Check the elites main idea - leaky vaccine

Rather than stop fowl from spreading the virus, the vaccine allows the disease to spread faster and longer than it normally would, a new study finds. The scientists now believe that this vaccine has helped this chicken virus become uniquely virulent. (Note: it only harms fowl). The study was published on Monday in the journal PLOS Biology.

This is the first time that this virus-boosting phenomenon, known as the imperfect vaccine hypothesis, has been observed experimentally.

The reason this is a problem for Marek’s disease is because the vaccine is “leaky.” A leaky vaccine is one that keeps a microbe from doing serious harm to its host, but doesn’t stop the disease from replicating and spreading to another individual. On the other hand, a “perfect” vaccine is one that sets up lifelong immunity that never wanes and blocks both infection and transmission.

Old article about chickens.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/tthis-chicken-vaccine-makes-virus-dangerous

Such vaccine can actually make things WORSE.

And they KNEW exactly

A 2003 experimental observation of SARS vaccine development presciently advised, "Application of a SARS vaccine is perhaps best limited to a minimal number of targeted individuals who can be monitored, as some vaccinated persons might, if infected by SARS coronavirus, become asymptomatic excretors of virus, thereby posing a risk to non-vaccinated people."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14676007/

Ok kids, this patent (apparently owned ultimately by Pfizer) is fascinating:

https://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=11107588&OS=11107588&RS=11107588

Synposis: Every person will be tracked using a “device” (cell phone?) and “scored” as to their vaccination status. Moreover, as you come within proximity of another person, your device will tell you who is vaccinated and who is not, and a value will be generated that will determine that person’s “superspreader” threat based on where they have been recently.

I could be mistaken (the patent seems complicated and a bit vague), but that’s my understanding.

What do you all derive from this?

An Excerpt from the patent document:

"A method of prophylactically vaccinating a population having a plurality of subjects with a vaccine against an epidemic infectious disease, said plurality of subjects each using a smart electronic device, the method comprising: a. a. using an ID for each said smart electronic device for determining a propensity of proximity of each said plurality of subjects; said determining a propensity of proximity comprises: i. at a proximity event, when a particular said smart electronic device of a particular said subject is in proximity of one or more other of said smart electronic devices, transmitting an ID or an indication thereof to said one or more other smart electronic devices and receiving an ID or indication thereof from said one or more other smart electronic devices, by said particular smart electronic device; said proximity event being an event where said particular said subject could, if infected, potentially infect other subjects with said infectious disease; ii. generating a score reflecting a propensity for proximity, according to a plurality of received IDs; said propensity of proximity reflecting a chance of infecting other subjects if said particular said subject becomes infected; b. generating for each said plurality of subjects a prioritization of vaccination based on said score; said prioritization being higher for subjects having a higher propensity of proximity; and c. prophylactically vaccinating particular subjects of said plurality of subjects according to said prioritization."

Practical Reasons Why Vaccine Injuries Are Rarely Reported

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/10/08/vaccine-injuries-vaers-whistleblower.aspx?ui=0c035d8741921863b274f439b28e3fbee64d86205ae1c2ac0e443e0be6921fca&sd=20210518&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20211008_HL2&mid=DM1013213&rid=1286921875

@firstbase

It is certainly not for tracking or control. :-)

All is much more simple - they need less people to fit shrinking resources and energy.

@firstbase

I can't say I know their true motives for the forced inoculations all over the world with those mRNA shoots, but one thing I'm certain of: they are NOT for our good or health!

@firstbase

Disturbing indeed! Thanks for sharing the info.

So it’s pretty clear that we are in a massive genocide Supported by laws, and new sanctions. In the future they will tell that it was for the grater good, now that everyone is dead, nobody Rises against them.

At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people. Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.

Median, interquartile range and variation in cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days across percentage of population fully vaccinated as of September 2, 2021

ercentage of counties that experienced an increase of cases between two consecutive 7-day time periods by percentage of population fully vaccinated across 2947 counties as of September 2, 2021

The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7

The results of a study carried out in Sweden and Italy showed that the majority of those who had had COVID-19 in the first six months had a slow decrease in the number of antibodies, after which the indicator was stable for up to 15 months.

The authors collected 188 blood tests from 136 patients in whom the disease was accompanied by characteristic symptoms and proceeded in various forms, from mild to severe. Plasma from 108 people with a confirmed negative PCR test was used as a control sample.

The scientists measured the titers of anti-S and anti-RBD antibodies in plasma. The former specifically target the spike protein, or the entire S-protein of the virus, while the latter target the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S-protein, which plays a key role in the binding of the virus to cells. It is known that over time, mutations accumulate in the structure of the S-protein and RBD-domain, which reduce the neutralizing ability of antibodies. The task of the scientists was to determine the time during which the antibodies of plasma cells remain active.

The results showed that at the peak of the immune response in recovering patients, the levels of anti-RBD immunoglobulins IgM and IgA were increased by 77 and 85 percent, respectively, but then dropped to 4.5 and 11 percent over six to fifteen months. Antibodies IgM and IgA to S-protein showed values ​​slightly higher - respectively 88 and 90 percent in the first one to three months and half less after 55-56 days.

The titers of specific IgG antibodies to RBD and S-protein in 94 percent of patients reached a maximum 15-28 days after the onset of symptoms, then, after passing the peak of the antibody response, they gradually decreased by about four times by the end of the sixth month, and then remained stable up to 15 months. The high level of antibodies remained for longer in those who had been ill with COVID-19 in a severe form.

For comparison, the scientists assessed the level of specific IgG antibodies in the plasma of the vaccinated. It turned out that 14-35 days after the introduction of the first dose of the vaccine, the antibody titers were similar to those in those who had recovered six months after infection, and after the second they corresponded to the maximum level of the natural response in recovering patients.

In addition to the main strain SARS-CoV-2, the authors tested the effectiveness of antibodies against beta, gamma and delta variants within 15 months after infection and confirmed that the neutralizing activity of antibodies, albeit to a lesser extent, is preserved for of these variants of the coronavirus.

In addition, the scientists measured the level of T-cell response, the peak of which was noted between the third and sixth months after infection, followed by a significant decrease after 12-15 months. However, the intensity and duration of the response did not depend on the severity of the disease.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.08.463699v1

We studied breakthrough infections among healthcare workers of a major infectious diseases hospital in Vietnam. We collected demographics, vaccination history and results of PCR diagnosis alongside clinical data. We measured SARS-CoV-2 (neutralizing) antibodies at diagnosis, and at week 1, 2 and 3 after diagnosis. We sequenced the viruses using ARTIC protocol.

Viral loads of breakthrough Delta variant infection cases were 251 times higher than those of cases infected with old strains detected between March-April 2020.

Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people. Physical distancing measures remain critical to reduce SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant transmission.

https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=786008073006113118011115105064080026039020070051029034123006104013043043007092113000110010064064002113114073095092082066102121078022007064064105080107070072080004092115016068020115073063066037048013012091068066064107095099109069102006030106116085075105108003075007120066020080119024068005008&EXT=pdf&INDEX=TRUE

To condense - present vaccines had been carefully designed for Delta variant (during Alpha times!) to make vaccinated people ideal mass spreaders and also keep damaging their health as they still become sick.

@firstbase

the injection is designed to make your body produce a foreign pathogen (the spike protein).

I see some ill logic here, as it is openly stated by vaccine creators, also, if you check my older posts - most vaccines produce not original spike protein, but modified version that renders it to be useless for anything rather than small exposed parts that are used to make antibodies.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/15/natural-immunity-vaccine-mandate/

"It’s okay to have an incorrect scientific hypothesis. But when new data proves it wrong, you have to adapt. Unfortunately, many elected leaders and public health officials have held on far too long to the hypothesis that natural immunity offers unreliable protection against covid-19 — a contention that is being rapidly debunked by science."

The RDIF said that an "information attack" was being conducted on the vaccine, and warned journalists against using anonymous sources, like Reuters did making fake publication.

“RDIF asks the media in their materials not to use unreliable anonymous sources and in articles on important topics related to vaccines, rely on the official position of regulators. Information attacks on the Sputnik vaccine based on inaccurate and misleading information received from anonymous sources have become more frequent in the media, ” the Foundation said in a statement.

The RDIF linked this with new research data that showed the advantage of the Sputnik V adenovirus vaccine over mRNA vaccines - these include drugs from Pfizer and Moderna already registered in the EU. “Official studies have shown that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against the delta variant of COVID-19 falls below 50% in just five months. In addition, an October article in The New England Journal of Medicine showed that vaccines based on the human adenovirus vector platform, such as Sputnik Light, show ten times stronger immunity at antibody and T- levels after eight months than mRNA vaccines, ” the Foundation says.