In many areas of life, half a loaf is better than no loaf at all. But when it comes to vaccines, the opposite is true. Half-baked antibodies injected throughout the entire population can make the virus even stronger and negate people's natural immunity. Thus, all the defenses of the leaky vaccine suggesting that it at least conveys "some" protection are actually extremely concerning, a point driven home by a nugget in the most recent surveillance report from Public Health England (PHE).
On page 23 of PHE's "COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report Week 42," British health officials report a shocking finding. They believe their serology tests are underestimating the number of people with prior infection due to "recent observations from UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) surveillance data that N antibody levels appear to be lower in individuals who acquire infection following 2 doses of vaccination." In other words, the vaccine might be reducing the all-important N antibodies that one generates from natural infection. Kudos to former NYT reporter Alex Berenson for discovering this important point.
Until now, we've been operating under the assumption that those with prior infection don't need the vaccine to boost immunity and taking the shots would only expose them to the growing risk of side effects. However, what if the shots are actually sliding back the natural immunity generated in those with previous infection? What if that is related to the macro concern that a narrow-spectrum vaccine with suboptimal antibodies that only recognize the "S" (spike) protein of the virus but not the "N" (nucleocapsid) of the virus will cause B cells in those with the vaccine to learn to produce only S antibodies, which are slower-acting and less sterilizing (don't stop transmission) than N antibodies, which are faster-acting and are more effective in their protection against the virus?
It's not like we weren't confronted with some other warning signs that the vaccine could perhaps negate some of the immunity acquired from prior infection. In March, researchers from Mount Sinai in New York and Hospital La Paz in Madrid posted a preprint study indicating that at least the second Pfizer shot might weaken T cell immunity. In a shocking discovery after monitoring a group of vaccinated people both with and without prior infection, they found "in individuals with a pre-existing immunity against SARS-CoV-2, the second vaccine dose not only fail to boost humoral immunity but determines a contraction of the spike-specific T cell response." They also note that other research has shown "the second vaccination dose appears to exert a detrimental effect in the overall magnitude of the spike-specific humoral response in COVID-19 recovered individuals."
Thus, mass vaccinating with leaky suboptimal antibody production could serve as a Trojan horse and make people more susceptible to an ever-enhanced virus. It's not like we had no warning about the possibility of viral enhancement through waning and suboptimal vaccine-mediated antibodies. On page 52 of Pfizer's "Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for an Unapproved Product Review Memorandum," it is admitted that antibody dependent disease enhancement was a possibility in the long run with waning efficacy.
"However, 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," write the FDA regulators in the memo. In the April 9, 2021, follow-up memorandum (p. 40), the FDA follows up with the same concern.
Well, here we are today, and we now know this vaccine wanes so badly that they are pushing boosters for everyone, as transmission rates among the vaccinated begin to overtake the unvaccinated. At the time of the April FDA memorandum, it was claimed that the vaccines were not waning. But several months later, they leaked so much that now the CDC is not even ruling out the possibility of deeming those without booster shots "unvaccinated," just like in Israel. So, if the vaccine-mediated antibodies wane beyond what anyone could have imagined, and we are seeing with our own eyes that the virus is getting worse instead of better, how is the concern of viral enhancement not even entertained?
According to PHE data, 86% of all U.K. residents over age 12 have received at least one shot, including nearly everyone in a vulnerable age bracket. Yet the summer and early fall curve, as presented by Worldometer, has blown out the magnitude of the case curve last year when nobody was vaccinated, and the daily numbers are reaching close to their winter peak.
The case rates per capita are now higher among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated in every age cohort over 30.
According to the PHE data (p.16), among those who died within 60 days of testing positive for COVID over the past three weeks in the U.K., 83% of them were fully vaccinated. Some of those deaths were obviously incidental, and among the most vulnerable groups, the vaccination rate is over 90%, but still, something is not right. This is not what we would expect from any minimally effective vaccine.
Consider the fact that they are now taking young children who are not vulnerable to this virus at all and who will produce impervious lifelong natural immunity, and aside from injecting them with numerous side effects, perhaps their natural immunity will also be mitigated by the suboptimal antibodies. Why on earth would anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty make these shots available (much less mandate them) to young children?Behold the power of a leaky vaccine. When it comes to vaccines, half a loaf is not better than no loaf; it's a poisonous loaf.