Fact: There is no immunity or protection against The Law of Scoreboards.
Corollary: You are crunchy and, with enough BBQ sauce, palatable.
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
|The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)||
User: Not logged on
|User Info||So You Want To Believe The So-Called 'Experts'?; entered at 2021-03-27 09:07:09|
Where is Susan Powter when you need her?|
Let's think about the insanity in this fear porn article:
"A clinical vaccine trial in South Africa showed that people in the placebo group who had previously been infected with one strain had no immunity against its mutated descendant and became reinfected."
(Andreas Kluth - ass wipe. We Must Start Planning For a Permanent Pandemic. https://archive.fo/7HfSp#selection-3299.....
First, dead men make poor placebo groups. The obvious fact is that these previously infected placebo group study participants survived an earlier COVID19 infection just fine, without an mRNA vaccination. In fact, assuming that they lacked cross-reactive immunity from a common cold virus, or even if they did have it, their immune systems did what it always does - recognized the virus and controlled it. Their bodies did not know what strain the virus was. And so if they are infected with a new strain, whether they have cross-reactive immunity or not from previous exposure, their immune systems will control the virus. If not, we'd all be dead by now.
Second the method used in the cited study was the so-called viral neutralization assay, which delivers incomplete data on immune responsiveness, but which nonetheless allows for the propagation of irresponsible alarmist fear porn, seemingly based upon hard scientific data.
Viral neutralization assays - You incubate the plasma from a naturally (so-called convalescent plasma) or vaccine immunized individual with virus of interest, and you assay whether the antibodies in the serum block the virus from infecting a model cell line, in vitro, usually in a microwell plate of similar format. All that is determined is the antibodies' ability to block infectivity. This is only one way that the immune response works, and so it is a facile, artificial, dare I say lazy way to test vaccine "efficacy." It is archaic methodology. It misses the cellular immune response to the virus, both antibody-independent and also antibody-dependent.
Antibody-independent cellular immune response - front-line natural immunity is provided by natural killer cells, which can recognize foreign invaders and take steps to neutralize them. Prior exposure not required. If not, a new pathogen would have wiped out humanity. It is an evolutionary adaptation.
Antibody-dependent cellular immune response - Antibodies, whether natural immunity IgM antibodies that exist before having encountered a novel pathogen, else we'd have been wiped out long ago, or IgG and IgM antibodies developed in response to the encounter of a novel pathogen, so-called adaptive immunity, bind the virus infected cells. Other cells, like macrophages (big eaters), see the tail end of the antibody which is bound to the virally infected cells, and gobble up these cells, preventing the virus from completing the replication cycle and releasing its spawn. This is known as ADCC, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Or NK cells, via a receptor that binds to the tail end of the antibody, and kill the virally infected cells. Or naturally occurring proteins, called complement, bind to the tail end of the antibody, causing lysis of the cells. CDC - complement-dependent cytotoxicity.
Neither the antibody-independent immune response, nor the antibody-dependent cellular immune response are assayed in these lazy-ass neutralization assays. GIGO. And so all they predict is neutralization, but nothing else.
In reality, if humanity lacked robust natural immunity, or effective adaptive immunity, we would not be here today.