Bossche Details Why Vaccinating in a Pandemic is Dangerous

www.geertvandenbossche.org...

There is a lot of solid information in this post, much of which has been discussed before on ATS, no doubt. I know I've shared a particular study that found that vaccinating during outbreaks will lead to more lethal variants: epidemics.psu.edu...

The problem is that the vaccine cannot provide robust antigen that covers all of the COVID bases because its focus is on the spike protein. Any derivation thereof will result in escape. These 'escapes' in vaccinated people are problematic because natural selection is being acted upon in a specific way. Bacteria and viruses find a way and they respond to changes in their environment. The evolutionary timescale for viruses and bacteria is very small so what might take humans 10k years to 'change', may take viruses a month or two.

Because the vaccine isn't as robust as natural immunity, it is directing the evolutionary changes in variants, which will lead to deadlier variants. We're seeing it now in that children are more susceptible to Delta than before.

Bossche points out that the "community" keeps pointing to waning symptoms as proof the vaccine is working and will stop the spread, but where it fails is in infectivity, which IS happening in both vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. He states there is no evidence to support their claim that the vaccine will not induce rapid changes which will ultimately increase mortality rates and uses well-understood mechanics to explain why the opposite of what they claim is true.

What vaccinated hosts are is a breeding ground for competition and the better mutations will win and eventually be immune from any antigens produced from vaccination. No doubt, when this occurs, these same companies will produce more mRNA vaccines to cover specific variants, which will recycle this process all over again.

It's a great read and should probably concern everyone. Even those that do not believe COVID is an issue at all should take note because even if COVID-19 wasn't as lethal as the MSM put it out to be, it's going to be. It's only a matter of time.

In other words, high viral infection rates drive natural selection and self-amplifying expansion of more and more infectious Sars-CoV-2 variants in the non-vaccinated part of the population while high vaccine coverage rates drives natural selection of increasingly VI-escaping Sars-CoV-2 variants. This evolution is now driving enhanced rates of disease in both populations. Consequently, mass vaccination during a pandemic of more infectious variants self-amplifies natural selection and expansion of more infectious, increasingly VI-escaping Sars-CoV-variants. Both, the vaccinated and non-vaccinated part of the population fully contribute to this evolution.

a reply to: BatSars

I actually found this article interesting Bat. Thanks for the post. I find myself agreeing with some of the points raised.

I think one of the final conclusions is strong:

Last but not least, it must be emphasized that those calling themselves ‘experts’ while pretending that this pandemic is ‘a pandemic among the non-vaccinated’ are devoid of any scientific insight in the evolutionary dynamics of Sars-CoV-2 as currently shaped by a combination of high viral infectivity and vaccine coverage rates. Neither the vaccinated (who merely believed the vaccine would protect them from Covid-19 disease) nor the non-vaccinated (who simply believe there is no need for them to take the vaccine in order to stay protected) are to be blamed for the escalation of this pandemic. Mass vaccination is the one and only culprit.

I agree with Dr. Bossche that both vaccinated and unvaccinated need to do as much as possible to minimize the potential for transmission.

Please correct me if I misunderstood, but Dr. Boscsche argues that the problem with mass-vaccination is not that the vaccines themselves are dangerous/ineffective, rather the concern comes from the presumed protection, allowing institutions to open back up allowing for an environment for mass transmission to reoccur and increasing the chances for more dangerous variants to emerge from either the vaccinated or non-vaccinated.

Edit to add: Dr. Bossche does contend that in a mass-vaccination environment, with highly transmissible variants, we are increasing the chances of naturally selecting the most robust variants of the virus to survive and spread. So I would have to ask the question, would the mass-vaccination effort need to be 100% to truely be effective? Or is Dr. Bossche really arguing that we have no vaccination and rely on natural immunity coupled with preventive measures like masks, social distancing, etc.

To a degree, he did say that yes, but it was more of just an added variable to what's currently going on rather than a focal point of the problem with the vaccine. What he is saying is that because the vaccine does 'x', it will force the virus to do 'y', and since it's STILL spreading (which it is), this gives the virus so many chances to mutate into that one strain that will both escape the vaccine's protection, and produce deadlier outcomes.

So, yes, that was certainly talked about but his main point was that it's a leaky vaccine that still spreads, mutates, etc.

From the non-vaccinated, the variant will be more virulent, but not necessarily more deadly. From the vaccinated, a deadlier variant will come. If those two variants were to recombine, then we'd really have a problem. This is more likely to occur in the immunocompromised as the virus can remain in that host for a long time. More time in host, more mutations and more chances of recombination.

The best way to handle this is to use things that prevent the virus from ever latching on to the receptors in the first place, preventing replication (and thus potential recombinant strains), or, something that kills it off. Ivermectin, from what I've read, actually does both.



a reply to: MDDoxs

a reply to: BatSars

Thanks for the comments. I re-read the article and yes you have summerized the main points. He does talk about the prospect of medical prevention. He does not mention medications like Ivermectin, but I wonder if that was what he was alluding to.

Regarding the article from Nature about smokers, it seems to conclude that this is a myth and this connection comes from more observational data rather than clinical. Did I misunderstand?

In Japan now, we are seeing an increase of school children now with the chinese virus. This was very rare up to a few months ago. So, yes, there probably is a lot of truth what was being stated.

Oh, and " experts ", right, maybe experience in the field, but expert, that's what we been hearing since childhood. I think no one is an expert, maybe highly experience in their craft, but expert, NO. Don't trust the experts.

a reply to: MDDoxs

None of the pandemic plans I've worked with were designed to be rolled out at full force during a pandemic as weak as COVID. Lockdowns and mandate powers were put in place as an absolute last resort for severe diseases. None of the planning is meant for that during something like COVID and, I believe, as a result there's probably not been a great deal of time put in to how badly mass vaccination can impact a rapidly evolving and relatively mild respiratory infection.

They'll have lots of data after COVID and in 5 or 10 years, when they decide it's no longer politically expedient to lie about the failures, there will be dozens of studies about how badly they screwed up. Until then, all we can be certain of is that we're not being told the whole truth. This whole thing is a big sandbox for public health officials to play with their emergency powers and they're more than happy to obscure the truth to keep playing in that sandbox.

a reply to: BatSars

“I know I've shared a particular study that found that vaccinating during outbreaks will lead to more lethal variants”

Which leads to more injections (conformity). You nailed it in your second sentence.

Do you actually think they want an end to this ‘Pandemic’?

a reply to: KKLOCO

For my thoughts, I'd have to say NO. There is something more what is going on in world of " evil power control over its people". Sadly I don't know what they are trying to achieve by controlling its people to make them less human like with only fear in their hearts.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Fair points. Yes, it will be interesting to see the conclusions drawing years from now.

Well articulated post, I am glad some can still have a rational conversation here.

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: BatSars

Thanks for the comments. I re-read the article and yes you have summerized the main points. He does talk about the prospect of medical prevention. He does not mention medications like Ivermectin, but I wonder if that was what he was alluding to.

Regarding the article from Nature about smokers, it seems to conclude that this is a myth and this connection comes from more observational data rather than clinical. Did I misunderstand?

So he doesn't come right out and say Ivermectin, but instead alludes to chemoprophylactic therapeutics and cites Peter McCullough's presentations, which includes HCQ & various other supplements and antivirals:

Furthermore, people should boost their health status whereas early treatment of patients who come down with Covid-19 disease (for more information, please consult, for example, prof. Dr. P. McCullough’s presentations and publications) would not only prevent severe disease and hospitalization but also enable these patients to more rapidly acquire broadly protective Abs facilitating killing/ elimination of virus-infected host cells and, therefore, diminish viral transmission and contribute to herd immunity. The above-mentioned interventions have been summarized in Fig. 3.

Here's a blurb about P McCullough - thetexan.news...

I would be confident in assuming McCullough would also prescribe and/or suggest Ivermectin. From all the literature I've read, Ivermectin is much more powerful than HCQ but they both have similar pharmacokinetics and action.

As for the smoker article - I deleted it because it's not the one I thought I was publishing. I have so many COVID links saved I can't keep track of them all.

Here is one, albeit a small one: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I have one, in particular, that demonstrates how nicotine blocks the receptor, which decreases viral replication.

Here's another that looked at 6.5k peeps: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

And this one puts all the "smoking is bad" studies and "smoking will kill you faster w/COVID" studies and basically says -- 'yeah, none of that makes sense based on the numbers and prevalence in individuals based on rates of smokers in an area vs negative tests, etc.' journals.sagepub.com...

I still can't find the one I want, but ah well. Probably redacted it to push more anti-smoking rhetoric. It's strange because I've read that nicotice can bind and downregulate ACE2 receptors and I've also read that it won't bind and enhances ACE2 receptors and that smokers have more ACE2 receptors. From a cellular bio standpoint, those don't really make sense.

If they bind, there should be more ACE2. Same with opioid receptors - the more opiates you put in your body, the more receptors will express, which is why tolerance is increased. So if it binds, there should be more ACE2.

Then you get into the "well there's more Ace2 which means it's more likely you'll get sick!" but that doesn't account for the fact that ACE2 that is already bound with nicotine isn't likely to allow binding from a virus (though I dunno which one's affinity is greater).

But yeah, this is back to the 'follow the ping pong of science and we'll tell you what to believe later'. lol

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Fair points. Yes, it will be interesting to see the conclusions drawing years from now.

Well articulated post, I am glad some can still have a rational conversation here.

If the push for ID and compulsory vaccination doesn't stop the number of rational and civil interactions is going to near zero. It's an inherently irrational and dangerous response to COVID that cannot be argued with rationally if it progresses much further.

It is urgent that people start getting the full picture of what's happening, especially the uncertainties that the "official" sources seem happy to exclude from their reports. When people start realizing many of the "facts" they're told are actually (crappy)opinions, they may be a little less inclined to advocate for violating human rights.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Fair points. Yes, it will be interesting to see the conclusions drawing years from now.

Well articulated post, I am glad some can still have a rational conversation here.

If the push for ID and compulsory vaccination doesn't stop the number of rational and civil interactions is going to near zero. It's an inherently irrational and dangerous response to COVID that cannot be argued with rationally if it progresses much further.

It is urgent that people start getting the full picture of what's happening, especially the uncertainties that the "official" sources seem happy to exclude from their reports. When people start realizing many of the "facts" they're told are actually (crappy)opinions, they may be a little less inclined to advocate for violating human rights.

Unfortunately, what I am seeing in other social media platforms is that many people are outright convinced by what they hear on TV. The level of smug, holier than thou self righteousness among the vaccinated and the so-called "well informed" is astounding. Any deviation from the official story and the official antidote is a punishable offense by these people and they mean business. There is no need for further discussion! Should a variant to eradicate everyone not with shot begin it's spread today, the masses would cheer it on, sometimes even within families, and among friends. The division is scary and I believe it will begin to grow worse and worse as the screws are turned to the antidote unwilling.
With my foil hat on, dare I say that this is the ultimate goal for those at the engineers helm. Something, along with society, has plans to remove the infidels either by force or by future variant, from which only those that have complied will survive. And with the information in the OP, it can all be written off as the unfortunate result of "what had to be done at the time" and the masses will be shaking their heads in unison. Then the dead shall indeed bury the dead.

FDA KNEW MONTHS AHEAD THAT THESE SHOTS WOULD INJURE OR KILL YOU

The very fact that the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) knew 2 months ahead what these shots would do to you is criminal in itself but to keep these going amid tens of thousands of deaths is GENOCIDE.

ourtube.co.uk...

View the full PowerPoint presentation from the FDA website here.

www.fda.gov...

FDA Safety Surveillance of COVID-19 VaccinesPublic discussion and documents reveal that the FDA knows that rushed-to-market COVID-19 vaccines may cause a wide range of life-threatening side effects, including death.)

Unless the public is made aware of their real effects, and is given a choice, their widespread coercive promotion as “safe and effective” and “necessary” violates the medical ethical principle of informed consent.

Guillain-Barre syndrome, Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, Transverse myelitis, Encephalitis/myelitis/encephalomyelitis/meningoencephalitis/meningitis/encephalopathy, Convulsions/seizers, Stroke, Narcolepsy and cataplexy, Anaphylaxis, Acute myocardial infarction, Myocarditis/pericarditis, Autoimmune disease, Deaths, Pregnancy and birth outcomes, Other acute demyelinating diseases, Non-anaphylactic allergic reactions, Thrombocytopenia, Disseminated intravascular coagulation, Venous thromboembolism, Arthritis and arthralgia/joint pain, Kawasaki disease, Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, Vaccine enhanced disease

Link: FDA Reveals Death and 21 Serious Conditions as Possible Adverse Outcomes of COVID Vaccination

stuartbramhall.wordpress.com...

I had to relay this and Malones statements past my bio tech gf to get a grasp on it.

Basically we can view the vaccines intented effect on our body as how Covid would effect it.

Its about triggering the immune system.

So in reality what we are doing by mass vaccinating people when the pandemic is ongoing AND the vaccine is not effective enough, is merely accelarating the chance of mutation.

Had the vaccine been completely safe and 100% effetctive it would probably be another situation.
But since they arent, we are just providing the virus the opportunity to ask how the immunesystem is currently build and evolve to avoid it.

Its #ing stupid....

originally posted by: BatSars
www.geertvandenbossche.org...

There is a lot of solid information in this post, much of which has been discussed before on ATS, no doubt. I know I've shared a particular study that found that vaccinating during outbreaks will lead to more lethal variants: epidemics.psu.edu...

The problem is that the vaccine cannot provide robust antigen that covers all of the COVID bases because its focus is on the spike protein. Any derivation thereof will result in escape. These 'escapes' in vaccinated people are problematic because natural selection is being acted upon in a specific way. Bacteria and viruses find a way and they respond to changes in their environment. The evolutionary timescale for viruses and bacteria is very small so what might take humans 10k years to 'change', may take viruses a month or two.

Because the vaccine isn't as robust as natural immunity, it is directing the evolutionary changes in variants, which will lead to deadlier variants. We're seeing it now in that children are more susceptible to Delta than before.

Bossche points out that the "community" keeps pointing to waning symptoms as proof the vaccine is working and will stop the spread, but where it fails is in infectivity, which IS happening in both vaccinated and non-vaccinated people. He states there is no evidence to support their claim that the vaccine will not induce rapid changes which will ultimately increase mortality rates and uses well-understood mechanics to explain why the opposite of what they claim is true.

What vaccinated hosts are is a breeding ground for competition and the better mutations will win and eventually be immune from any antigens produced from vaccination. No doubt, when this occurs, these same companies will produce more mRNA vaccines to cover specific variants, which will recycle this process all over again.

It's a great read and should probably concern everyone. Even those that do not believe COVID is an issue at all should take note because even if COVID-19 wasn't as lethal as the MSM put it out to be, it's going to be. It's only a matter of time.

In other words, high viral infection rates drive natural selection and self-amplifying expansion of more and more infectious Sars-CoV-2 variants in the non-vaccinated part of the population while high vaccine coverage rates drives natural selection of increasingly VI-escaping Sars-CoV-2 variants. This evolution is now driving enhanced rates of disease in both populations. Consequently, mass vaccination during a pandemic of more infectious variants self-amplifies natural selection and expansion of more infectious, increasingly VI-escaping Sars-CoV-variants. Both, the vaccinated and non-vaccinated part of the population fully contribute to this evolution.

Spot on, spot on.

Good stuff but I find it hard to believe that our "experts" didn't already know this? IDK, it's possible I suppose, but I just don't know.

Also, can we truly believe a word he says? I mean, he did work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Who we all know wants to kill us all and control the population (/sarcasm).

Anyways, back to being semi-serious...the one thing I always look for when an "expert" speaks up is there credentials. This guys for that part at least pasts that test. Thanks for posting.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: MDDoxs

None of the pandemic plans I've worked with were designed to be rolled out at full force during a pandemic as weak as COVID. Lockdowns and mandate powers were put in place as an absolute last resort for severe diseases. None of the planning is meant for that during something like COVID and, I believe, as a result there's probably not been a great deal of time put in to how badly mass vaccination can impact a rapidly evolving and relatively mild respiratory infection.

They'll have lots of data after COVID and in 5 or 10 years, when they decide it's no longer politically expedient to lie about the failures, there will be dozens of studies about how badly they screwed up. Until then, all we can be certain of is that we're not being told the whole truth. This whole thing is a big sandbox for public health officials to play with their emergency powers and they're more than happy to obscure the truth to keep playing in that sandbox.

This answers some of my question I had in my previous post so thanks for that!

a reply to: HawkeyeNation

It feels like there is a desperation to get back to normal, and the vaccine was the decided upon solution. What's a few deaths right? If we can get back to normal...

a reply to: BatSars

Mass immunization campaigns during uncontrolled disease outbreaks are common and have been happening for decades. We've seen them for everything from measles and polio to Zika and Ebola.

These events demonstrate that mass vaxxing during an outbreak is both safe and an effective way to bring a disease under control.

There hasn't been a single recorded instance even remotely resembling what the OP is suggesting might happen in 50 years of mass Polio vaxxing in India, Africa or Pakistan.

originally posted by: InachMarbank
a reply to: HawkeyeNation

It feels like there is a desperation to get back to normal, and the vaccine was the decided upon solution. What's a few deaths right? If we can get back to normal...

From one hawk to another, you may be right. I'm holding out hope that our "experts" have or had a plan in place. Maybe they do, we just aren't patient enough.

But does anyone remember that leaked details of Covid right when it started from a bank? I recall it stating this was going to be at least a 4 year plan before things get back to normal.