[ad_1]
While you listen Loretta bolgan Speaking of the vaccine, the feeling is that of a Russian roulette. Graduate in Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Technology, Doctor in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research fellow at Harvard Medical School in Boston, then an industrial researcher for companies that produce diagnostic kits and was involved in drug registration, Bolgan fears, in order, “a very serious risk of a fatal adverse reaction; the danger of autoimmune reactions, serious diseases that affect the nervous system; the possibility of epigenetic alterations, which is capable of modifying the expression of genes. Finally, the hypothesis that the reproductive system can be attacked with the spectrum of infertility ”.
“I have always been in favor of vaccination and therapeutic freedom, but this time I am absolutely against the authorization of the vaccine. The precautionary principles were not respected. The population will be the guinea pig ”.
Doctor, why are you so alarmed?
Because there are no requirements to market these vaccines. When certain data is missing, the precautionary principle is used. It has not been applied here. In fact, despite the guarantees of the producers, very partial experimentation was carried out and there are no reliable data. And we run the risk of discovering the consequences once the vaccine is injected. In particular, the very serious risk of a fatal adverse reaction. All SARS vaccines were blocked because the animals died from fatal lung complications once they were reinfected.
What is a fatal adverse reaction?
A fatal adverse reaction occurs when our immune system reacts by enhancing the disease for which we are vaccinating. That is, unleash the disease from which we must protect ourselves. But there are two types of problems here: the type of virus that is used to make the vaccine. And the risks due to the fact that we inject genetic material without having studies about it. In theory, the vaccine should be safe if the virus does not mutate. But the virus changes …
Let’s go step by step. Please tell us why the danger lies in the type of virus used to make the vaccine.
Let’s start with the Oxford vaccine. It involves the production of a vector into which a fragment of the spike is inserted, which is the genetic sequence that must lead to the production of antibodies and which has been chemically synthesized from the sequences provided by the Chinese. But the virus has changed profoundly in the passage from one man to another. Furthermore, being an RNA virus, it has the property of forming smaller mutant populations. They are “almost species” that form inside the person when infected and compete with each other. In essence, they can produce resistance to the vaccine, but worse, a selection of more dangerous and contagious mutants. The person is at risk of becoming infected with more dangerous viruses.
What are the chances of this happening?
The point is this, we don’t know. Animal testing was done with the original virus strain, not the current one. The risk is injecting genetic material without some experimentation. Let me take another example. The fragment with genetic material enters the cell and the ribosomal system translates it into protein. Theoretically it should remain at the level of the cytoplasm. The risk is that this RNA is not only transformed into protein, but also into double-stranded DNA and is transported within the nucleus, producing unpredictable effects. Again, we don’t have an experiment that can tell us. We risk all of this being found out once people have been vaccinated.
Are you telling us that people will be guinea pigs?
Although the vaccine is made to not integrate with our DNA, in fact there are no studies and we cannot know what will happen. Engineered genetic material, when injected, can trigger violent immunopathological adverse reactions, creating that cytokine storm for which COVID-19 has been shown to be deadly. Or there could be epigenetic alterations, which means a modification of gene expression. Not sequence mutations, but changes in the way genes are expressed.
You spoke of the potentiation of the disease that should be fought. How is this risk founded?
The vaccine is created to produce antibodies, but it is not sterilizing, that is, it does not prevent infection and transmission of the virus. We are told that it is 95% effective, but I deny this fact: it is the antibody-forming ability of the vaccine, but no one guarantees that it is protective. Until proven otherwise, the person can still become infected and contagious. They claim that the person is protected from the disease, but we do not know that because they have chosen animal models that have not developed the complication.
Let’s wonder why the SARS vaccines were blocked. Animal studies, which must always precede human studies, tell us that they died from a fatal lung complication once reinfected. The vaccine was considered a source of adverse reaction, so it was stopped. Here they vaccinated the animals with an antigen that has the sequences of the Wuhan virus but, I repeat, the circulating virus has mutated. No one has done this study in a way that reassures us. The vaccines that are put on the market tell us that only if one person is capable of producing antibodies to the vaccine, we have total uncertainty about the rest. We should do a long-term follow-up, but a very short active follow-up is planned in clinical trials, from 7 to 15 days.
What do you see in 7 or 15 days?
In the technical data sheet we will find redness, induration at the injection site, fever, loss of appetite or anaphylaxis (severe allergy) as acute reactions. Autoimmune reactions are not seen immediately, they are seen later in time. In particular, autoimmune reactions can occur mainly with boosters. We may have responses that get progressively worse. Let me explain. This virus forms autoimmune antibodies and this is documented in the literature. It means that in addition to antibodies against the virus, antibodies are formed against human proteins. When you have an immune system reaction to human proteins, you have an autoimmune reaction. Most of the proteins targeted by autoimmune attack come from the central nervous system. This means the appearance of ALS, sclerosis and other very serious pathologies. But we cannot know it if we do not carry out active pharmacovigilance over time. Furthermore, the detrimental actions of the reproductive system are not known at all.
You mean infertility?
Yes, but not only that.
The speed with which they produced it leaves me wondering that they have not adequately purified it from some processing residues. And here I also explain it to you. After synthesizing the small piece of genetic sequence and creating the vector, they have to produce it in large quantities to make the vaccine. You cannot do 300 million doses per synthesis, we need to find a system that reproduces this small piece in industrial quantities. That is why cell lines are healthy. Well, the Oxford Adenovirus Vaccine is produced using immortalized cell lines. In particular, potentially cancerous fetal cell lines. If processing residues remain in the vaccine, it is very dangerous. Fetal DNA has a great capacity to integrate into host DNA and, upon immortalization, carries with it mutated genes that could trigger carcinogenesis. And then there is the problem highlighted by an ISS study, vaccination against influenza.
What does the flu have to do with this?
Three years ago, I informed the undersecretary of the Ministry of Health about an ISS study, which showed that the incidence of severe pneumonia increased by 50% in those vaccinated against influenza. The study also reported 12% more mortality in those vaccinated due to potentiation of the disease.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29616677/
https://www.onb.it/2018/11/02/vaccini-antinfluenzali-risposte-ed-efficacia-per-fasce-di-eta/
It may also be a coincidence, but several cities in which they anticipated the flu vaccine two months later became red zones. I brought the evidence three years ago, I pointed out the danger of potentiation of the disease and they did not consider it. Indeed, two months later they began the vaccination campaign without taking this serious risk into account.
As for the flu vaccine, also the COVID vaccine, in addition to the known and potential risks, we do not know how long its action lasts.
Does that mean we don’t know how long it has its protective effect?
Exact. It seems that the duration is very low, or a few months. For example, the adenoviral vector vaccine forms antibodies against the vector itself, no boosters can be produced. Adenovirus is recognized by the immune system and we cannot use the same vector. We cannot make withdrawals. Protective antibodies, assuming they are formed, remain limited in time, maximum two or three months. Another problem is that when it begins to replicate to make the protein, the adenovirus “spits out” the little antigen sequence they put on it. The adenovirus then replicates but not the sequence, so there are inefficiency problems due to the way the vaccine is constructed.
And the problem of conservation?
The vaccine must also be stored at minus eighty degrees and it is vital that this is done. Degraded genetic material is highly inflammatory. It triggers a very violent inflammatory reaction. Therefore, inoculating a degraded vaccine is very dangerous.
For more information:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29616677/
Vaccini antinfluenzali, risposte ed efficacia per fasce di età
[ad_2]
