Vaccines like those for Covid, substantially reducing viral illness but not transmission or infection, “always” select for more lethal variants: researchers
Vaccines like those for Covid, substantially reducing viral illness but not transmission or infection, “always” select for more lethal variants: researchers
It might take years, but deadlier variants must come, claim scientists (Updated 7/18/22)
Vaccines like those for Covid, substantially reducing viral illness but not transmission or infection, “always” select for more lethal variants: researchers
Sylvain Gandon at the University of Edinburgh found that antitoxin vaccines that reduce severe illness and death, but don’t block infection or transmission, “always” lead to selection of more lethal variants.
Current Covid vaccines are antitoxin, generating antibodies and T cell responses against the toxic viral spike protein. Yet they significantly permit infection and transmission of viral variants like Delta and Omicron.
This type of vaccine necessarily leads to selection of more virulent variants that resist the vaccines and kill more people, says Gandon, whose paper measures virulence “as induced host mortality in susceptible (non-immune) hosts.”
Because antitoxin vaccines reduce ill effects of a pathogen such as the Covid virus, at least at first and in some people, they reduce evolutionary selection against virulence when the pathogen mutates to a more lethal form and does not kill its vaccinated host before transmitting to others.
The mutated pathogen can then kill new hosts it infects, especially unvaccinated people or those who have a poor immune response to the vaccine.
Gandon:
[V]accines designed to reduce pathogen growth rate and/or toxicity diminish selection against virulent pathogens.
The subsequent evolution leads to higher levels of intrinsic virulence and hence to more severe disease in unvaccinated individuals.
This evolution can erode any population-wide benefits such that overall mortality rates are unaffected, or even increase, with the level of vaccination coverage.
[A]nti-growth-rate and anti-toxin immunity always select for higher virulence.
In contrast, infection-blocking vaccines induce no such effects, and can even select for lower virulence.
The CDC has acknowledged current Covid vaccines don’t substantially prevent infection or transmission of variants like Omicron.
If the researchers are correct, this could lead to a situation like that seen in Marek’s disease vaccines for chickens, in which a viral variant evolved that rapidly killed unvaccinated flocks.
And more immune escape of the virus from current vaccines might lead to vaccine-enhanced disease, including antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of infection, as a diminishing proportion of binding vaccinal antibodies are capable of neutralizing the virus.
Those behind the Covid bioweapon operation almost certainly planned for this.
This can explain why all four major vaccine makers — Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZenica, and Johnson & Johnson — designed vaccines, allegedly quickly, having the same three major problems:
Single target
The vaccines use only a single antigen target, the spike protein.
This allows easier immune escape from vaccinal antibodies than if multiple targets were used, such as with whole virus vaccines.
Full spike
The vaccines encode the full-length spike protein, without removing potentially dangerous amino acid sequence regions (epitopes) that can cause blood clotting or autoimmunity.
Mass vaccination under rapid viral spread
Policy in Western nations is for coercive administration of leaky Covid spike protein vaccines to everyone (creating high immune pressure) during a pandemic (high infectious pressure), leading to (a) rapid selection of immune escape variants evolving toward greater lethality; and (b) elimination of a significantly large unvaccinated “control” group for comparison to vaccinated people, making adverse events hard or even impossible to attribute to the vaccine.
Gandon:
The question now is how does host immunity (or ‘resistance’) change the optimum virulence relative to that in a completely non-immune (‘susceptible’) host population?
Still assuming a homogeneous host population, we consider four different forms of immunity, with efficacies denoted r1, r2, r3 and r4, which independently affect different stages of the pathogen's life cycle.
The first is anti-infection immunity, which decreases the probability that a host becomes infected.
The second is anti-growth-rate immunity, which directly reduces virulence and concomitantly affects trans- mission rate and host recovery.
The third is transmission-blocking immunity, which only decreases parasite transmission.
The fourth is antitoxin immunity which directly reduces virulence but, contrary to growth-rate immunity, does not affect parasite transmission and host recovery rates.
[V]irulence is measured as induced host mortality in susceptible (non-immune) hosts.
[A]nti-growth-rate and anti-toxin immunity (modelled by r2 and r4) always select for higher virulence.
This is because they reduce the risk of host death and hence selection against more virulent mutants.
Indeed, evolution will restore the virulence observed in a uniform population of resistant hosts, as well as the force of infection, to that observed in a uniform population of susceptible hosts by increasing intrinsic virulence (that is, virulence as measured in susceptible hosts).
Thus a pathogen following a strategy that would generate optimal virulence in a resistant host will induce a higher-than-optimal virulence in a susceptible host.
In contrast, anti-infection (r1) and transmission-blocking (r3) immunity select for lower virulence whenever there is superinfection [infection by two or more variants in a person at the same time], and leave it unchanged otherwise.
Gandon et al. Imperfect vaccines and the evolution of pathogen virulence. Nature 414, 751–756 (2001).
the best result that america could hope for seems impossible. The people who are suffering and not collaborating would get together with their billions of firearms and make the police understand that defending the people who issue their checks will call for them to engage in gunfights in which they're outnumbered 20 to one. When the kevlar covered foreign nationals show up, we'll see how they resist armor piercing rifle shots. Then what will they do? bring in the u.s. army? Most of them are MK Ultra victims. Kids whose parents were arrested for smoking a joint and so to save them from joint smoking parents they were put in foster homes where they were rented out as child prostitutes. They no doubt now see the state as their family. That's when it might get ugly.
It's interesting that they'll need to be careful how quickly they destroy the current dollar. It seems the more we resist, the longer they'll need to keep that dollar worth something. Cause when it's worth nothing if the shooting war has started, it may be difficult for them to accomplish anything with their new electronic money in a country where there's no more cell service, no internet, no telephone, no roads, just rifles.