V.2 Evidence Consistent with Protective Shedding from those Vaccinated with Only One Dose While for Two Doses Shedding Putatively Promotes DEATH in the Unvaccinated (Updated April 11, 2024).
Please see new comment posted on X https://twitter.com/hervk102/status/1770827757674537343 on March 21, 2024 concerning differential impact of shedding on the unvaxed (no spike specific IgG4) versus the vaxed (with high levels of IgG4) and how vitamin D3 greater than 50 ng/ml can only protect those without IgG4 against all-cause mortality.
The CDC recognized long COVID in July 2021 as a new disease entity (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email) which was co-incidental with the projected maximal shedding related to increased C19 mortality (Image 5B) in the vaxed and unvaxed (for the UK population from ONS data). If morbidity is 33 times the rate of mortality, then Long COVID likely peaked around the same time. In other words, what I am saying is that Long COVID (and/or sudden death) may be moreso related to shedding from the recently vaccinated (affecting the vaxed and non-vaxed populations) and may have been particularly harmful with the emergence of the delta variant. Are the spike specific IgG1/3 from the upper respiratory tract being shed with the vaccinal spike mRNA that are captured in the exosomes (HERV-K102 particles) expressing spike at the surface which then targets the foamy macrophages in the new host (eg. sebocytes and tissue macrophages) explaining why shedding may be more dangerous with delta variant SARS-CoV-2 infection? I will summarize the exosome work in a new substack.
Thank you. This 2018 article by James Bull is a must read by anyone trying to figure out what went wrong with the LNP and mRNA gene therapy technology prematurely unleased on mankind with the excuse of a man-made pandemic. It talks about the 5 main issues to be considered for the 'genetic engineering' of new technology vaccines: immunogenicity (humoral and/or cellular adaptive immunity); avirulence (lack of disease causation); subsequent evolution of the virus (affecting transmissibility/pathogenicity); TRANSMISSIBILITY TO OTHERS; and tissue tropism. I would add a sixth extremely important consideration and that is the effects on trained innate immunity/HERV-K102 activation in macrophages (enhancing or inhibiting such as by antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection into macrophages) and whether ADE causes merely immunosuppression or worse immunosenescence of macrophages (ISM) which can vary according to tissue location. Did either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna address these 6 KEY considerations before submitting for EUA and why weren't these evaluated by the regulator (EMA, MRA, FDA or HC) prior to unleashing a gene therapy shot known to have major issues with "shedding".
It is quite something to think that humans have evolved the means to send out a horizontal pandemic planning 'Population' warning system putatively able to activate the powerful HERV-K102 INNATE defense system in preparation for an impending infection by a pandemic virus in the new host. Note that along similar lines, the specialized foamy macrophages in sebaceous glands (the sebocytes) CONSTITUTIVELY produce HERV-K102 particles also to help jump=start the system in the event of a pandemic. However the caveat is that we need to validate that this horizontal protection does happen. Similarly, we have to examine if spike mRNA hijacks the HERV-K102 particles to increase the likelihood of integration of the spike toxin in the new host and if this leads to spike persistent overexpression. Shedding is already well known as a major concern for gene therapy which begs the question why weren't the shedding studies done???
"It is quite something to think that humans have evolved the means to send out a horizontal pandemic planning 'Population' warning system..."
But are we as good as trees in a forest?
This seems to me to be parallel to the body switching to IgG4 after 2-3 "vaccines", deciding to live with spike protein, and then passing that note in class...
You raise an interesting point about the purpose of the switch of spike IgG1/3 to IgG4 which diminishes ADE mediated induction of "immunosenescence" in macrophages by SARS-COV-2 virions and putatively, spike protein.. Immunosenescence would increase C19 and non-C19 mortality so by preventing immunosenescence systemically this could result in lower all-cause mortality. The IgG4 by binding to FCGR2B would block the activation of macrophages but only when spike protein is present (ie., natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 virions or vaccine supplied mRNA spike proteins). So the subsequent mRNA vaccines after the second dose would temporarily cause immunosuppression of immune surveillance against infectious agents (including SARS-CoV-2) and cancers in addition to any toxicity such as generating clots or vasculitis. This might help explain in part why omicron variants lacked the ability to generate pneumonia/cytokine storm in the lungs because omicron variants were not able to activate macrophages and then cause the conversion of the LB-FMs to the LB+FMs with fatal consequences. So good news there for Mother Nature. But in the upper respiratory tract (URT) there apparently isn't any conversion of spike IgG1/3 to IgG4. So unfortunately this spells trouble and the passage of the contaminated HERV-K102 particles (carrying spike nucleotide sequences) to the new host is in fact targeted to the intermediate monocytes /LB-FM macrophages which convert to non-classical monocytes/LB+FMs. Now this process causes progression to severe disease by generating immunosenescence (causing CVD and turbo cancers) which would be exacerbated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. So in fact shedding would cause more severe disease in the vaccinated and also in the unvaccinated who are not prone to generating IgG4 systemically. So the use of a LNP delivered spike mRNA gene therapy may cause more morbidity and mortality than the SARS-CoV-2 virus and surprisingly even more than the direct injection of the toxic LNP with spike mRNA and cDNA.
Please see new comment posted on X https://twitter.com/hervk102/status/1770827757674537343 on March 21, 2024 concerning differential impact of shedding on the unvaxed (no spike specific IgG4) versus the vaxed (with high levels of IgG4) and how vitamin D3 greater than 50 ng/ml can only protect those without IgG4 against all-cause mortality.
😱 It just gets worse.
The CDC recognized long COVID in July 2021 as a new disease entity (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term-effects/index.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email) which was co-incidental with the projected maximal shedding related to increased C19 mortality (Image 5B) in the vaxed and unvaxed (for the UK population from ONS data). If morbidity is 33 times the rate of mortality, then Long COVID likely peaked around the same time. In other words, what I am saying is that Long COVID (and/or sudden death) may be moreso related to shedding from the recently vaccinated (affecting the vaxed and non-vaxed populations) and may have been particularly harmful with the emergence of the delta variant. Are the spike specific IgG1/3 from the upper respiratory tract being shed with the vaccinal spike mRNA that are captured in the exosomes (HERV-K102 particles) expressing spike at the surface which then targets the foamy macrophages in the new host (eg. sebocytes and tissue macrophages) explaining why shedding may be more dangerous with delta variant SARS-CoV-2 infection? I will summarize the exosome work in a new substack.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966842X17302123
Intentionally transmissible. They know what they’re doing
Thank you. This 2018 article by James Bull is a must read by anyone trying to figure out what went wrong with the LNP and mRNA gene therapy technology prematurely unleased on mankind with the excuse of a man-made pandemic. It talks about the 5 main issues to be considered for the 'genetic engineering' of new technology vaccines: immunogenicity (humoral and/or cellular adaptive immunity); avirulence (lack of disease causation); subsequent evolution of the virus (affecting transmissibility/pathogenicity); TRANSMISSIBILITY TO OTHERS; and tissue tropism. I would add a sixth extremely important consideration and that is the effects on trained innate immunity/HERV-K102 activation in macrophages (enhancing or inhibiting such as by antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection into macrophages) and whether ADE causes merely immunosuppression or worse immunosenescence of macrophages (ISM) which can vary according to tissue location. Did either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna address these 6 KEY considerations before submitting for EUA and why weren't these evaluated by the regulator (EMA, MRA, FDA or HC) prior to unleashing a gene therapy shot known to have major issues with "shedding".
Great work, you are always bang on the money as far as I can tell as an enthusiastic amateur! You have taught me a lot so thankyou, and brilliant.
Very interested shedding transition between one-dose "vaccinated" and 2 dose "vaccinated", which I never would have suspected...
Now, what to do with that?
:-o
It is quite something to think that humans have evolved the means to send out a horizontal pandemic planning 'Population' warning system putatively able to activate the powerful HERV-K102 INNATE defense system in preparation for an impending infection by a pandemic virus in the new host. Note that along similar lines, the specialized foamy macrophages in sebaceous glands (the sebocytes) CONSTITUTIVELY produce HERV-K102 particles also to help jump=start the system in the event of a pandemic. However the caveat is that we need to validate that this horizontal protection does happen. Similarly, we have to examine if spike mRNA hijacks the HERV-K102 particles to increase the likelihood of integration of the spike toxin in the new host and if this leads to spike persistent overexpression. Shedding is already well known as a major concern for gene therapy which begs the question why weren't the shedding studies done???
"It is quite something to think that humans have evolved the means to send out a horizontal pandemic planning 'Population' warning system..."
But are we as good as trees in a forest?
This seems to me to be parallel to the body switching to IgG4 after 2-3 "vaccines", deciding to live with spike protein, and then passing that note in class...
;-(
You raise an interesting point about the purpose of the switch of spike IgG1/3 to IgG4 which diminishes ADE mediated induction of "immunosenescence" in macrophages by SARS-COV-2 virions and putatively, spike protein.. Immunosenescence would increase C19 and non-C19 mortality so by preventing immunosenescence systemically this could result in lower all-cause mortality. The IgG4 by binding to FCGR2B would block the activation of macrophages but only when spike protein is present (ie., natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 virions or vaccine supplied mRNA spike proteins). So the subsequent mRNA vaccines after the second dose would temporarily cause immunosuppression of immune surveillance against infectious agents (including SARS-CoV-2) and cancers in addition to any toxicity such as generating clots or vasculitis. This might help explain in part why omicron variants lacked the ability to generate pneumonia/cytokine storm in the lungs because omicron variants were not able to activate macrophages and then cause the conversion of the LB-FMs to the LB+FMs with fatal consequences. So good news there for Mother Nature. But in the upper respiratory tract (URT) there apparently isn't any conversion of spike IgG1/3 to IgG4. So unfortunately this spells trouble and the passage of the contaminated HERV-K102 particles (carrying spike nucleotide sequences) to the new host is in fact targeted to the intermediate monocytes /LB-FM macrophages which convert to non-classical monocytes/LB+FMs. Now this process causes progression to severe disease by generating immunosenescence (causing CVD and turbo cancers) which would be exacerbated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. So in fact shedding would cause more severe disease in the vaccinated and also in the unvaccinated who are not prone to generating IgG4 systemically. So the use of a LNP delivered spike mRNA gene therapy may cause more morbidity and mortality than the SARS-CoV-2 virus and surprisingly even more than the direct injection of the toxic LNP with spike mRNA and cDNA.
Thank you for the detailed clarification, Dr. Laderoute.