Mortal Antigenic Sin (Original Antigenic Sin) and taking functional immune systems and making it react incorrectly with COVID vaccinations for Omicron and Delta
we are creating a disaster for the vaccinated and we should have left their functional immune systems alone
Mortal Antigenic Sin and taking functional immune systems and making it react incorrectly with COVID vaccinations for Omicron and Delta: we are creating a disaster for the vaccinated had we left their functional immune systems alone
Paul Elias Alexander, PhD
The core thesis is that we are damaging the immune system and response with the initial prejudiced priming with a sub-optimal non-sterilizing vaccine. We are saying to it with the second exposure in the wild that when you get a localized respiratory infection and you need a proper cytotoxic CD 8+ natural killer cell response to clear out the respiratory site of infection, that you would respond incorrectly with antibodies systemically, given that was the initial prime. If the first exposure was to vaccine, all subsequent responses with exposure will be a systemic one, even if it were to the respiratory tract. The wrong soldiers are being sent and to the wrong location, and even at the wrong time.
I begin by stating I stand on the shoulders of giants like Dan Stock, Peter McCullough, Geert Vanden Bossche, Mike Yeadon, Robert Malone. I am so humbled to know them and be part of their circle, people who are staggering in their intellect. Incredible mountains of knowledge to climb. I am only trying to build my own understanding and to figure out what is wrong here. I am always open to learning and corrections.
I state now that we will never ever be able to achieve population-level herd immunity with these non-sterilizing, non-neutralizing imperfect ‘leaky’ vaccines that do not stop infection, viral replication, or transmission. 100%. Alike how we will never contact trace our way out of this pandemic with a virus that has a 10-14 day incubation period. It just cannot happen.
Leaky vaccines can cause a disaster for the unvaccinated. “The result is that infected but vaccinated individuals have extended survival, allowing highly virulent pathogen that would normally reach an evolutionary dead-end in a dead host, can transmit.” I argue we are facing this now with these imperfect leaky vaccines and we are stunned as to why the vaccine developers would bring these sub-optimal vaccines to market.
Why would the FDA permit these to be used in mass vaccination? The outcome could only be disastrous! Why would the public health officials like Fauci et al. the CDC, the NIH, and FDA ignore the potent role of the innate immune system in this pandemic? With natural acquired immunity, we have the immune arsenal to handle this pathogen and especially the mild Omicron and Delta variants. If we vaccinate and then subvert/damage the innate immune system and especially in our healthy children who depend on this innate response usually (and so effectively), we are removing from the battle field an immune compartment that functions usually to vanquish most pathogen but also works to purchase time for the adaptive system.
Geert Vanden Boosch (electronic communication December 2021) explains that it is not a problem if the virus breaches the ‘first line of defense’ innate immune system even (which would normally destroy it) because para “we still have a more sophisticated (but more energy-consuming) compartment of the immune system that can extinguish the SARS-CoV-2 fire: naturally acquired Abs! But if you take away that innate immune defense, the fire spreads way to fast to be contained by adaptive immunity. The innate immunity allows the adaptive response to buy time such as to come well-prepared.”
Yet is it really Mortal Antigen Sin (MAS) as apposed to Original Antigenic Sin (OAS)? We are arguing given the possible long-lasting immune catastrophe we are causing with this mass vaccination and sub-optimal immune pressure by using a non-sterilizing vaccine during a pandemic (massive infectious pressure due to circulating pathogen), that this is sin with no absolution. This is mortal sin with no opportunity to absolve the initial original sin baggage or in this case, insult to the immune system. The former is irrecoverable to the sinner as it is now to the vaccinated person’s immune system. In that, our argument is that antibody-mediated viral enhancement (AMVE) and some may term it antibody dependent enhancement (ADE), may explain the surging infections globally among those vaccinated. This due to MAS that burrows heavily on the OAS phenomenon by Thomas Francis, Jr (OAS refers to the Biblical description of the original sin).
The key hypothesis is that we may be taking immune systems that could have responded adaptively and accurately had we NOT vaccinated and leaving particularly low-risk population alone (e.g. children and young persons and low-risk persons), and with unnecessary vaccination, driving it to react and respond maladaptively and inappropriately. This incorrect responding is disastrous for it would then be potentially making a person who would not ordinarily become symptomatic and seriously ill from COVID (Delta and Omicron and other mild non-consequential variants), to become progressively more infected and sicker, with potentially disastrous outcome including death. Is this what we are seeing in the UK data? In other nations as well with the vaccinated becoming very infected, even sicker, and even dying, as well as the unvaccinated?
We are saying to leave the population alone and stop this mass vaccination with these non-sterilizing vaccines that are setting the population up for a disaster it would NOT have had if just left healthy people alone and allowed their functional immune systems (innate and adaptive/acquired immunity) to deal with Omicron and Delta. To deal with variants of this COVID virus it would typically have no problem handling.
With this concept of OAS and as I argue for a more apt term being MAS, the core thesis is the grave prejudice of the initial priming of the immune system that could lead astray, negatively influence, or derange the subsequent ‘secondary exposure’ immune response? We are talking about immune dysregulation (derangement) that is not short term. Furthermore, the OAS/MAS phenomenon being described that hobbles the immune response and in one negative direction, is not necessarily to the spike or variant, such that it may well be that this has zero to do with the type of variant (e.g. wrong antibodies to the circulating spike/variant so there is immune escape (vaccine escape/resistance) or sub-optimal antibodies being produced etc.) and really is an immune system that has gotten so hobbled and very disturbed and anomalous with the initial vaccine priming, to the extent that it is responding incorrectly following the initial exposure. Long-term. With each subsequent exposure to pathogen which you would experience and particularly so given we are vaccinating during an ongoing viral pandemic.
Thomas Francis, Jr. in 1960 initially proposed the concept of the ‘original antigenic sin’ (OAS). Since then, it has been used to explain the initial priming of the immune system response and subsequent responding, using the influenza model. “The first antigenic variant encountered early in life conditions lifelong immunity”. The core issue is that if the epitope (s) (using SARS-CoV-2 model, it is the receptor binding domain (RBD) on the spike glycoprotein where there is binding/interaction between the RBD and the ACE 2 receptor in the host cell’s surface) has even the slightest variance (mutation), then the immune system, based on the initial priming or exposure, is prejudiced in that direction as it relies on ‘learning’ or ‘memory’ of the initial exposure. It does not generate a new primary or secondary response and the impact of this could be a sub-optimal response to the new variant given the immune system fails to make any adjustment. So, the concept implies that whether the initial priming is optimal or sub-optimal, the future response to subsequent exposures will be the same as the initial response, to that pathogen or similar (etched in stone so to speak if I understood it correctly). The prior ‘learning’ biases all subsequent immune responding, good or bad/detrimental, and the concern we have is when it is ‘bad’.
Drs. Vanden Bossche and Montagnier have been vocal against vaccinating during an epidemic/pandemic with heavy infectious pressure from the circulating pathogen (in this case SARS-CoV-2 variants Delta and now Omicron) and the use of a very narrowly focused spike specific sub-optimal antibody response (an immature, sub-optimal, incomplete, immune library spectrum).
A vaccine that does not sterilize the virus (does not prevent infection or transmission or prevent immune escape) and with non-neutralizing antibodies, could possibly drive vaccine-mediated viral immune escape. We just described the COVID vaccines and even the CDC admits the vaccines do not stop transmission etc. and this is why you are asked to wear a face covering even after being vaccinated and it has failed against the variants and this is why you are now being asked to get boosters. The insanity of this surrounds the booster being the same as the second inoculation. Thus, the outcome is destined and preordained. We are presently seeing this now in the UK and Israel and even in the US and other global nations and it is distinctive. “It is clear that the new variants are created by antibody-mediated selection due to the vaccination.” It is the vaccination and sub-optimal incomplete ‘unhinged and deranged’ antibody responses that is driving the emergence of the variants. Is this why so many young healthy athletes are dying?
It is now abundantly clear and these vaccines are showing that the more vaccinated a nation is, the more problems they are having with the vaccine in terms of escalating infections. We are seeing deaths 1-2 and up to 5-7 days post vaccine (85% explained by the vaccine) and we argue there is strong biological plausibility, a strong temporal relationship, and also external consistency that could link the vaccines to the severe outcomes in a portion of vaccinated persons. These vaccines do not adequately protect the upper respiratory tract and the emergent data is clear that the vaccinated can transmit as efficiently as some who are completely unprotected. The fully vaccinated are revealing staggering infection and propensity to transmit.
Do we have clear evidence of the failure of the vaccines on Delta? Do we have evidence that the vaccinated may be transmitting? Yes we do. For example, we have present research findings by Singanayagam et al. (fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts), by Chau et al. (viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases in vaccinated nurses were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with prior strains early 2020), and by Riemersma et al. (no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine “breakthrough” infections and if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others) that reveal the vaccines have very sub-optimal efficacy.
This troubling situation of the vaccinated being highly infectious and transmitting the virus has also clearly emerged in seminal nosocomial outbreak papers by Chau et al. (HCWs in Vietnam), the Finland hospital outbreak (spread among HCWs and patients), and the Israel hospital outbreak (spread among HCWs and patients). These studies also troublingly revealed that the PPE and masking were essentially ineffective within the healthcare setting. All of the HCWs were double vaccinated yet there was extensive spread to themselves and their patients.
Additionally, Nordström et al. (vaccine effectiveness of Pfizer against infection waned progressively from 92% day 15-30 to 47% day 121-180, and from day 211 and onwards no effectiveness), Suthar et al. (a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunization), Yahi et al. (with delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity), Juthani et al. (higher numbers of patients with severe or critical illness in those who received the Pfizer vaccine), Gazit et al. (SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant, and substantially elevated risk of symptomatic COVID and hospitalization), and Acharya et al. (no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with Delta) collectively reveal the poor efficacy and even negative efficacy of the COVID vaccines. Levine-Tiefenbrun et al. reports that the viral load reduction effectiveness declines with time after vaccination, “significantly decreasing at 3 months after vaccination and effectively vanishing after about 6 months.”
So, it is clear that the vaccine has failed on the Delta variant with evidence now of failures on omicron variant. Do we have any? Yes! For example, Wilhelm et al. reported on reduced neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant by vaccine sera and monoclonal antibodies. “in vitro findings using authentic SARS-CoV-2 variants indicate that in contrast to the currently circulating Delta variant, the neutralization efficacy of vaccine-elicited sera against Omicron was severely reduced highlighting T-cell mediated immunity as essential barrier to prevent severe COVID-19.” The CDC itself reported on the details for 43 cases of COVID-19 attributed to the Omicron variant. They found that “34 (79%) occurred in persons who completed the primary series of an FDA-authorized or approved COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before symptom onset or receipt of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result.” In a similar light, Dejnirattisai et al. presented live neutralisation titres against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, and examined it relative to neutralisation against the Victoria, Beta and Delta variants. They reported a significant drop in “neutralisation titres in recipients of both AZD1222 and BNT16b2 primary courses, with evidence of some recipients failing to neutralise at all.” Moreover, Cele et al. reported that Omicron variant “still required the ACE2 receptor to infect but had extensive escape of Pfizer elicited neutralization.”
Immunity from the vaccines seem to last only about 4 to 5 months and thus how could any one think we can achieve population level herd immunity with these vaccines? It is virtually impossible that these vaccines could get us to herd immunity. Zero chance. Yet are we about to accept boosting every 4 to 5 months? And we do not have proper clinical data yet we are moving to boost and this is very concerning. Do we know if the immune system is designed for this? Or how much it can be deranged from this? ADE and AMVE (one can argue one in the same) were not studied by the vaccine developers. This was a catastrophic omission and failure by the vaccine developers and the FDA as the key regulator in enforcing this.
So, the evidence has accumulated (as above) that there is breakthrough and the vaccine is (has) failing (failed) against the Delta and omicron variant. There is no question. Even CDC’s Director Rochelle Walensky admitted that the vaccines are not stopping transmission which is an admission of a failed vaccine. Again, the Marek’s disease in chickens and the vaccination situation explains what we are potentially facing with these leaky vaccines (increased transmission, faster transmission, and more ‘hotter’ variants).
The Marek’s disease/Read et al. (‘leaky’ non-sterilizing, non-neutralizing imperfect vaccines that reduce symptoms but do not stop infection or transmission) in chickens model and the concept of the Original antigenic sin (the initial priming of the immune system or exposure prejudices the immune response life-long to that pathogen/virus or similar, and if the initial priming of the immune system is indeed sub-optimal, then the subsequent response (exposure) may be sub-optimal to that pathogen or similar/related ones) may explain what we are potentially facing now with these imperfect COVID vaccines (which is immune escape, increased viral load, increased transmission, faster transmission, and potentially more ‘hotter’ variants). Read et al. (Marek’s disease) wrote “Could some vaccines drive the evolution of more virulent pathogens? Conventional wisdom is that natural selection will remove highly lethal pathogens if host death greatly reduces transmission. Vaccines that keep hosts alive but still allow transmission could thus allow very virulent strains to circulate in a population.”
Penn State’s Ohm wrote “Leaky vaccines work…without necessarily blocking or slowing viral replication. The result is that infected but vaccinated individuals have extended survival, allowing highly virulent pathogen that would normally reach an evolutionary dead-end in a dead host, that can transmit.” Boots echoed similar and again we suggest that we are possibly facing a Marek 2.0 now with these clearly imperfect COVID vaccines.
The thesis is that the double-vaccinated and triple-vaccinated (likely quadruple vaccinated in Israel and UK) are (would) driving the transmission of the Delta and Omicron variants (and other variants to come) with severe consequences for the vulnerable unvaccinated (and vaccinated). They are functioning potentially as asymptomatic super spreaders. That these COVID vaccines are functioning to severely disturb the immune response (prejudicial priming) and thus allowing for infection and transmission which could permit very virulent and pathogenic strains to circulate within a population. What we are seeing at present cannot really be explained by differences in variants and this breakdown in infections among vaccinated persons. People who are double (and triple) vaccinated are being made to shed virus at alarmingly high levels.
We wish to make the case that we may be able to explain the surging infections (hospitalization and death) in vaccinated persons as well as unvaccinated persons via the concept of the OAS/MAS with a so very compromised immune system responding, that any future exposure to the pathogen post vaccine sets up a vicious cycle or sub-optimal response with heightening infection and severe sequelae. We may well be looking squarely at AMVE/ADE due to the vaccine program. While some may argue that it is a theoretical argument, the data I/we are seeing could well be explained by this. There is no other explanation at this time for what we are seeing in the data post vaccine in UK, Israel, US etc. Globally.
Yes, more data and acute definitive research is needed for this was not studied by the vaccine developers and we are in the dark as to how these vaccines behave medium and long-term as to safety. We are in a black box situation. However, what is shaping up raises many urgent questions and is potentially ominous. We run the risk of killing many with these vaccinees, and particularly our children if what we are seeing is the tip of ADE/AMVE.
So, the core theory is with the initial sub-optimal priming (exposure) with non-sterilizing vaccines that biases the immune system to subsequently respond in a biased sub-optimal manner with repeated exposure), we are making people infected and very sick (and infectious) who would not end up that way had we simply left them alone. Had we not used these imperfect vaccines. The recent Public Health England (PHE) reports weeks 39 to 50 are a key aspect of this thesis and raise serious issues that we cannot discount. Urgent questions as we continue to vaccinate. It is so contentious and problematic that I/we argue, if the aim was to cause tremendous morbidity and mortality in a population, then I would continue vaccinating the population in the very same manner as now and using the same failed vaccine. I would continue locking down the society and closing schools with restrictive policies that have been shown to all have failed (see Brownstone publication)! We would continue vaccinating with vaccines that have been shown to have failed against the variants. I would continue vaccinating disregarding the potency of natural immunity over vaccine immunity.
The model (Box 1) assumes that the initial exposure/priming was to vaccine (systemwide exposure and not local infection) and here is where we position the concept of OAS/MAS. The initial priming was sub-optimal and prejudiced. It was wrong to start with. The vaccine does not hit Delta (or Omicron) and the initial exposure was vaccine when what was needed was a cellular response in the nasopharyngeal (upper respiratory tract) area. We may indeed convince the immune system to respond in a sub-optimal manner at that time and forever e.g. an incorrect response sent to the wrong location and at the wrong time. So, in the future, when there is an actual exposure in the respiratory system (remember, this is a pandemic and virus is circulating so more than likely you will be exposed and virus will land in your respiratory tract/nostrils) and you get a respiratory infection, you respond incorrectly. Your immune system has been biased in the wrong direction. The vaccinated persons actually become more vulnerable to the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen. I write here not as an immunologist or virologist, as my expertise is in evidence-based medicine and epidemiology.
Box 1: Antibody-mediated viral enhancement and Original Antigenic Sin model to explain vaccinated persons globally getting infected and sick
The immune system is biased initially to fight the virus sub-optimally and incorrectly. The vaccine is wrong to begin with as it is comprised of the initial Wuhan strain March/April 2020, and not the prevailing variants (s). When you first become infected with a respiratory pathogen, the cells and tissues of your body tell the immune system where the infection is located. So, if you got viral particles landing in your nostrils (respiratory system), the immune system is told the infection is viral and not bacterial and it is located in the respiratory system (nasal or pharyngeal area). The immune system then would have to chose (switch between) either the Th 1 cytotoxic CD 8 + response (local respiratory site response) or the Th 2 B-cell antibody response (B cells and antibodies systemically/circulation). If it is to the local site of respiratory infection, which is correct if the exposure is to a respiratory pathogen that lands in the nostrils, then it responds with the Th 1 cytotoxic T cell response (natural killer cells) which are potent killer immune cells that seek out cells with viruses and viral proteins on/in them and functions to destroy them. After this, if there remains enough stimulus (virus infected cells), it may instruct the T helper cells to invoke the Th 2 pathway to generate B cells that make antibodies. Antibodies do not fight infections locally (clear out infections), but rather, are located in the blood stream to prevent dissemination.
Let us game this out if the first exposure is to vaccine. If the initial priming/exposure is via vaccine (and not infection in the respiratory tract), then the helper T-cell immune response would be biased (switched) toward a Th 2 B-cell and antibody response and a more limited Th1 CD 8+ cytotoxic T cell response at the localized native site of infection. We may convince the immune system to do this if the first exposure is via vaccine. The immune system is forced to choose between Th 1 and Th 2 differentiation, and that such differentiation is permanent. It is ‘learning’ potentially that anytime you are exposed to the virus (antigen and in this case that spike protein) in the wild (or similar virus), that it should switch to the Th 2 pathway and make less Th 1 cytotoxic immunity because you have taken the vaccine and this is how the immune system initially responded. It was ‘prejudiced’ in that antibody production direction.
The immune system is forced to switch between Th 1 and Th 2 immune responding pathways and if it does respond systemically with antibodies (if your first exposure is vaccine), then when you are indeed infected in the future with the virus as a localized respiratory tract infection, your immune system would be responding wrong (disturbed) and not with the cytotoxic CD 8+ response that is actually (optimally) needed at the local site of infection (respiratory tract). In other words, the signals sent to the immune system says to produce B cells and antibodies and not the needed cytotoxic natural killer cells at the local site of infection to begin clearing out the local site of infection. The immune system technically is not doing anything wrong. It learnt the response. It was ‘primed’ to behave this way.
The result is that the respiratory tissue (lungs) become more infected (as the cytotoxic cells are not there or not enough of it is produced to clear the infection) and sicker and sicker and the infected vaccinated person could be very infected with more and more virus as the CD 8+ cytotoxic response is diminished or maybe non-existent. This could become even worse with more subsequent exposure which is likely to happen when we are vaccinating in the midst of a pandemic with circulating pathogen. The vaccinated person would be then potentially becoming very ill and at the same time, amassing massive viral load and capability of shedding/transmitting virus. So, the infection is building up in the local tissues (the primary site of infection) and not being cleared by the cytotoxic response which has been tamped down. This is our hypothesis and may help explain the data we are seeing out of UK with deaths not only in the vulnerable unvaccinated but in the vaccinated. This is a real problem if this is indeed what is occurring. In other words, it is not the type of variant etc., it is the immune system just reacting wrong when you are actually exposed to the wild type virus given the initial exposure was vaccine.
A systemic presentation (due to the vaccine) must necessarily reduce Th 1 response as it drives Th 2 response, allowing not only increased shedding, but eventually driving a pathogen that would naturally not rapidly disseminate, and certainly not before it was eradicated, into an uncheckable pathogen that would more rapidly and dependably disseminate (the issue of penetrance is of consideration too), further driving progressive Th 2 differentiation, reduced Th 1 response, until eventually the infection would not have any meaningful Th 1 response. The result is the lungs are very sick and destroyed and the upper limit of Th 2 response is reached. Then we would see not only spread to the naive unvaccinated, but increased death in the vaccinated, who would never recover with proper immune response as the immune system ‘learns’ the initial sub-optimal incorrect response (away from CD 8+ cytotoxic responding) and responds in that direction with subsequent exposure/boosting. Boosting will be devastating for it will only drive this deranged (incorrect) immune response and it will build and build and the vaccinated will get sicker and sicker (inflammatory cytokine response etc.) for there is no Th 1 cytotoxic response available. There is no or limited capacity to clear out the local respiratory site of infection and now the virus has spread getting deeper into the lungs and may well get out of the lungs systemically that drives this anomalous responding even more. The immune system effectively learns to respond incorrectly and the result is the tissue in the respiratory tract/lungs getting more and more infected and sicker, and the vaccinated person at risk of severe illness as the vulnerable vaccinated is also at risk of infection and severe outcome. This model argues that even if the nearby unvaccinated has a robust immune system, it could be overwhelmed with virus from the vaccinated person who is shedding and churning out massive infection (as the CD 8+ pathways is stepped down). Both can become very ill and potentially die.