Drama in het Covid-lab: proefpersonen zijn niet meer ziek te krijgen

Even with absurdly high doses, scientists were unable to get test subjects to get Covid with the original SARS-CoV-2 virus. The researchers recommend that even higher doses and older subjects should be considered in future studies. It would also help if the subjects hadn't already gone through the disease, they say. However, those people are no longer to be found. A major scientific problem for future research into Covid vaccines.

N.a.v. het artikel "Wetenschappers probeerden mensen COVID te geven - en faalden" in Nature, 1 mei 2024. Study Here.

Purpose of the study

Het was geen experiment om de kracht van natuurlijke immuniteit aan te tonen. Noch werd onze eerste en belangrijkste verdedigingslinie, de mucosale immuniteit, beproefd. Nee, het zit zo: voor de beoordeling van een vaccin is een gestandaardiseerd infectiemodel (een "CHIM") nodig. Daarin wordt de precieze methode beschreven hoe je proefpersonen moeten besmetten. Als dat in onderzoeken op uiteenlopende manieren gebeurt, maakt dat de resultaten natuurlijk onvergelijkbaar. Van belang daarbij is -volgens de wetenschappers- eigenlijk alleen de toegediende dosis van het virus.

They therefore want future corona vaccines to be able to be tested thoroughly and in a standardized way. In the past, this has not been necessary (regulations are devised for this and definitions are revised), but people in virologists' land are happy to do so. And besides: there appears to be an inexhaustible pot of money in the corona sector.

Het virus in kwestie was het originele SARS-CoV-2 virus. Waarom zo'n verouderde variant...? "Ze moeten misschien van die vaccins af" opperde mijn altijd praktisch ingestelde echtgenote. En inderdaad: Mogelijk staan er nog miljoenen van die vaccins bij Ursula in de kelder of anders op de telefoon waarop de SMS-jes met nabestellingen zijn ontvangen. Dan helpt het om juichende onderzoeksresultaten te kunnen laten zien, waarvoor je nu eenmaal proefpersonen nodig hebt. Maar zonder zieken wordt dat lastig.

En hoezo eigenlijk 'toekomstige corona-vaccins', dat is nu toch wel klaar? Nou nee: in Engeland is bijvoorbeeld de leeftijdsgrens voor de doelgroep met verzwakte immuunsystemen net Reduced to 6 months. Men denkt daar nog dat disfunctionele immuunsystemen goed reageren op de coronavaccins. En ze denken kennelijk ook dat een vaccinatie in mei nog bescherming biedt in het eerstvolgende griepseizoen, dat zich misschien pas over een half jaar aandient... En dan nog met verouderde vaccins ook. Dat gaat opnieuw tegenvallen => weer reden om dringend te boosteren tegen die tijd!

Reinfection in case of natural immunity

In a previous similar study, almost half of the subjects were successfully infected with a dose of 1×10¹ (TCID50) pre-alpha SARS-CoV-2 virus (take it for granted. Just note that 10¹, which is 10 to the power of 1). But by then, the virus hadn't circulated yet! The researchers realized that the situation has changed: almost everyone has now been in contact with the virus and has built up natural immunity.

What do you do then? Well, that follows the same logic for these people as that of the vaccines: if one vaccination doesn't work, more vaccine is needed, so you do a double shot. If that still doesn't work, then apparently more vaccine is needed because vaccine works. So there has to be a booster after it. Etcetera.

From this point of view, it is only consistent that the researchers expected that they would be able to higher dose of the same virus the test subjects would still get sick.

Note: the same virus that those test subjects were once infected with, the 2019 version.

Zouden deze topwetenschappers ook denken dat, als je goed de mazelen hebt gehad, je toch nog een keer mazelen kunt krijgen? Zoals mijn echtgenote terecht opmerkte: "Iedereen die zelf mazelen heeft gehad en kinderen met mazelen heeft verzorgd, weet dat dat onzin is."

It works very differently with measles than with a rapidly mutating virus. You can get the latter again as soon as it has mutated sufficiently, and especially if you have been vaccinated against an older strain. There is even more to covid vaccination: the more corona vaccinations you have had, the greater the chance that you will become infected. See, at least, the earlier Cleveland study And there is also a New preprint ready that gives the same picture.

Noot: Mijn moeder gaf les in Hygiëne en Infectiepreventie, aan verpleegkundigen. Zij was misschien niet zo ingevoerd in microbiologie of virologie maar wist alles van hygiëne, ontsmetten, besmettingsrisico's, infectie, het luchten van ruimtes, transmissie, steriliseren, infectiebehandeling etc. Hogerop in de medische hiërarchie wordt dat vak niet meer als interessant beschouwd: "Daar hebben we verpleegsters voor." Men houdt zich daar liever bezig met celkweken en titers. Dat is dus te merken, ook als het over de transmissieroute gaat, waarover straks meer.

How did vaccinated people perform?

Een tussenvraag. Er deden aan dit "CHIMS-onderzoek" namelijk ook niet-gevaccineerde proefpersonen mee. Iedereen had Covid gehad, ook de gevaccineerden. Het is blijkbaar volstrekt normaal dat er hordes gevaccineerden zijn te vinden die alsnog Covid hebben gehad. Dat kwartje viel alvast niet bij de onderzoekers.

Unfortunately, due to the distribution of the test subjects among different groups, it is impossible to say anything about the performance of the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. A missed opportunity or rather: a missed opportunity, because it is not a coincidence.

Subjects are divided into 5 groups, inoculated by 1×10¹, 1×10², 1×10³, 1×10⁴ and 1×10⁵tcid₅₀SARS-CoV-2. With the increase of each power, a zero is added, so 1×10⁵ is a 10,000x higher dose than 1×10¹. Somewhere in between, one expected an effect.

All but one of the unvaccinated have been strategically grouped together in the group with the lowest dose. At least: it can't be a coincidence because that chance is about 1 in 3 million, I checked that with the help of chatgpt 😅. What could have been the motive for this? The researchers state that they had started by recruiting only unvaccinated subjects, but due to the ever-increasing vaccination rate, this was no longer possible after 9 candidates. Then they also started admitting vaccinated people. So they filled the containers chronologically, I understand. I think it's a strong piece.

Ik dacht eerst nog dat het misschien uit ethische overwegingen was geweest: "die arme ongevaccineerde mensen waren het minst beschermd dus het was niet verantwoord om hen aan een hoge dosis bloot te stellen"... Dat is geen erg overtuigend argument omdat in eerder onderzoek diezelfde dosis was gebruikt en toen zijn er geen ongelukken gebeurd. En die proefpersonen waren nog niet eens geïmmuniseerd.

Chronologically, with the side effect that no comparison is now possible between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. If the unvaccinated perform worse, it is of course because they were never vaccinated. In the unlikely event that they perform better, this could be explained by the fact that they had had the lowest dose.

Had made three groups of 12, each with 3 unvaccinated people in it. Then you would have had at least something of a control group in each group. The study could then have shown, for example, that in each subgroup only the unvaccinated became ill, which could have been useful as well. It is a pity that they have ruled out that possibility in advance. But then again, that's not what the study was about.

Uiteindelijk maakte het niet uit: het ziek maken lukte gewoon niet. Ook met een 10.000 maal zo hoge dosis waren ze niet in staat om een langdurige COVID-infectie te induceren bij de vrijwilligers, bij geen van hen. Een verstopte neus hier en daar, dat was het wel zo'n beetje. Er werd behoorlijk geswabt en ge-PCR-test maar nee.... Ze signaleerden wat verhoogde niveau's af en toe maar het ging allemaal weer vrij snel over.

Fun fact

De proefpersonen werden 12 maanden gevolgd. In die periode deed Moeder Natuur het even voor: 39%(!) van de proefpersonen maakte in die periode alsnog spontaan een nieuwe Covid-infectie door. Dat is toch wel veel: 14 van de 36. Eén van de proefpersonen zelfs twee keer! Ik ben toch zó benieuwd naar diens vaccinatiestatus...

The scientists do not elaborate on this either, except that they note that it was Omicron. 14 pieces, that could not have been only the unvaccinated. After all, there were only 9 of them. So at least 5 were vaccinated. Maybe more, 7, or 10. That would then be an indication that the vaccinations offer little to no protection against later variants, at least since Omicron.

Or would that entire 39% have consisted of only vaccinated people and the unvaccinated remained out of harm's way of Mother Nature? Would that be reported? I didn't see anything about it.

You can find a definite answer about this in the follow-up post. The link is at the bottom of this article.

PCR test: no association

Incidentally, the study mentions that infections are measured with a PCR test. Virus and vaccine research is of course impossible without a specific PCR test. I have pointed it out before, but I will take the opportunity again: the Wuhan lab was a leading center of research with corona viruses. However, our virologists did not get our PCR test from there. They also did not make any use of the knowledge that was available there at the time when a virus broke out in that very region.

On the contrary, they managed to make that PCR test super fast based on messages in social media. So there is no association there. That's just, yes, not an association.

Solutions to the problem

Aan het eind, in 'Discussion', raden de bollebozen aan om bij vergelijkbaar onderzoek niet alleen gezonde vrijwilligers tussen 18 en 30 jaar te nemen. Door het includeren van ouderen wordt de kans op ziekte vergroot, vermoeden ze. En ze geven de tip om te doseren op 1×10⁷ (i.e. 1 million times higher as the aforementioned reference study. 1,000,000x stronger! They are really distraught. And something of insight is starting to ripen because their advice is not to take the original virus anymore but a later variant:

The use of Prevalent Variants would be more relevant for the evaluation of vaccines and therapies and work is underway to use variants known to demonstrate immune escape, such as Delta (ISRCTN94747181) or Omicron.

So they have found out that it is not very useful to do research on variants that no longer exist and to which everyone is immune. Boy. Progressive insight, shall we say.

And even then, what are the prevalent variants now? Does anyone remember why we stopped naming after Omicron? That was because nothing more happened. Of course there is still some numbering, but the Name Branding Has left much to be desired since Omicron. So this experiment actually shows that natural immunity protects well and that the later, spontaneously contracted, variants no longer cause significant damage.

So there goes the business model, the silver fleet sinks within sight of the port. The scientists are in sackcloth and ashes. What about the corona research, and it went so well?

You would say: Nobody gets Covid anymore, right? Hooray, actually!! But no: the scientists are at a loss and hint at higher doses of recent variants on older test subjects in order to be able to continue to develop vaccines against this life-threatening virus!

Transmission route

Of course, I was also curious about how exactly these infections are realized in that lab setting, always a source of hilarity.

We have in Playing poker with infections Already seen how difficult that is with respiratory viruses. Could it be that they put their test subjects on an exercise bike in an unventilated room with an atomizer that continuously generated infectious aerosols? Not at all.

What do we read in the reference study about the standardized method of inoculation:

Deelnemers werden intranasaal geïnoculeerd door middel van een pipet met 10 TCID50 van wild-type SARS-CoV-2 (100 µl per naris) verdeeld over beide neusgaten [...] en bleven gedurende 10 minuten in rugligging [...], gevolgd door 20 minuten in zittende positie met een neusklem op na de inoculatie om maximale contacttijd met het neus- en keelholteslijmvlies te verzekeren.

Een pipetje! Met druppels dus... en om te voorkomen dat de druppels verloren gingen bij in- en uitademen, kregen ze twintig minuten een neusklem op.

In de studie staat ook dat laboratoriummedewerkers mondmaskers moesten dragen. Dat is bescherming tegen spatjes maar ze denken vast dat het ook helpt tegen aerosolen. Als je op BSL-2 niveau met een pipetje werkt moet dat zelfs in een onderdrukkast met afzuiging. Bij het druppelen met een pipetje kunnen er immers aerosolen vrijkomen...! ("aerosol-genererende procedures" heet dat officieel). Stel je voor, dat is gevaarlijk hoor, voor je het weet ben je besmet en besmet je iemand anders.

Protecting themselves against aerosols and trying to infect test subjects through droplets. Who gets it?

Somehow the awareness seems to be there, something with instinctive fears perhaps.

Epilogue: The Pandemic Treaty

Let me now turn to the pandemic treaty: centralised control by the WHO in the event of pandemics.

This study shows once again that you can at least fool doctors and medical scientists, perhaps the majority of all scientists, into believing anything. And it will stay that way, presumably until this entire medical generation is replaced. Not that everything is OK then, because the next generation will undoubtedly ride new hobbyhorses of their own.

They live on protocols. As soon as they get it from above, the thinking stops. Or vice versa: because they can't think, protocols have to be devised for them. Is contamination dose-dependent? OK, then we're going to increase the dose in the immunized. Is it via drops? OK, so a pipette. They don't really understand one iota of it, so if they strictly stick to the rules, at least they won't do anything wrong. See also our own OMT.

This is the generation of scientists that the WHO advises. What will they advise in the event of the next flu wave (including corona, of course, as has been the case for decades)?

a) Heavier vaccination. The doses we are working with now have become too low, you can see that from the fact that they no longer work well. The active dose of mRNA will have to be at least 100,000 to 1,000,000 times higher to generate any effect. This can also be achieved with more frequent vaccinations.

b) Stoppen met vaccineren - er kan immers niet meer getest worden zonder CHIMS dus vaccineren is onverantwoord. Dat betekent dan overdag strak handhaven op mondmaskers, handsprays, plexiglazen afscheidingen, anderhalve meter en na 18u. -het kan helaas niet anders zonder vaccins- de avondklok. En lockdowns als er pieken zijn geweest.

And then draconian imposed worldwide. In the Netherlands, we get it passed on through the EU, which sees something in centralized power. And all national government officials are bowing like flicking knives, half an eye on the European plush.

"Niet zo overdrijven, het is nu nog maar een griep?" Nou, dat was het begin 2020 ook...

The establishment lives in a parallel universe.

Also read the Follow-up post with more information about the vaccination statuses.