Your footnote 18 is interesting. I don't recall seeing ( or noticing) a Kaplan-Meier type graph with a logarithmic X-scale- usually the Y-scale is logarithmic.
Furthermore, if I can indulge my "Conspiracy Theory" tin hat, the cryogenic requirements kept the injections out of the hands and offices of GP's and Nurse Practitioners. I know that they are given by corporate pharmacies in the USA, but they are tightly held north of the border. This is particularly important- I talked a particularly feisty patient into the "H1N1" vaccine when current. She did not feel well for a week, and was not hesitant to give me a piece of her mind!
It is much easier to dismiss someone else's AE's than those you have induced yourself. It also reduces the opportunities for "AirBalls" or saline shots.
And yet there is plenty of reason to go log on the time axis with pharmacokinetics or immune response. I think I have seen log time used in some virology papers from the 40s-60s, but a specific link doesn't come to mind...
That’s a good point - in the US, the cold chain supported a default to retailer pharmacies and public school pop-ups, which effectually “tightly holds” the injected product by keeping it in the hands of under-paid hourly workers who will often never be seen again by the recipient.
This took a little bit of rereading to understand, but it's all extremely fascinating. This is why you asked the questions about the endosomes! My idea was based on the notion that the size of the LNPs would dissuade the uptake of the LNPs in endosomes. Of course I clearly overlooked the idea that the LNPs are the same size as viruses. Why wouldn't there then be a possibility of endosomal uptake? My mistake on overlooking this!
It is quite ironic that all of these endeavors to examine SARS-COV2 under a microscope may actually indicate that there's a lot about other viruses and immunology as a whole that we do not know about. I think it's one of the biggest issues we are seeing where people are finding overlaps with SARS-COV2 and attributing it to other viruses, essentially making SARS-COV2 out to be a "Frankenvirus" (or to use the term more appropriately gain of function's frankenvirus). So what we may really be seeing is something that has been happening across other virus strains. It's only now, through constant research and surveillance that we are discovering these pathways.
One thing to point out with the endosomal route would be what aspect of the LNP is eliciting the uptake. I believe in your model your argument suggests the PEG playing a role which would be quite interesting. The article you provided to me suggesting a mimic of LDL cholesterol may suggest that the cholesterol may be providing its own response which would also justify the possible endosomal uptake as well! Plenty of things to think about with this post.
Oh - I should perhaps increase the emphasis on the need for an antibody complex getting attached to the LNPs for the FDC recycling to occur. Without the FDC recycling you don't get protection against RNA release. And so you need the antibody complex, and so you need the antibody. That's where the PEG comes in. (PEG+anti-PEG antibody+C3)->FDC recycling. The giant LNP is just along for the ride, but both it and the RNA inside are protected by the recycling.
Ah, the PEG centipede if one were to put it another way! But that makes sense because it is then the cascade of attachments that lead to the protection.
Centipede as in linked / necklaced LNPs? Per the Eitner et al. and Heesters et al. model, the recycling compartments should just form around individual LNPs with some number of antibody+C3 complexes stuck onto the PEG chains. Presumably the same would be true for any other non-HIV viruses / vaccines that this also occurs for that we don't know about. And then the FDCs just passively cycle the payload.
Check the iccosome story from John G.Tew…To me the exosomes shown where not of a common size and greater .The idea that PEG ABs could be important is also interesting
At first I thought that "iccosome" was an auto-correct - now I see it is in Heesters et al. and Tew dominates the pubmed results. Thank you, I will look into it!
Consider me stupid, and forgive me for not being as able to understand as I wish I was. Is the big point that the long term existence of vaccine RNA and other products associated cause a chronic or auto-immune disease state of some sort?
I could hear vaccine proponents saying that long term antigen presence will allow long term antibody response (and therefore, protection, even though data doesn’t seem to support that). Or is the point that the sequestered RNA is responsible for OAS and therefore will be useless for variants? I can’t remember the nuances of immune system function, so will you be doing an “immunity for dummies” version? Thank you!
The big point is summarized in the "the defense will ask the expert to propose what this would mean" bullet - namely, that these findings are just evidence of the immune system working on anti-spike and anti-PEG response for a short while after injection. So, pretty harmless, hopefully.
That's not to rule out other possibilities for "super bad things that happen after injection," but these findings don't match / support those possibilities. We would need more / different evidence.
Normal vaccine trials are just as shoddy. AEs are defined as always occurring in the first few days because AEs after a few days aren't even evaluated. And the vaccine gets approved and added to the schedule before any long-term outcomes can be revealed, ensuring that long-term harms will never be observable since now there's no control group, as Plotkin repeatedly admits in his deposition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFTsd042M3o
And the reason the "defense" in my "movie" has to dig into ancient research to prove that antigen and RNA retention in germinal centers is probably normal (i.e., why no one expected it in advance) is because no one checks if it happens all the time with other vaccines.
Another fun fact: olden-style vaccines for flu, grown in eggs, have been released faster than these. Medicine has been nuts for a long time.
In the old days you didn't just trust the Pfizer CEO, the FDA made the company run a randomized trial showing a reduction in a clinically meaningful endpoint: severe disease.
In 55, the US gov trusted semi-independent (but still on the teat of the March of Dimes) scientists. Only one of which had access to the raw data. The result was the Cutter incident and a vaccine that turned out to need universal yearly boosters to be any good.
“Sabin had been among the scientific advisors at Ann Arbor who recommended licensing the Salk vaccine. But he had gone along reluctantly, as his correspondence makes clear. In a letter to William Workman, written several days before the Cutter incident became national news, Sabin complained that speed, not safety, had been the dominant concern. “During our hurried meeting at Ann Arbor on April 12,” he wrote, “we had to decide as to whether or not there was any evidence that the polio vaccine used in 1954 may by itself have been responsible for a certain number of cases of paralysis. Like the others, having had no time to examine the report, I was willing to accept the interpretation of Dr. Francis that there was no evidence….”48 Now, after reading the various appendices and attachments, Sabin had his doubts. At least ten cases of paralytic polio had been reported in the first month of the 1954 trials among children who received the Salk vaccine.” (Polio: An American Story)
Well of course there’s no reason anyone should think “nature” in any way superior, after all, “nature” has only been tinkering for a billion years, we’ve been at it for a few hundred, and we’re super duper smart.
Same disregard for the deeper wisdom of nature is connected to our GMO mania and our petrochemical RoundUP laden farming damages. It is so obviously killing us, and more and more people know this. Someday organics and natural immunities will prevail again.
I find it ironic / troubling / amusing that a scientis- er surgical oncologist would draw a distinction between "nature" and "human" - as if humans are not part of and intrinsic to nature.
In general, nature follows long-term fitness goals, whereas humans are all about cheating fitness as often and as quickly as possible. Profit in particular makes the choices made by humans more often than not dubious at best.
I’m just glad that lots of “gene haxxorz” have enough years of CRISPR under their belt to know everything there is to know about how genes interact with all the body’s super simple and easy-to-understand systems so they can just rip out a gene sequence like some sort of subroutine in a simple program and run it within a human body and be absolutely certain of the short, mid and long-term effects.
The important assessment to always make is to understand why it would be referred to as "flying AIDS". I think a lot of people may see the term AIDS and immediately attribute things that may not be properly attributable. Fortunately, like Brian said, it appears it may not be so long-lived, although why it is happening is worth questioning. Considering that the spike protein is downregulating T-cell activity I wonder if this has anything to do with the reduced immune response.
I’m in the same boat as far as anecdotal immune performance being fine. And OTOH plenty of anecdotal sudden deaths, including from cancer. So I’m skeptical of the “VIAIDS!” angle.
Additionally, when it comes to HIV, all of the research is a giant tower of Babel propped up on intentionally not looking at whether any other viruses behave the same way. It’s very creepy!
Your footnote 18 is interesting. I don't recall seeing ( or noticing) a Kaplan-Meier type graph with a logarithmic X-scale- usually the Y-scale is logarithmic.
Furthermore, if I can indulge my "Conspiracy Theory" tin hat, the cryogenic requirements kept the injections out of the hands and offices of GP's and Nurse Practitioners. I know that they are given by corporate pharmacies in the USA, but they are tightly held north of the border. This is particularly important- I talked a particularly feisty patient into the "H1N1" vaccine when current. She did not feel well for a week, and was not hesitant to give me a piece of her mind!
It is much easier to dismiss someone else's AE's than those you have induced yourself. It also reduces the opportunities for "AirBalls" or saline shots.
And yet there is plenty of reason to go log on the time axis with pharmacokinetics or immune response. I think I have seen log time used in some virology papers from the 40s-60s, but a specific link doesn't come to mind...
That’s a good point - in the US, the cold chain supported a default to retailer pharmacies and public school pop-ups, which effectually “tightly holds” the injected product by keeping it in the hands of under-paid hourly workers who will often never be seen again by the recipient.
This took a little bit of rereading to understand, but it's all extremely fascinating. This is why you asked the questions about the endosomes! My idea was based on the notion that the size of the LNPs would dissuade the uptake of the LNPs in endosomes. Of course I clearly overlooked the idea that the LNPs are the same size as viruses. Why wouldn't there then be a possibility of endosomal uptake? My mistake on overlooking this!
It is quite ironic that all of these endeavors to examine SARS-COV2 under a microscope may actually indicate that there's a lot about other viruses and immunology as a whole that we do not know about. I think it's one of the biggest issues we are seeing where people are finding overlaps with SARS-COV2 and attributing it to other viruses, essentially making SARS-COV2 out to be a "Frankenvirus" (or to use the term more appropriately gain of function's frankenvirus). So what we may really be seeing is something that has been happening across other virus strains. It's only now, through constant research and surveillance that we are discovering these pathways.
One thing to point out with the endosomal route would be what aspect of the LNP is eliciting the uptake. I believe in your model your argument suggests the PEG playing a role which would be quite interesting. The article you provided to me suggesting a mimic of LDL cholesterol may suggest that the cholesterol may be providing its own response which would also justify the possible endosomal uptake as well! Plenty of things to think about with this post.
Oh - I should perhaps increase the emphasis on the need for an antibody complex getting attached to the LNPs for the FDC recycling to occur. Without the FDC recycling you don't get protection against RNA release. And so you need the antibody complex, and so you need the antibody. That's where the PEG comes in. (PEG+anti-PEG antibody+C3)->FDC recycling. The giant LNP is just along for the ride, but both it and the RNA inside are protected by the recycling.
Ah, the PEG centipede if one were to put it another way! But that makes sense because it is then the cascade of attachments that lead to the protection.
Centipede as in linked / necklaced LNPs? Per the Eitner et al. and Heesters et al. model, the recycling compartments should just form around individual LNPs with some number of antibody+C3 complexes stuck onto the PEG chains. Presumably the same would be true for any other non-HIV viruses / vaccines that this also occurs for that we don't know about. And then the FDCs just passively cycle the payload.
Heesters et al. 2013 visualizes the resulting whack-a-mole effect in Fig 5 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074761313002367 - this is for simple "antigen" but the 2015 paper extends it to HIV.
Check the iccosome story from John G.Tew…To me the exosomes shown where not of a common size and greater .The idea that PEG ABs could be important is also interesting
At first I thought that "iccosome" was an auto-correct - now I see it is in Heesters et al. and Tew dominates the pubmed results. Thank you, I will look into it!
👏👏👏 fascinating way to present this information! Thank you! 💜
Consider me stupid, and forgive me for not being as able to understand as I wish I was. Is the big point that the long term existence of vaccine RNA and other products associated cause a chronic or auto-immune disease state of some sort?
I could hear vaccine proponents saying that long term antigen presence will allow long term antibody response (and therefore, protection, even though data doesn’t seem to support that). Or is the point that the sequestered RNA is responsible for OAS and therefore will be useless for variants? I can’t remember the nuances of immune system function, so will you be doing an “immunity for dummies” version? Thank you!
The big point is summarized in the "the defense will ask the expert to propose what this would mean" bullet - namely, that these findings are just evidence of the immune system working on anti-spike and anti-PEG response for a short while after injection. So, pretty harmless, hopefully.
That's not to rule out other possibilities for "super bad things that happen after injection," but these findings don't match / support those possibilities. We would need more / different evidence.
Which usually becomes evident in normal vaccine trials. This was short circuited and approved without the normal rigor.
Normal vaccine trials are just as shoddy. AEs are defined as always occurring in the first few days because AEs after a few days aren't even evaluated. And the vaccine gets approved and added to the schedule before any long-term outcomes can be revealed, ensuring that long-term harms will never be observable since now there's no control group, as Plotkin repeatedly admits in his deposition. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFTsd042M3o
And the reason the "defense" in my "movie" has to dig into ancient research to prove that antigen and RNA retention in germinal centers is probably normal (i.e., why no one expected it in advance) is because no one checks if it happens all the time with other vaccines.
Another fun fact: olden-style vaccines for flu, grown in eggs, have been released faster than these. Medicine has been nuts for a long time.
In the old days you didn't just trust the Pfizer CEO, the FDA made the company run a randomized trial showing a reduction in a clinically meaningful endpoint: severe disease.
In 55, the US gov trusted semi-independent (but still on the teat of the March of Dimes) scientists. Only one of which had access to the raw data. The result was the Cutter incident and a vaccine that turned out to need universal yearly boosters to be any good.
“Sabin had been among the scientific advisors at Ann Arbor who recommended licensing the Salk vaccine. But he had gone along reluctantly, as his correspondence makes clear. In a letter to William Workman, written several days before the Cutter incident became national news, Sabin complained that speed, not safety, had been the dominant concern. “During our hurried meeting at Ann Arbor on April 12,” he wrote, “we had to decide as to whether or not there was any evidence that the polio vaccine used in 1954 may by itself have been responsible for a certain number of cases of paralysis. Like the others, having had no time to examine the report, I was willing to accept the interpretation of Dr. Francis that there was no evidence….”48 Now, after reading the various appendices and attachments, Sabin had his doubts. At least ten cases of paralytic polio had been reported in the first month of the 1954 trials among children who received the Salk vaccine.” (Polio: An American Story)
Yes, over a 7-10 YEAR trial period. Which is what really makes it look suspicious.
Ok—I do hope it’s harmless as well. Thank you.
Well of course there’s no reason anyone should think “nature” in any way superior, after all, “nature” has only been tinkering for a billion years, we’ve been at it for a few hundred, and we’re super duper smart.
Same disregard for the deeper wisdom of nature is connected to our GMO mania and our petrochemical RoundUP laden farming damages. It is so obviously killing us, and more and more people know this. Someday organics and natural immunities will prevail again.
I find it ironic / troubling / amusing that a scientis- er surgical oncologist would draw a distinction between "nature" and "human" - as if humans are not part of and intrinsic to nature.
In general, nature follows long-term fitness goals, whereas humans are all about cheating fitness as often and as quickly as possible. Profit in particular makes the choices made by humans more often than not dubious at best.
I just find it astounding that he imagines that any rational person could think the "somehow" is a high bar
Highly unlikely. It is well known that before the invention of vaccines, life was not even possible.
I’m just glad that lots of “gene haxxorz” have enough years of CRISPR under their belt to know everything there is to know about how genes interact with all the body’s super simple and easy-to-understand systems so they can just rip out a gene sequence like some sort of subroutine in a simple program and run it within a human body and be absolutely certain of the short, mid and long-term effects.
I wouldn’t have a second leg if I hadn’t been vaccinated as a child. I’m just sure of it.
Exactly - it would have been crushed by a horse and carriage, like what happened to Tiny Tim - so be thankful for all those anti-carriage antibodies.
Reading this will be my 'Sunday night fights'....I so appreciate your quality/frequency ratio.
That means a lot - thank you!
The important assessment to always make is to understand why it would be referred to as "flying AIDS". I think a lot of people may see the term AIDS and immediately attribute things that may not be properly attributable. Fortunately, like Brian said, it appears it may not be so long-lived, although why it is happening is worth questioning. Considering that the spike protein is downregulating T-cell activity I wonder if this has anything to do with the reduced immune response.
I’m in the same boat as far as anecdotal immune performance being fine. And OTOH plenty of anecdotal sudden deaths, including from cancer. So I’m skeptical of the “VIAIDS!” angle.
Additionally, when it comes to HIV, all of the research is a giant tower of Babel propped up on intentionally not looking at whether any other viruses behave the same way. It’s very creepy!