One shot, two shot; red shot, blue shot. The vaccines might not have been successful in slowing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 one iota, but they were successful in earning profits for the manufacturers. Logically, they would like to repeat this pleasurable experience with other viruses — safety, past failures, and common sense be damned.
If you like the success of the mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in stopping the virus, you will love the slate of new mRNA vaccines coming to a neighborhood near you, according to Moderna’s CEO. Once upon a time, we could rely on our government and even the pharmaceutical companies to abort efforts to pursue failed vaccines when they proved to be dangerous during clinical trials, such as with the attempted dengue fever and RSV vaccines. Now that they plan to develop more vaccines by 2023, do you really have the confidence that they will still act upon dangerous safety signals?
And the other piece we’re working on is for 2023 is how do we make it possible from a societal standpoint that people want to be vaccinated. And we’re trying to do this by preparing combinations, we’re working on the flu vaccine, we’re working on an RSV vaccine, and our goal is to be able to have a single annual booster, so that we don’t have compliance issues, where people don’t want to get two to three shots a winter, but they get one dose, where they get a booster for corona, and a booster for flu and RSV, to make sure that people get their vaccine.
When moderator Francine Lacqua asked Bancel how close the company is to achieving this goal, here was his response:
“So the RSV program is now in Phase 3, the flu program is in Phase 2 and soon in Phase 3, I hope as soon as second quarter of this year. So the best-case scenario would be the fall of 2023, as a best-case scenario, I don’t think it would be in every country, but we believe it’s possible to operate in some countries next year.”
Judging by the past two years, this means that no number of negative safety signals will stop this shot. After all, they want to make sure there are no “compliance issues.”
The public needs to be aware of the fact that there is no effective vaccine against respiratory viruses. We now see that the COVID vaccines never stopped transmission and likely turned negative after a few months, which is why they pushed the boosters and Fauci is now floating a second booster. Flu shots as well are spotty at best. One could not possibly conjure up a worse collection of illnesses for which to pursue vaccines. Respiratory virus vaccines have always failed in the past, and now we know why. Both the RSV and dengue fever vaccines have failed because they created antibody-dependent disease enhancement (ADE), where they made the vaccinated sicker from the pathogen.
Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) has a page on its website about ADE and its history with the failed RSV and dengue fever vaccines. “ADE occurs when the antibodies generated during an immune response recognize and bind to a pathogen, but they are unable to prevent infection,” writes CHOP. “Instead, these antibodies act as a ‘Trojan horse,’ allowing the pathogen to get into cells and exacerbate the immune response.”
Sound familiar? What recent vaccine do we know failed to stop transmission and in fact, in later months, caused the vaccinated to get infected at higher rates? Oh, that’s right, a coronavirus vaccine.
CHOP explains that this is exactly what happened with the failed RSV vaccine in 1967:
“In clinical trials, children who were given the vaccine were more likely to develop or die from pneumonia after infection with RSV. As a result of this finding, the vaccine trials stopped, and the vaccine was never submitted for approval or released to the public.”
Indeed, the RSV vaccine was an utter disaster, resulting in the hospitalization of 80% of the infants and toddlers in the clinical trial. There has not been a successful RSV vaccine since then.
This was back when we actually nixed dangerous vaccines. Do you have any confidence that the company would respond in kind and be transparent about it today were the trials to pick up inchoate signs of injuries, ADE, or leaky vaccine hypothesis?
More recently, in 2016, hundreds of thousands of children in the Philippines were injected with a vaccine that made some of them very sick. Fourteen children reportedly died. The concern at the time was that those without prior infection wound up getting more seriously ill from the pathogen after having had the vaccine, which is why the shot is only available today for those who, ironically, already had the disease.
In other words, ADE is a real concern with respiratory virus vaccines, especially one of them mentioned by Bancel. Let’s not forget that on page 52 of the FDA's "Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for an Unapproved Product Review Memorandum," it states that there appears to be no concern of ADE in the short run (during the original strain), but "risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure."
Well, why is this not revisited a year later, now that everyone agrees there is waning immunity?! We see record infections across the board, a higher rate of infection among the vaccinated, waning immunity, and a need for endless boosters, and we know they never ruled out ADE, by their own admission. Yet now they want to tether this vaccine to yet another respiratory virus that already had a proven manifestation of ADE in a failed vaccine candidate!
The other candidate for the mRNA deluxe triple combo is an annual influenza vaccine. But we already know that the flu vaccine is clearly non-sterilizing, and furthermore, there is already evidence of instances of negative efficacy. A Canadian study published in Euro Surveillance just days before the start of the coronavirus pandemic found a -346% vaccine efficacy rate of the flu shot for those ages 35-54 during the 2018-19 late-season influenza A(H3N2) epidemic. H3N2 is the predominant flu circulating this season. “Clade 3C.3a VE showed a pronounced negative dip among 35–54-year-olds in whom the odds of medically attended illness were>4-fold increased for vaccinated vs unvaccinated participants (p<0.005),” concluded the authors.
Shouldn’t we have an independent audit of consumer advocates studying these vaccines before we allow the government and the people who stand to make billions of dollars foist them upon us with liability protection?
Fauci himself was also a speaker at this forum with Bancel. Let’s not forget that at the beginning of the pandemic, he warned that part of the safety concern of a rushed vaccine is that it might make the pathogen worse. “There’s another element to safety, and that is: If you vaccinate someone and they make an antibody response, and then they get exposed and infected, does the response that you induced actually enhance the infection and make it worse?” warned Fauci in an interview with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in March 2020. In cautioning why you can’t just produce a vaccine out of thin air, Fauci explained, “The only way you’ll know that [if the vaccine makes the pathogen worse] is if you do an extended study, not in a normal volunteer who has no risk of infection, but in people who are out there in a risk situation. This would not be the first time, if it happened, that a vaccine that looked good in initial safety actually made people worse.”
Which example did he give? The very virus for which Moderna is now working on an mRNA vaccine. “There was a history of the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine in children which, paradoxically, made the children worse,” continued Fauci. “One of the HIV vaccines that we tested several years ago actually made individuals more likely to get infected. So, you can’t just go out there and give it unless you feel that, in the field, when someone is getting infected and exposed, being vaccinated doesn’t make them worse.”
During the forum with Fauci, the Moderna CEO said he is collaborating with “Dr. Fauci’s team” on this proposed triple combo vaccine. He also said (at 44:01) that he would be working on targeting 20 other pathogens, including Nipah and Zika. All of these vaccines for respiratory viruses run the risk of causing some form of ADE and original antigenic sin, especially if the new modus operandi is to release them to the public before conducting studies that rule out these pernicious unintended consequences of imperfect vaccines.At some point you can’t blame them for wanting to make billions of dollars when they’ve so successfully gotten away with their first heist. If we allow more untransparent, rushed vaccines without any liability or proper third-party vetting to continue, then the fault is on us. Fool me twice, shame on me.