authors looked at TriNetX’s health data from over 200,000 U.S. kids ages 5 to 18 between Jan. 1, 2021, and Dec. 31, 2022.

According to Berenson, they found that children who received a COVID-19 mRNA shot and who had not had a natural COVID-19 infection had a 13% higher risk of receiving a new asthma diagnosis in the year after their vaccination when compared to a matched group of children who didn’t get a COVID-19 shot or infection.

“That increased risk cannot be due to Covid, since neither group was infected,” Berenson wrote.

When the researchers compared vaccinated versus unvaccinated children — all of whom also were diagnosed with a COVID-19 infection — they found an even higher risk.

Berenson reported that children who had both a COVID-19 mRNA shot and a COVID-19 infection had a 20% higher risk of a new asthma diagnosis than a similar group of unvaccinated kids who had a COVID-19 infection.

Because the study is not a randomized prospective trial it does not prove that the mRNA COVID-19 shots caused the extra asthma cases, Berenson said.

“But the researchers closely matched two very large groups,” he wrote, “and the association they found is almost certainly not due to chance.”

Keep reading

Govt. Researchers: Flu Shots Not Effective in Elderly, After All

An important and definitive “mainstream” government study done nearly two decades ago got little attention because the science came down on the wrong side. 

It found that after decades and billions of dollars spent promoting flu shots for the elderly, the mass vaccination program did not result in saving lives. In fact, the death rate among the elderly increased substantially.

The authors of the study admitted a pro-vaccine bias going into the study. Here was the history as described to me: Public health experts long assumed flu shots were effective in the elderly. But, paradoxically, all the best studies done on the question failed to demonstrate a benefit. Instead of considering that they, the experts, could be wrong–instead of believing the scientific data–the public health experts assumed the studies were wrong. After all, flu shots have to work, right?

So the NIH launched an effort to do “the” definitive study that would actually prove, for the first time, once and for all, that flu shots were beneficial to the elderly. The government would gather some of the brightest scientific minds for the research, and adjust for all kinds of factors that could be masking that presumed benefit.

But when they finished, no matter how they crunched the numbers, the data kept telling the same story: flu shots were of no benefit to the elderly—or anyone else, it seemed. Quite the opposite. The death rate increased markedly after widespread flu vaccination among older Americans. The scientists finally had to acknowledge that decades of public health thought had been mistaken.

Keep reading

Kamala Harris campaign still mandating employees get COVID vax

Vice President Harris is still insisting that employees of her 2024 presidential campaign be fully vaccinated against the coronavirus — even as most other institutions in American life have abandoned vaccine mandates.

“Harris for President requires all employees to be ‘up to date’ on COVID-19 vaccination status as prescribed by the CDC as a condition of employment, unless otherwise prohibited by applicable law,” reads the fine print of a job posting for a senior designer in Wilmington, Del. Anyone seeking a “reasonable accommodation” must plead their case to human resources.

Additional postings on Harris’ campaign website indicates the rules also apply to all jobs offered by the Democratic National Committee as well.

Up to date officially means having a dose of the latest Pfizer, Moderna or Novavax coronavirus vaccine, according to the CDC.

Keep reading