Published On: Mon, Aug 3rd, 2020

UK Government’s pointless Covid-19 vaccine; the ultimate in vaccination for the sake of being vaccinated

Share This
Tags

There are a number of vaccines being developed for so-called Covid-19. The favourite of UK Government is being developed by Oxford University “at unprecedented speed” – which is being sold as a good thing. UK Government has ordered 100 million doses, even though in trials on monkeys in April, all the vaccinated test subjects got sick. For future reference, the names of the other two vaccines that UK Government have invested in  (that are also still in development) are BioNtech/Pfizer (30 million doses ordered and paid for), and Valneva (60 million doses), but this article is dedicated to the Oxford vaccine with the punchy name.

ChAdOx1 nCov-19 is currently being tested on humans, despite the monkey tests provoking at least one professor of molecular virology, Jonathan Ball, at the University of Nottingham, to declare that there should be “an urgent re-appraisal”. Be that as it may, on July 20th the BBC published a good news story about the human trials whereby success was claimed thus far: the vaccine appeared safe, and triggered an immune response. It’s the second part that this article is mostly interested in, because there’s not much to be said about claims for the safety of any vaccine except they are not to be trusted (and whether the vaccine is rushed through development or not doesn’t make a blind bit of difference). However, we cannot pass without noting that the BBC’s health and science correspondent answers “yes” to his own question, is ChAdOx1 nCov-19 safe? And that he continues…

…but there are side-effects.

There were no dangerous side-effects from taking the vaccine, however, 70% of people on the trial developed either fever or headache.

The researchers say this could be managed with paracetamol.

An actual trial participant, writing an account of his experience for The Independent in July, told of how “twice in the first week I went to bed with mild fever symptoms”. Not knowing whether he had received the vaccine or was a control subject (half the participants did, and half didn’t), this particular guinea pig, being preoccupied, it seems, with second guessing the exact nature of his contribution, explains that he might have imagined being ill. Nevertheless, he made an official report of having “raised temperature and sneezing”, so let us put it this way: he had symptoms of vaccination stimulated illness. The side effects (or the symptoms of the side effect, to be precise), it seems, are managed by paracetamol and going to bed like one who is properly poorly. With a mild cold, perhaps.

And perhaps it’s not just coincidence that the idea of common cold occurs when suggested by the symptoms mentioned, because it turns out that the sample virus in the vaccine wasn’t SARS-COV-2 (the FBEL reader will not be surprised to discover this). The sample virus, as the BBC reports, was something else:

It is made from a genetically engineered virus that causes the common cold in chimpanzees.

It has been heavily modified, first so it cannot cause infections in people and also to make it “look” more like coronavirus.”

We will get to the question momentarily of whether a vaccine can “catch the fish” it is intended to when it’s using the wrong “bait”, as it were. For the vaccine developers, perhaps, this would be all academic – no matter how much of a failure the animal testing  –  and the human tests would be about establishing safety (“their main purpose is to ensure the vaccine is safe enough to give to people”, says the BBC).

As for the Oxford vaccine test animals, when the development process was at that stage, these were rhesus macaque monkeys, housed at the the US National Institute of Health’s Rocky Mountain Laboratory. A team there discovered that “three of the vaccinated animals” developed the symptom of “increased breathing rate”. The Telegraph article where the reader can see this science informally written up explains that this symptom is pertinent because it is indicative of the virus attacking the lungs. Well, as these pages have explained before, a human host might be compensating for low blood oxygen levels if he has to breathe more; the lungs do not necessarily need to be damaged. Indeed, while the Rocky Mountain researchers say that “on autopsy…, [they] found the virus in the vaccinated monkeys’ lungs”, there was no indication as to what it was doing there. It certainly wasn’t causing pneumonia (the monkeys, it was reckoned, did not indicate this illness), and so this was taken as a sign that the vaccination “may be partially protective”.

At this juncture, it needs pointing out, because it is easy to overlook, that the monkeys will have needed to have been primed with the means to develop an infection ahead of receiving a vaccination. The Telegraph indicates this (but implying, in a Freudian slip no doubt, that infection came from the vaccine):

In the Oxford monkey trial, six monkeys were infected with single doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exposed to coronavirus. A control group of three non-vaccinated monkeys were also infected.

The reader should consider it a possibility that while the researchers will surely have assumed that they were priming their subjects with a material that is supposed to cause Covid-19 pneumonia, i.e. SARS-COV-2, what the experiment might be showing is that another factor is required for viral presence to become a life threatening infection, or that the priming material wasn’t in fact one that caused Covid-19, or that it wasn’t even SARS-COV-2 (which hasn’t been isolated). Declaring that the vaccination has protective properties is perhaps a least likely possibility. The bottom line: the vaccine didn’t work.

There is a school of thought, of course, that says that vaccines never work. On the way to understanding the reason for saying such things, it is certainly easy to appreciate that vaccines are an appropriate instrument in a medical religion that will not tolerate the heresy that a body can be cured without artificial intrusion; such things have been discussed previously in the FBEL article, Pneumonia and Covid-19, and the veracity of the “one virus, one cause” paradigm.

The idea that vaccines don’t work emanates from the theory of virus as held by the Church of allopathic medicine itself, so it’s not really that heretics are inventing new obstacles for the orthodoxy to have to clear. When one looks at a mainstream explanation of how antibodies are made, one will find words and phrases such as “specific” and, in fact, “antigen-specific antibodies”.  Antigens are that element on the surface of a pathogen (in this case, a virus) to which an antibody can bind as part of the process of making it harmless. Antibodies are created by B lymphocytes, or “specialized white blood cells”, on encountering a pathogen. This encounter will inform the design of the antibodies, thus making them antigen-specific.

The jutification for vaccines is based on the premise that on the second time an immune encounters an infection by a pathogen, it will “know” what to do, but on the first occasion, the body doesn’t act swiftly enough, and a cure is delayed by the “learning”. So, the vaccine is introduced to simulate a first time infection: to force the manufacture of antibodies ahead of any potential proper infection of the target pathogen. The ultimate conclusion to make from this paradigm of a unique cure for each virus is the necessity for an abundance of vaccine; there is actual literature out there that says this: “This is why we’re so dependent on vaccines to protect us from a lot of pathogens.”

So, as was previously said, the normal trouble with vaccines comes from within the paradigm, and can be illustrated with the most common objection: because flu strains mutate, the old vaccine is currently useless. In the specific case which is the subject of this article, we have an extreme caricature of the same situation, and hopefully the reader can see the problem of having a different genetically modified chimpanzee cold virus as the sample in the vaccine intended to train an immune system to react to SARS-COV-2 (whatever that looks like).

And there is also this: if a vaccine trial is doing well in generating SARS-COV-2 antigen antibodies, it probably has a better success rate than can be found naturally. The phenomenon of people having illness with “Covid-19” (supposedly), but not generating antibodies is something dealt with briefly in the FBEL article SARS-COV-2 doesn’t exist, but don’t take anyone else’s word for it. In that article there was also an all too brief reference to something called the T-cell theory of Covid-19 prevention (and not even by name) which involves an infection of SARS-COV-2 being stymied by a first (in fact, second) line of immune system defence.

“T-cells”, tells The Sun, “are part two of the body’s three-phase response to an infection.” It goes on [with author’s notes in square parenthesis]:

If a patient is unlucky enough to contract the virus causing Covid-19, it begins to bind to receptors in the mucus membranes at the back of the nose and throat [SARS-COV (our preferred name) binding with ACE2 in the upper respiratory tract as a gateway for the SARS-COV to the lung].

The first immune phase kicks in at this point – with the detection of a foreign protein in the body.

So-called “non-specific” immune cells, which respond to any invader instantly, set about tackling it. If they cannot, back-up is called in the form of T-cells.

They take two forms: “helper” T-cells and “killer” T-cells. The latter attacks the virus directly and, as Professor Karol Sikora says: “usually gobble it up”.

Prof Sikora told The Telegraph that if they don’t and the virus gets into the blood system it is then that the third line of defence (which “helper” T cells play a part in activating), kicks in.

“It is called the ‘B-cell system’,” says Prof Sikora “and it is this which makes antibodies.”

However, Prof Sikora says it is entirely possible that the initial two layers of the immune response deal in some cases with the SARS-Cov-2 virus without the production of antibodies.

We note that the Oxford vaccine human trials claims to generate the T-cell defence as well as the antibody. Now, the thing about T-cells in terms relative to the issue of supposed vaccine necessity is that they are much quicker to arise than antibodies – remember the whole point of a vaccine is to speed up response.

Now, consider this:

Research in Sweden… found T-cells could be a source of immunity for twice as many people as Covid-19 antibodies – and therefore that levels of public immunity could be much higher than previously thought.

If natural T-cell response to SARS-COV/SARS-COV-2 is as effective as is reckoned, then there’s little point in a general vaccine to provoke them, and indeed, little point in a general vaccine for the purpose of generating antibodies, which wouldn’t be needed. This is the mainstream scientific argument against general Covid-19 vaccination. Of course, the argument against targeting recipient groups (potentially identified as needing assistance to create immune system responses) is that if their immune systems aren’t working properly as it is, it’s perhaps not a good idea to be introducing a challenge in the shape of adjuvant, usually (accumulatively poisonous) aluminium, and a sample of virus that is newly engineered and will demand, in terms of virus/antibody theory, all the work required to produce new antibodies.

The top of this piece, as the reader will recall, conveyed the information that headache and fever was a symptom of the side effect of the Oxford vaccine; as was hinted at in that place, it sounds like it could be the cold that the test subjects would have been injected with. Of course, the Church of allopathic medicine swears that vaccines never cause the illness that they are supposed to inoculate the recipient against.  “If you have what you think is flu after vaccination”, says an NHS webpage,  “it may be that you have caught a flu-like virus that’s not really flu, or you may have caught flu before your flu vaccination had taken effect.”  How about the vaccine has over-challenged a generally weakened immune system (from prescription drug and fast food gobbling) and presented an opportunity for one of the many other pathogens that are inevitably and eternally present in a body? And that would be being lucky, as the recipients of a Swine flu vaccination – now narcolepsy sufferers – could testify.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
T-shirts to protest compulsory face coverings - click image