Dr. Shi Zheng Li was coauthor on a research into how corona viruses can infect antibody producing cells when antibodies attach themselves to the spike protein. The research was done with MERS coronavirus in the context of mechanisms of antibody dependent enhancement.
https://jvi.asm.org/content/94/5/e02015-19#sec-6
Here we identify a novel mechanism for ADE: a neutralizing antibody binds to the surface spike protein of coronaviruses like a viral receptor, triggers a conformational change of the spike, and mediates viral entry into IgG Fc receptor-expressing cell.
I’m no expert in immunology, but I wonder about pertinence to SARS Cov-2, perhaps the attenuation of acquired immunity, and the consequences of later reinfection. I recall reading that some people seems to get coronavirus more than once and worse symptoms the second go-round. I wonder about relevance to vaccines.
It’s all about the grubs, grains, bugs and worms. If you have the space, keep a couple patches of earth tilled, rotating every week between the two.
The chickens will find their own food in the soil. Friend of mine had chickens on his farm and he only fed them in the winter here in Wisconsin. And they thrived on bugs, native grains, grubs and worms from his fields.
Just spotted this article about why people should wear masks (even if no-one else does).
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent
Notice the funding for this study was provided by: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, of whom Dr. Anthony Fauci is the director. If he would lie to us about the wearing of masks EVERYTHING that comes from him is suspect. While it appears this study was well intentioned: “This study reveals complex roles of antibodies in viral entry and can guide future vaccine design and antibody-based drug therapy.” the date of submission was November 27, 2019. The Chinese government and WHO state the first confirmed case of Covid-19 was December 8, 2019. A study gone bad?
“…the US now experiencing 50,000(!) new infections per day”
Chris, you are confusing “cases” and “infections”. I suspect “new infections” have been 50,000 per day for a long time… likely much, much higher. We are finally seeing them as “new cases” since we are testing much more. There are so many asymptomatic or mild infections, I would be willing to bet that new infections are several times greater than new cases.
The Swedes have a new study on T-cell immunity that they find encouraging. They seem to think it is protective but not sure how much when patients don’t also mount antibodies
Here’s their press release:
https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covid-19-is-probably-higher-than-tests-have-shown
Here is the preprint:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.29.174888v1
And an interview quote:
“Our results indicate that roughly twice as many people have developed T-cell immunity compared with those who we can detect antibodies in,” noted Karolinska Center for Infectious Medicine researcher Marcus Buggert…“It remains to be determined if a robust memory T cell response in the absence of detectable circulating antibodies can protect against [the virus].”
The Germans have also published a study in T-cells. My immunology knowledge is not good enough to comment on it.
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-35331/v1
But there is a news report about it - claims the implication is that having had the common cold may confer some immunity (T-cells have some memory). I wonder what that means for those who get regular flu shots?
https://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/26278/20200630/8-out-10-people-infected-covid-19-protected-episodes-colds.htm
As I noted, not an immunologist, but I did peruse the German paper referenced above paper and was intrigued by this discussion point:
"recognition rates of SARS-CoV-2 T-cell epitopes by individual donors were lower in individuals with more severe COVID-19 symptoms. This observation, … and reports from other active or chronic viral infections associating diversity of T-cell response with anti- viral defense, provide evidence that natural development and vaccine-based induction of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 requires recognition of multiple SARS-CoV-2 epitopes.
Translation: I think it means that your immune system needs to recognize more than a single local region of the viral antigen(s) in order to mount a robust response.
If that is the case, I wonder what this means for the Moderna mRNA vaccine. According to their website, they pre-select the protein they will use as antigen and synthesize the mRNA for it.
I wonder what guides the selection of the antigenic protein in the case of SARS Cov-2. (I am aguessing the spike protein is a likely candidate , but that’s speculation on my part). DO we know which viral proteins would provide the “multiple epitopes” necessary to mount a robust response, or are we guessing?
A theory is only as good as the assumptions on which it is based. I hope the Task Force is looking at the data coming in from beyond our shores.
Yes, the timing of study is interesting (FYI - she reports on MERS but no doubt work on SARS was in the mix). By 2015 they had already created their chimeric Frankenvirus (my words, not theirs) with the increased infectivity, lung cell pathogenicity and muted neutralization by antibodies, as cited in an earlier post. So by 2019, antibody dependent enhancement research seems to have been underway, and I suspect if it weren’t for the emergence of SARS Cov 2 we would have seen more reports.
As to funding, yes, isn’t it ironic. I suspect you are aware that the funding for GOF was paused in 2014 (the 2015 GOF research got published though) and then resumed in 2019, because, well…what could possibly go wrong?
I cite from the NIH website:
"The U.S. government will undertake a deliberative process to assess the risks and benefits of certain gain-of-function (GOF) experiments with influenza, SARS, and MERS viruses in order to develop a new Federal policy regarding the funding of this research. During this deliberative process, U.S. government agencies will institute a pause on the funding of any new studies involving these experiments. For purposes of the deliberative process and this funding pause, “GOF studies” refers to scientific research that increases the ability of any of these infectious agents to cause disease by enhancing its pathogenicity or by increasing its transmissibility among mammals by respiratory droplets.”
Why did he fail to ask one of the most important questions: Will this experimental covid vaccine come filled with aluminum and other neurotoxins that previous vaccines are all laced with?
You say you want the “terrain to be as fit as it can be”… but you say nothing about the typical vaccine adjuvants obliterating the terrain…
That research you should’ve done even before considering the shady (to say the least) characters leading the efforts to suppress effective cures (like HCQ) to get to mass vaccination programs, as Prep101 points out.
If you inject aluminum into a child without a developed blood-brain barrier (BBB), what should you expect to happen? Watch Vax xed II: The People’s Truth (2019) if you’re ready to face the obvious truth of the predictable effects of vaccine adjuvants (which are often primary ingredients, the attenuated pathogen a secondary ingredient if ranked by effects of the substances injected). [Oh wait, I can’t post bitchute links, nope, those remain BANNED on PeakProsperity! - You’ll have to paste the link together or search for it: bit chute .com/video/ 1RAAGIgNLeJU/ ]
How much longer do you intend on shying away from the truth about vaccines[-as-they-are-today]?
The biggest risk factors for Covid seem to be:
- Vitamin D deficiency (aggravated by lockdowns but lessened by summer time)
- Vaccine toxins exposure (elderly populations being injected with flu shots containing several extremely toxic adjuvants, maybe even containing other coronavirii and XMRVs)
This is because, prior to the coronavirus pandemic, there has been and is a vitamin D deficiency pandemic, and a vaccine injury pandemic.
“Chimeric Frankenvirus” indeed. Your comments as well as others here are some of the most salient anywhere. We (governments, power brokers, and much of the scientific/medical field) seem to be in a CYA, tow the line, propagandist mode. It’s as though we’re in a “you want the truth? you can’t handle the truth” period. In the interim, tens of thousands continue to die. Throughout history, science has been a search and quest for the “truth”. Sadly today, “truth” has become obfuscated to irrelevance, bought with the dollar, and the majority of the masses cheering it’s demise.
If (and it appears it was) this virus was created through gain of function studies, let us hope and pray it’s makers haven’t created the perfect monster. I pray all here know the peace, patience, and understanding, needed in these difficult times. The “Truth” will set us free.
edit to remove language in poor taste.
Does anybody know which video it was where Chris presented a protocol from a US medical college that corroborated his protocol for boosting the bodies immune system? … vit C, Quercetin, Vit. D3, Vit C, Selenium…
If so, please share the video.
...for 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05%-0.3%. For those above 70, it escalates substantially...
www.zerohedge.comInterestingly enough, one can make a self-replicating mRNA vaccine. Take the genes (structure of active polymerase solved and published in nature) for the viral RNA polymerase put it on a mRNA also containing the viral spike protein. Then use lipofection to get cells to take up the vaccine. Et voila, the infected cells start producing viral RNA polymerase, which synthesise additional mRNA. Spike protein will be produced and delivered to the cell surface, while viral polymerase fragments can get presented by MHC proteins on the cell surface, inducing both B and T cell responses respectively.
And yes, I did preliminary design on such a vaccine and came up with a way to test it in cell cultures and animal models.
Kind regards,
Jeppe
EDIT: The vaccine cannot produce infectious virus particles as no structural proteins are present.
EDIT EDIT: Here is an overview of the status of some of the vaccines being developed:Vaccinestudier - Overblik over planlagte og igangværende humane studier af vacciner til COVID-19
Replying to post 32. You seem to understand the immunology. Help me out here.
I’ve been looking at research on the immune response to SARS Cov-2.
A group in China is suggesting that an open reading frame on the SARS Cov-2 genome (ORF-8) enables this virus to evade immune surveillance by down-regulating the surface expression of MHC-1.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.111823v1.full
This paper is disturbing because they point out that this open reading frame is the least homologous to analogous gene sequences in original SARS Cov, another strange way that this version 2 virus seems particularly adapted to be virulent.
Question: if the mRNA vaccine primes the T-cells ahead of viral exposure, might that prevent down-regulation of MHC-1 with subsequent exposure to the actual virus? Or would the actual virus still be able to evade eliciting a T-cell response via the mechanism in this paper?
On the other hand, In a previous post, I shared a study by German scientists, which suggests that prior exposure to other coronaviruses may be somewhat protective via a T-cell pathway, although antibody titres may be low.
So I’m not sure how to tie these different strands together.
Also, do you think the Spike protein is the best candidate antigen for an mRNA vaccine? Is that what Moderna is using?
@jn20 Interestingly enough, one can make a self-replicating mRNA vaccine. Take the genes (structure of active polymerase solved and published in nature) for the viral RNA polymerase put it on a mRNA also containing the viral spike protein. Then use lipofection to get cells to take up the vaccine. Et voila, the infected cells start producing viral RNA polymerase, which synthesise additional mRNA. Spike protein will be produced and delivered to the cell surface, while viral polymerase fragments can get presented by MHC proteins on the cell surface, inducing both B and T cell responses respectively.Sounds great, but do you have any reason to believe it won't end up being laced with aluminum, polysorbate 80, formaldehyde, MSG, aborted human fetal tissue, animal organ tissue containing viruses... and other neuro-, immuno-, and cytotoxic adjuvants that seem to be the primary cause of the autism epidemic and a vast array of other health disasters? I don't disagree with talking about theoretical vaccines, but we can't just keep ignoring the health-destroying (and society-destroying as children are the main targets) adjuvants, which have literally turned vaccines into bioweapons, thinly veiled as medical necessities.
@Island girl Also, do you think the Spike protein is the best candidate antigen for an mRNA vaccine? Is that what Moderna is using?That would seem to make the most sense, as without functional spike proteins, the virus would be inert (non-pathogenic).
Can’t have any independent thinking. Must suppress. How long till this is banned by Twit, FB, YT?
Rector
I posted this on the forum page.
Watched the video. He made some claims about Taiwan, Singapore and Japan that I have not been able to verify.
I hope it works but he was a little too evangelical and did not really present data.
Need more info from other sources.
This new treatment could literally be the final nail in the coffin of the weaponized virus.
Based on Doctor Bartlett’s comments about other countries like Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan which have super low death rates, I did some digging. I personally find it hard to believe that the mode of efficacy is just related to an immuno-modulation/anti-inflammatory effect… could it be that simple?
First off, we should say that one reason to think it does work is that WHO said not to use steroids. Out of Japan in April;
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7161498/Therapeutic potential of ciclesonide inhalation for COVID-19 pneumonia: Report of three cases
Abstract
More going on than meets the eye? I will dig more.No specific and effective anti-viral treatment has been approved for COVID-19 so far. Systemic corticosteroid has been sometimes administered to severe infectious diseases combined with the specific treatment. However, as lack of the specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug, systemic steroid treatment has not been recommended for COVID-19. We report here three cases of the COVID-19 pneumonia successfully treated with ciclesonide inhalation. Rationale of the treatment is to mitigate the local inflammation with inhaled steroid that stays in the lung and to inhibit proliferation of the virus by antiviral activity. Larger and further studies are warranted to confirm the result of these cases.....
....Although it was still very preliminary and unpublished data, the coronavirus laboratory at the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Murayama Branch, had experimental data that among existing inhalation drugs for treatment of bronchial asthma, ciclesonide (trade name: Alvesco) has strong antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 [1]. In addition, according to another screening studies including FDA-approved drugs, ciclesonide also has the antiviral activity against MERS virus [2].
This appears to be one of the inhaled corticosteroids that Japan is using for Covid-19. Does Budesonide have similar properties?
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.11.987016v1 The inhaled corticosteroid ciclesonide blocks coronavirus RNA replication by targeting viral NSP15 Steroid compounds, which are expected to have dual functions in blocking host inflammation and MERS-CoV replication, were screened from a chemical library. Within this library, ciclesonide, an inhaled corticosteroid, suppressed human coronavirus replication in cultured cells, but did not suppress replication of respiratory syncytial virus or influenza virus. The effective concentration of ciclesonide to block SARS-CoV-2 (the cause of COVID-19) replication (EC90) was 6.3 μM. After the eleventh consecutive MERS-CoV passage in the presence of ciclesonide, a resistant mutation was generated, which resulted in an amino acid substitution (A25V) in nonstructural protein (NSP) 15, as identified using reverse genetics. A recombinant virus with the mutation was also resistant to ciclesonide suppression of viral replication. These observations suggest that the effect of ciclesonide was specific to coronavirus, suggesting this is a candidate drug for treatment of patients suffering MERS or COVID-19.