Dr. Fauci Comes Clean About Never Expecting the Vaccines to Work and Natural Immunity Being Better

    0
    401

    by Dr David Bell, Daily Sceptic:

    The journal Cell Host & Microbe recently published one of the more important papers of the Covid era: ‘Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenza viruses, and other respiratory viruses’. This elicited surprisingly little fanfare considering its authorship and contents. Firstly, the final author was Dr. Anthony Fauci, the recently retired Director of the United States National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), normally a magnet for the media. Secondly, because Dr. Fauci and his co-authors provide evidence that much of what those in authority have told the public regarding Covid vaccines was contrary to what they knew to be true.

    TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

    Kudos to Dr. Fauci for coming clean on the basics of viruses and immunology. If leading medical journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine or Lancet had employed editors with such knowledge three years ago, they might have contributed to public health rather than the gutting of society and global human rights. If those in authority had explained these truths and based their policies on them, things would also have been different. Likewise for the entire medical establishment. Much death, poverty and inequality might have been avoided. Trust may also have been maintained in the institutions within which they work.

    The paper co-written by Dr. Fauci discusses the potential to develop coronavirus vaccines and vaccines for other fast-mutating respiratory viruses. It is best to step through the paper in three parts: reviewing the evidence provided by the authors, noting the residual dogma that persists despite being contrary to this evidence, and lastly considering the implications of the paper regarding the Covid public health response. Reading the original paper is recommended, as this article only highlights extracts.

    Poor vaccine efficacy and the superiority of natural immunity

    The review makes clear that vaccines against respiratory viruses such as influenza or coronaviruses (e.g. SARS-CoV-2 responsible for Covid) are highly unlikely to achieve the levels of effectiveness we expect from other vaccines. The authors note CDC data showing influenza vaccines, now pushed for all ages from six months upward, have an efficacy ranging from just 14% to a maximum of 60% since 2005 (extending back 17 years would have lowered this to 10%, with the average vaccine efficacy (VE) just below 40%). As Dr. Fauci notes: “Our best approved influenza vaccines would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine-preventable diseases.”

    Indeed: “It is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been effectively controlled by vaccines.”

    The authors provide clear explanations for this lack of efficacy:

    The vaccines for these two very different viruses have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity.

    It is not just the high mutation rate that is a problem, but also the mode of infection:

    They replicate predominantly in local mucosal tissue, without causing viremia, and do not significantly encounter the systemic immune system or the full force of adaptive immune responses, which take at least five to seven days to mature, usually well after the peak of viral replication and onward transmission to others.

    As this honest appraisal notes, Covid vaccines were never expected to significantly reduce infection or transmission.

    The authors explain what most infectious disease doctors and immunologists have known throughout the Covid outbreak: that circulating antibodies (IgG and IgM) play only a limited role in controlling infections such as Covid, whilst mucosal antibodies (IgA) in the lining of the upper respiratory tract, not stimulated by injected vaccines, play a far larger role:

    The importance of mucosal secretory IgA (sIgA) in pathogen-specific responses against respiratory viral infections has long been appreciated for influenza viruses, RSV and more recently SARS-CoV-2.

    The significance here is that systemic vaccines, as the authors note, do not elicit mucosal IgA production.

    The efficacy against severe Covid that systemic vaccines do provide to some unexposed people within a certain window is explained by the observation: “IgA appears to be a better effector in the upper respiratory tract, whereas IgG is better in the lung.”

    The early variants of SARS-CoV-2 were characterised by lung involvement. While the CDC showed that vaccination on top of natural immunity provides almost no added clinical benefit, the reduction in Covid mortality (as distinct from all-cause mortality) claimed for the vaccines between early potential immune suppression and later waning of efficacy has a reasonable immunological basis.

    As NIH acknowledged, T-cells are also a primary defence against coronaviruses, with cross-immunity against SARS-CoV-2 seen in many people not previously infected. Fauci et al. make the interesting observation that T-cell correlates for immunity are found after influenza infection, but not after influenza vaccination. This suggests a further mechanism to explain poorer efficacy of vaccines compared to natural infection, even against early SARS-CoV-2 variants.

    In summary, both the coronavirus and influenza vaccines are poor:

    The vaccines for these two very different viruses have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity.

    Clear, and succinctly put.

    Struggling with the dogma

    The real value of the paper is in the way it contrasts Covid dogma against evidence. The authors start by noting that as many as five million people normally die globally every year from respiratory viruses. A comparison with the World Health Organisation’s 6.8 million Covid deaths recorded over three years would have provided useful context (Note: is it important to distinguish deaths from Covid from total deaths from the pandemic that include those from Covid and lockdown impact.) However, such an acknowledgement would have fit poorly with their following statement that: “SARS-CoV-2 has killed more than one million people in the United States.”

    Read More @ DailySceptic.org