Kids' Immunity and the mRNA Experimental Injections
About which, very little is yet clear.
Do the Covid vaccines “erase” kids’ pre-existing natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2?
Is the RSV [and other stuff] wave linked to injecting kids (or their mothers) with the same experimental products? [Note: This was a planned follow-up post that I never made.]
[Housekeeping note: Forgive rampant typos, I am working with a difficult display-keyboard arrangement due to holiday travel.]
In the comments to my “Cleveland Clinic Boosters” post, reader ForkInSocket reminded me of an Igor post from September, in which a paper appears to show that Delta-infected kids, if later injected with the emergency-authorized experimental mRNA Covid vaccines, become reinfected at rates suggesting they have no post-infection immunity.
The paper in question:1
Igor highlights the sole figure provided in the “study” (it’s really just a letter produced from hacking at some database values), which appears to show an alarming degradation in previously acquired natural immunity for the injected. With Igor’s annotations:
I wasn’t free to look at the study at the time, as I was engrossed in the epidemiological mysteries of white-tailed deer.2 However, as the claims are concerning — and have taken on the status of an established truth in Covid vaccine skeptical space — I was grateful for ForkInSocket’s reminder and for the chance to see what the alarming graph was really all about.
First, while Igor is often right about things before anyone else, my sense here was that the study didn’t actually have the goods to back up the conclusions suggested by the graph.
Second, while the whole gene therapy experimentation on children thing is repugnant, I think there is a value in forming the most accurate picture of the harms or lack thereof as possible. And so, after having given Igor a friendly notice in advance, I now present the official Unglossed Peer Review of the Igor Review of the Vaccine Resets Natural Immunity Paper.
Official Unglossed Peer Review of the Igor Review of the Vaccine Resets Natural Immunity Paper
Notably, despite my missing the post at the time, Igor’s interpretation of the results was provocative enough to promptly result in a formal Fact Check™ from AP:
The AP’s fact check is a study in presenting information in an insincere, unconfident, and deceitful-seeming manner.
[O]ne diagram shows a steep drop-off in the protection offered by prior infection with the Delta variant against reinfection among vaccinated children. That chart was cited in the blog post as evidence that immunity from prior infection is eliminated over time following vaccination. But the analysis lacked sufficient data after three months to reliably estimate what came after the apparent reduction, Lin said.
“The effectiveness of prior infection with omicron against reinfection with omicron is actually higher among children who are vaccinated than among the children who are unvaccinated,” he added. “The conclusion is completely opposite to what they claim in their article.”
The reader would be forgiven for assuming that Lin and his interlocutor are desperately trying to obscure an accidentally revealed truth. If “what came after the apparent reduction” is not “reliably estimated,” doesn’t that still leave the “apparent reduction” itself as valid — aren’t Lin and Kelety just mincing words?
However, I must say I was not really surprised to find that in all likelihood Kelety had simply misstated the actual, correct explanation for the graph. The apparent reduction itself is, in fact, not even derived from Lin, et al.’s own data. It is a product of the stupid mathematical equation they used to churn some database values to produce the result they thought they wanted.
First, a note on the definition of “immunity” being discussed here. What Lin, et al. are measuring, and appearing to show as being “unset” by the injections, is the organic definition of immunity: actual not-getting-infected-at-the-rate-of-everyone-else.
These results overlook surrogate markers for immunity, such as antibodies or cellular responses, etc.: They cut straight to the thing itself. Do previously-Delta-infected kids get Omicron infections at the same rate as not-previously-infected kids? If they have (literal, organically defined) immunity, the answer will be no; if they don’t, it will be yes.
If one visits the supplemental materials, however, it turns out there were no recorded reinfections for the Delta-infected, mRNA-injected kids after month 5 (which is arbitrarily plotted onto the graph as February).
Further comments could be offered on panels A and B of Lin, et al., and of the extremely synthetic nature of both those results and the “prior infection efficacy” results (C and D). Comments which basically amount to, “everything about the way these authors approach their analysis is ridiculous.”
The authors are probably under-estimating infection efficacy at all points due to counting kids who can not interact with the database (due to traveling or having moved) as unvaccinated (thereby rendering them immortal to infection).
Previously Delta-infected kids in the unvaccinated and vaccinated groups aren’t actually being tracked from the same start-dates, so the plotting of “by month” efficacy on a calendar isn’t even accurate. This means there might be different risk-levels of Omicron exposure (waves vs. not-waves) between the two groups on a (imaginary) month-by-month basis. This is indirectly what leads to so few vaccinated kids being “5 months post-Delta” infection, resulting in the huge confidence margin for that group, and what leads to no data existing after month 5.
The math equations used to calculate efficacy by time-from-dose are just ridiculously complex and nothing in this paper should be taken as reflecting real-life (the provided raw data does not allow rebuilding the time-from-dose values)
The authors don’t even care about any of these flaws. In fact, in a follow-up correspondence replying to criticism from UKHSA agents, Lin, et al. seem almost pleased with the fact that their graph in panel A shows such poor durability for post-vaccine infection efficacy:
The author replies: Our study showed that the immunity conferred by the BNT162b2 vaccine and by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection against omicron infection waned substantially after 5 months. Thus, boosters would be needed to reduce the risk of omicron infection and transmission.3
Conclusion:
Lin, et al. does not provide evidence that the experimental mRNA Covid vaccines erase pre-existing natural immunity in children.
If you derived value from this post, please drop a few coins in your fact-barista’s tip jar.
Lin, DY. et al. “Effects of Vaccination and Previous Infection on Omicron Infections in Children.” N Engl J Med. 2022 Sep 22;387(12):1141-1143.
To the editor. “More on Omicron Infections in Children.” N Engl J Med. 2022; 387:1911-1912
Looks to me like it was just a propaganda piece designed to scare parents into thinking they need to boost up their kids
Be careful you dont get Epsteined