Will you get in line for the SARS-CoV 2 Vaccine? Look at SARS 1 Vaccine development.

In 2003 China was the epicenter of the SARS outbreak which infected 8000+ Globally and killed roughly 800 people. China lost 1% of its GDP that year primarily due to pullback in tourism, retail, and entertainment revenue.

At the time it was thought that a second SARS outbreak was imminent and vast resources were allocated toward rapid development of a vaccine to immunize the populous. The CFR of SARS was around 10% and it didn't take a math wiz to extrapolate out the impact of a second potentially larger and more widespread outbreak.

The vaccine development progress was rapid and by May of 2004 they entered into Phase 1 Human clinical trials.

First Sars Vaccine Trials a Success

A SARS vaccine could be used among high-risk groups in China in the event of a large-scale outbreak again this spring, say experts.

The inactivate vaccine was produced last May following a year of intense research to find a vaccine for the virus which sparked a global health scare when it emerged in early 2003.

Trials among 36 volunteers have proved effective and safe in the first-phase human tests begun on May 22, 2004, said Yin Weiping, managing director of Beijing-based Sinovac Biotech Co Ltd which has produced the vaccine.
......
The second-round of tests will involve further experimental verification in many aspects, such as dosage and schedule for injecting the vaccine to gain a better understanding of it and how it can best be used.

A date for beginning the second-round of tests has not been fixed, while the third-round of trials will necessarily involve hundreds of volunteers in the event of another large-scale SARS outbreaks, Yin Weiping noted.

The response in China was overwhelmingly positive.
SARS Vaccine Passes First Test
SARS Vaccine Clinical Trial Off to Good Start

Shortly after the completion of the Phase 1 human trials in China (Dec, 2004), the NIH in the US began its own clinical trials for a SARS Vaccine.

In 2005 they were looking at 3 different vectors of vaccine development. They were
-Inactivated SARS-CoV- based Vaccines
- S Protein-based Vaccines
- Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) based Vaccines.

SARS Vaccine Development

The first vector was using the entire genome of live SARS-CoV, inactivating it, and then inducing the immune system to create antibodies from the dead virus. China was using this method in 2004 as it is easy to quickly generate whole killed virus particles.

The second vector is isolating the S Protein out from the rest of the genome and attempting to use it to induce antibodies that will disrupt and block the virus from binding to the ACE2 receptors of human cells and subsequently prevent fusion with the cell and viral intrusion.

The third vector is to further isolate out a fragment of the S protein, specifically the RBD segment in the middle of the S1 Subunit of the S proteins outer layer. The RBD segment contains the specific receptor binding site on the S protein that interacts with ACE2.

Despite the positive response to China's early clinical trials. The research in the US quickly began to find problems with the first two vectors of vaccine development.

Regarding full genome inactivation

Several reports have showed that SARS-CoV inactivated with formaldehyde, UV light, and β-propiolactone can induce virus-neutralizing antibodies in immunized animals (8–11), and the first inactivated SARS-CoV vaccine is being tested in the clinical trials in China. However, safety of the inactivated vaccine is a serious concern; production workers are at risk for infection during handling of concentrated live SARS-CoV, incomplete virus inactivation may cause SARS outbreaks among the vaccinated populations, and some viral proteins may induce harmful immune or inflammatory responses, even causing SARS-like diseases

And regarding the S protein

The S protein of FIPV expressed by recombinant vaccinia can cause antibody-dependent enhancement of disease if vaccinated animals are subsequently infected with wild-type virus (32). Our previous studies on HIV-1 showed that antibodies against some immunodominant epitopes in the HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein could enhance infection by heterologous HIV-1 strains (33). Most recently, Yang et al. (6) demonstrated that the polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies against S protein of the late SARS-CoV (Urbani strain) could neutralize infection by the relevant late SARS-CoV strains. However, these antibodies enhanced infection by an early human SARS-CoV isolate (GD03T0013) and the civet SARS-CoV–like viruses. These investigators have shown that the ACE2-binding domain mediates the antibody-dependent enhancement of civet SARS-CoV–like virus entry (6). Theoretically, some antibodies to the ACE2-binding domain may enhance infection if these antibodies closely mimic the receptor ACE2 and induce similar conformational changes, as the receptor likely does.
....
Vaccination of ferrets with MVA-based SARS vaccine expressing full-length S protein caused liver damage after animals were challenged with SARS-CoV (34). These findings raised concerns about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines containing or expressing full-length S protein.

Now this was truly concerning, a SARS Vaccine could actually ENHANCE an infection from certain strains of coronavirus rather then protect against it!!

China's early trials were deceiving, the vaccine could be given and seem to be successful at producing antibodies with few ill effects. However if the individual was later exposed to a subsequent coronavirus infection, it could cause a worse reaction then if you were un-vaccinated. SARS never re-emerged with any significant spread and thus these vaccinated individuals were never challenged with the live virus.

The threat of a recurring SARS outbreak was great enough that the Vaccine research continued for years. However by 2012 the result of the research was no more promising.

Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS Virus

Histopathology seen in animals given one of the SARS-CoV vaccines was uniformly a Th2-type immunopathology with prominent eosinophil infiltration, confirmed with special eosinophil stains. The pathologic changes seen in all control groups lacked the eosinophil prominence.

Conclusions
These SARS-CoV vaccines all induced antibody and protection against infection with SARS-CoV. However, challenge of mice given any of the vaccines led to occurrence of Th2-type immunopathology suggesting hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV components was induced. Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated.
.....
The eosinophil component of infiltrates was very prominent in animals vaccinated with the experimental vaccine preparations when compared to animals mock-vaccinated using PBS, or those exposed earlier to live virus (figure 6); few to no eosinophils were seen in those lung sections. Thus, while pathology was seen in sections from the control mice, the hypersensitivity-type pathologic reaction with eosinophils was not seen.

Continued...

Also shown is that a Th2-type immunopathology was seen after challenge of all vaccinated animals when evaluation for immunopathology was reported except the study in hamsters with a GSK whole virus vaccine. Thus, inactivated whole virus vaccines whether inactivated with formalin or beta propiolactone and whether given with our without alum adjuvant exhibited a Th2-type immunopathologic in lungs after challenge. As indicated, two reports attributed the immunopathology to presence of the N protein in the vaccine; however, we found the same immunopathologic reaction in animals given S protein vaccine only, although it appeared to be of lesser intensity. Thus, a Th2-type immunopathologic reaction on challenge of vaccinated animals has occurred in three of four animal models (not in hamsters) including two different inbred mouse strains with four different types of SARS-CoV vaccines with and without alum adjuvant. An inactivated vaccine preparation that does not induce this result in mice, ferrets and nonhuman primates has not been reported.

Despite almost a decade of SARS vaccine research, they were unable to create a vaccine that did not trigger a HYPER-Sensitivity to the live infectious SARS-CoV.

This effort was hampered by the occurrence in the initial preclinical trial of an immunopathogenic-type lung disease among ferrets and Cynomolgus monkeys given a whole virus vaccine adjuvanted with alum and challenged with infectious SARS-CoV [14]. That lung disease exhibited the characteristics of a Th2-type immunopathology with eosinophils in the lung sections suggesting hypersensitivity that was reminiscent of the descriptions of the Th2-type immunopathologic reaction in young children given an inactivated RSV vaccine and subsequently infected with naturally-occurring RSV [32]–[33]. Most of these children experienced severe disease with infection that led to a high frequency of hospitalizations; two children died from the infection [33], [40], [41]. The conclusion from that experience was clear; RSV lung disease was enhanced by the prior vaccination.

In plain terms, ALL the SARS vaccines that they produced, rather then protecting the test animals, actually created a Cytokine Storm immune response in the lungs when they were challenged with the live SARS virus.

the Th2-type immunopathology pattern was seen only in animals given an inactivated vaccine earlier.

Here is a good article for further reading to help explain the Cytokine system

Th1 and Th2 responses: what are they?


We now found ourselves in a place without a SARS vaccine, in fact worse, without a single version of a SARS vaccine that anyone in the US was comfortable bringing to phase 1 Human clinical trials.

Which brings us back to China. We have to go back now to 2004 and remember that in the rush to develop protection from SARS, that China was willing to plunge headlong into human clinical trials. Far from being concerned about the long term implications of the SARS vaccine they had deployed, this was their attitude.

"Compared to the time when there was no SARS vaccine, we now feel much less disquiet with spring approaching, because we now have a powerful weapon," said Dr Lin.

Hmm, far from being cautious, they appeared to be ready to wield a "powerful weapon".
I cannot find any record of phase 2 or phase 3 trials being conducted by the Chinese back in this time frame. However this did happen in that time frame.

SARS laboratory escape

In April 2004, China reported a case of SARS in a nurse who had cared for a researcher at the Chinese National Institute of Virology (NIV). While ill, the researcher had traveled twice by train from Beijing to Anhui province, where she was nursed by her mother, a physician, who fell ill and died. The nurse in turn infected five third-generation cases, causing no deaths.

Subsequent investigation uncovered three unrelated laboratory infections in different researchers at the NIV. At least of two primary patients had never worked with live SARS virus. Many shortcomings in biosecurity were found at the NIV, and the specific cause of the outbreak was traced to an inadequately inactivated preparation of SARS virus that was used in general (that is, not biosecure) laboratory areas, including one where the primary cases worked. It had not been tested to confirm its safety after inactivation, as it should have been.

Though this is pure speculation, the question must be asked. Did China move forward in secret with phase 2 or phase 3 human clinical trials for SARS vaccines? Or did the potential for more lab leaks perhaps spook them enough to undertake hidden immunization programs?
Even the relatively small SARS outbreak in 2003 took a heavy toll on their economy. They had ample financial motivations to wield any "weapon" that they perceived could lesson the chance of another costly outbreak.

China had already shown their willingness to set aside human safety for the sake of speed in developing a SARS vaccine. Although the acknowledged phase 1 trials involved voluntary human guinea pigs, if they were going to further deploy their "powerful weapon" it would have to be done in secret. The initial trial subjects were never challenged by a subsequent SARS outbreak, thus the safety or efficacy of it could not be demonstrated.

Lets move closer toward the present.

Between SARS-CoV 1 and SARS CoV 2 there has been a team working to sample and identify coronavirus samples from the bats living in China. Perhaps the most famous member of this team is Shi Zhengli (aka Bat Woman) who with her colleagues identified hundreds of bat-bourne coronaviruses.

The Story of China's Bat Woman

Including one in 2013 that was 97% identical to the SARS strain that jumped to humans in 2003 and another that is 96% identical to the SARS-CoV 2 strain that is causing Covid-19.

This growing database of coronavirus genomes is not going to waste. There is a man who studied under Shi Zhengli and with access to her research is taking this to another level.

In 2015 China opened a BSL 4 Laboratory in Wuhan and one of the researchers currently working there is Dr. Peng Zhou. He is particularly focused on studying how bats are able to carry deadly pathogens without being killed by the diseases themselves.

In addition he has been working on the following.

Dr. Peng Zhou

He was genetically engineering various immune pathways (such as the STING pathway in bats) to make the bats more or less susceptible to infection, in the process potentially creating a highly resistant mutant superbug.
As part of his studies, Peng also researched mutant Coronavirus strains that overcame the natural immunity of some bats; these are "superbug" Coronavirus strains, which are not resistant to any natural immune pathway, and now appear to be out in the wild.
As of mid-November, his lab was actively hiring inexperienced post-docs to help conduct his research into super-Coronaviruses and bat inf

Continued...

If we dig further into some of his research papers we find this little gem.

Immunogenicity of the spike glycoprotein of Bat SARS-like coronavirus

It is clear that the recently discovered bat SL-CoVs
are not the immediate progenitors of SARS-CoV
which caused the outbreaks in 2002/2003[26]. It is
envisaged that the ongoing vaccine against the SARSCoV may not protect the infection by bat SL-CoVs.
Considering the wide distribution and genetic diversity
of bat SL-CoVs in China[18, 20, 25, 33], co-infection of
same bat species by different coronaviruses[18, 20, 30] and
the capability of recombination of coronaviruses[2, 8], it is
likely new coronaviruses in bats that can cross species
to infect humans. Moreover, high density of bat
habitats and increasing contacts between bats and
human will further increase the virus transmission
opportunities from bats to human. So, it is highly
important to be prepared for prevention and control of
the emerging disease resulting from this group of
viruses. The recombinant adenovirus constructed in
this study provides a potential vaccine candidate
against the infection by diverse bat SL-CoVs.

We learn a few things here, one that there is an ONGOING vaccine against SARS-CoV(They were still at it in 2009) and that they are concerned that it might not provide protection against a potential human crossover of a BAT coronavirus (SL-CoV) found in horseshoe bats.
Remember that it was a coronavirus sample from a HORSESHOE bat that came up as a 96% match to the new SARS-CoV 2 virus. Also that they were looking into using Recombinant viruses as potential vaccine candidates against a potential human crossover event. This study was done in 2009 and published in 2010.

Is this a smoking gun? perhaps not, but we know that for almost a decade they have been messing around with the S protein of human and bat coronaviruses. That they have explored the possibility of how changes to the S protein could cause a crossover event. Further showed interest in developing a vaccine as early as 2010 to preempt a crossover event from a Horseshoe bat reservoir.


Lets just consider for a moment that China was willing to test a SARS vaccine on humans in 2004 while at the same time acknowledging that an improperly inactivated virus could actually infect the vaccine recipients with the live virus rather then merely induce a controlled immune response.

Have they developed a vaccine for a potential horseshoe bat coronavirus crossover event? Would they preemptively deploy it?

This brings us to June 29th 2019. China passed a new vaccine law and accordingly planned to implement a state immunization program.
Mandatory Vaccine law

The Law will take effect on December 1, 2019

Which leads us right up to the SARS-CoV 2 emergence. Could this just be a coincidence? Sure, but perhaps either they started a trial Vaccine program in Wuhan, or a virus being used for research into a potential vaccine leaked out.

They would need to find some way to model a SL-CoV bat virus with a different S protein in order for it to be able to infect human cells. That is the only way to test whether your potential vaccine will work to prevent or disrupt that invasive viral activity. They had the means, they had the motive, and most importantly, thanks to bat women, they already had the VIRUS.

A few interesting tidbits from the past few months.

We have seen one of the main causes of death in victims of Covid-19 identified as ARDS or major organ failure brought on by Cytokine storm.
Molecular immune pathogenesis and diagnosis of COVID-19

ARDS is the common immunopathological event for SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infections [31]. One of the main mechanisms for ARDS is the cytokine storm, the deadly uncontrolled systemic inflammatory response resulting from the release of large amounts of pro-inflammatory cytokines
...
The cytokine storm will trigger a violent attack by the immune system to the body, cause ARDS and multiple organ failure, and finally lead to death in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, just like what occurs in SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infection

It is fairly obvious that China was trying to hide what was happening in Wuhan up until they could not hide it anymore.
Once they finally acknowledged the problem, they released unreliable data on infection and death rates.

Its interesting that W.H.O. sent a research team to China from Feb 10th-Feb 24
They were there to collect data and model the epidemic.
On Feb 23rd, the day before the W.H.O. team left, the CCP sent out an internal mandate to their local provinces to destroy all data that had been collected on the corona virus.

Governm ent offices required to destroy data

Staff who had access to the data were also required to sign a “letter of commitment,” which stipulated that officials promise to delete relevant documents from their laptops, computers, smartphones, external drive, and so on.

Furthermore, the signee will delete any screenshots and photos he or she made of the documents, and will promise not to share the contents of said documents with any party.

This is highly suspicious and it appears as though the CCP and W.H.O. colluded to release an "official narrative" regarding the data and statistics. And then the CCP destroyed the real data.
Five days later on Feb 28th W.H.O. released a 40 page report detailing their findings while in China. If the data on the ground in China corroborated the W.H.O. report, then why destroy it?

Pure speculation at this point, but perhaps China did start a new Vaccine trial on December 1, 2019 in Wuhan in an attempt to conduct a phase 3 human clinical trial on a vaccine for the modified horseshoe bat coronavirus.
Perhaps the live virus got loose either though human error or incompetence.
Perhaps there was an inordinate number of cytokine storm responses due to the vaccine "priming" the individuals for a hyper-active response to the live virus once it was loose.
Perhaps this lead to a death rate in Wuhan that was so different from the death rate outside Wuhan, that it was impossible to hide the incongruence in the data.

Or perhaps it was just a completely natural animal to human crossover event. We will likely never know, there is very little info coming out of Wuhan lately.

W.H.O. has motive to hide data that a vaccine may have caused a more severe disease outcome. They are largely dependent upon Voluntary Contributions from wealthy governments, organizations, or individuals to fund their activities. Many of these contributions are earmarked for specific projects and the end result is that the Largest Donors have the largest influence on where W.H.O. will focus its efforts.
The financial sustainablity of the World Health Organization

many large donors have given priority to infectious diseases, to the extent that the WHO’s polio programme acc

Continued...

Over the past decade, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been the largest private donor to WHO, whose major contributions had been earmarked for polio eradication through the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI)

Another article shows the W.H.O. reliance on Donor contributions and China's increased influence over W.H.O. starting in 2017.
China leapfrogging to become a leader in global health?

WHO, as the global health governance body, is now dependent more on funding by donors than by member states. About 80% of the WHO budget is financed by donor contributions, and is mostly ear-marked for certain activities.
...
Interestingly, China has committed a new financial contribution to WHO and is strengthening the WHO-China cooperation through the Belt and Road Initiative, announced during the high-level meeting with Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director General of WHO, in August 2017.

The bottom line is that monetary considerations are the primary factor driving the activity and narrative that W.H.O. promotes throughout the world. So when they go into China, they come out with the story China wants told. When Bill Gates wants something to get done, W.H.O. will bend over backwards to make it happen.

They all have a piece of the MASSIVE financial pie that is the Vaccine market, its research, development, manufacturing, and sales.
Global Vaccine Market Revenues

The global vaccine market is showing some escalating growth and it is expected that it will reach total revenues of nearly 60 billion U.S. dollars by 2020. That would be almost double the size the market had back in 2014. Driver of the growth is the increase of various infectious diseases like influenza, swine flu, hepatitis, tuberculosis, diphtheria, Ebola, and meningococcal and pneumococcal diseases.

Like any other market, negative publicity is bad for business. There is a reason they go out of their way to ridicule and dismiss anyone who questions whether or not vaccines are safe. Just keep your mouth shut and hold out your arm

In this case as the world rushes to create a SARS CoV 2 Vaccine, I think it would be prudent to let someone else rush to the front of the line to get that first needle.

Soul

Will you get in line for the SARS-CoV 2 Vaccine? Look at SARS 1 Vaccine development.

No.

a reply to: SoulReaper

Holy s888. I knew the SARS vaccine was bad; I didn't know it went this badly.

a reply to: SoulReaper hell no but according to letter sent to DOD by our president,all citizens must be vaccinated it was sent 9-19-19 invert those numbers,and the fact it was 4 months before supposed outbreak,this is a red herring for #! financial collapse#2 WW3#3 Trump is last american president,not neccesarily in that order,so it is etched in stone so to speak,welcome to the New World Order,ohh and military will be wearing blue uniforms,by the end of this year,this is unraveling like taking a razor blade to a skinless golfball

I was watching the news last night and the medical scientist said that if we get this virus we will probably have one year immunity and it looks pretty good that for many their immune system's innate immunity may give them lifetime protection.

I won't get the vaccine till I observe what it does to others, I have read about horrible problems with newly developed vaccines in the past and since I actually have a horrible response to flu vaccines, I am thinking I will pass on this for now. I also have some negative effects to other vaccines like the TDAP but it is probably the pertusis part, I can get the DT next time I cut myself badly, I never used to get a reaction against the Tetnus vaccine before. I had whooping cough, my reaction was similar to that reaction so my doctor advised me to not get that part. They have it is stock.

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: SoulReaper hell no but according to letter sent to DOD by our president,all citizens must be vaccinated it was sent 9-19-19 invert those numbers,and the fact it was 4 months before supposed outbreak,this is a red herring for #! financial collapse#2 WW3#3 Trump is last american president,not neccesarily in that order,so it is etched in stone so to speak,welcome to the New World Order,ohh and military will be wearing blue uniforms,by the end of this year,this is unraveling like taking a razor blade to a skinless golfball

That date has come and gone. If you made a type a meant 9-19-20, I don't even think a vax will be ready by then. Maybe 9-19-21.

a reply to: SoulReaper

no, i don't even do the flu shots.

a reply to: SoulReaper

Man- great round up of research and presentation.

As for me, if I were the type to believe in conspiracies, I might think this was all a REALLY bad sign.

If.

a reply to: SoulReaper

Absolutely not. And now I'm wondering if there's any chance prior vaccination for influenza has any crossover with this eosinophil infiltration reaction, as my father became suddenly ill at the end of November, with a massive eosinophilic reaction of unknown cause (despite two months of testing and a team of specialists trying to figure it out, to no avail.)

*Raises hand*

Pick me! Pick me!

IF the virus comes my way, I'm out of here. My ticket to the afterlife has already been punched; just waiting for the train to leave the station. I'd be happy to test a vaccine- as long as it wasn't made in China.

a reply to: SoulReaper

"Thank you"


Been following such to see if info', ref the Genes of it are released.

Have you also seen this;

en.wikipedia.org...

I can see them pushing this new vaccine as a "Required to work or be in public" type of choice.

I ain't taking it. I stock piled up on firearms and ammo for this very reason.

Taking the fight to them if they try to pull this sh#t

originally posted by: IrateCanadian
I can see them pushing this new vaccine as a "Required to work or be in public" type of choice.

I ain't taking it. I stock piled up on firearms and ammo for this very reason.

Taking the fight to them if they try to pull this sh#t

Thank you. I need more of you.

# no, I'm not getting a vaccine for a cold.

I don't see how anyone could read this and not at least somewhat lean towards thinking that this is man-made.

Thanks SoulReaver for putting this together.

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: SoulReaper hell no but according to letter sent to DOD by our president,all citizens must be vaccinated it was sent 9-19-19 invert those numbers,and the fact it was 4 months before supposed outbreak,this is a red herring for #! financial collapse#2 WW3#3 Trump is last american president,not neccesarily in that order,so it is etched in stone so to speak,welcome to the New World Order,ohh and military will be wearing blue uniforms,by the end of this year,this is unraveling like taking a razor blade to a skinless golfball

Do you have a link to something showing that letter? Or showing an official Vaccine mandate at the federal level? I have not heard of this happening and would be quite interested to take a look.

Soul

originally posted by: drussell41
a reply to: SoulReaper

Holy s888. I knew the SARS vaccine was bad; I didn't know it went this badly.

I didn't know it was this bad either until I looked into it.

Truth is, a Vaccine can sometimes be worse then the disease it is intended to treat.

Soul