LFC Comments: Our new contributor, Joan River, sent us the following letter, and we thought it was appropriate to share it with our readers. It is quite disturbing when your family doctor of many years lets you down!
*****
Dear Brian,
A friend contacted me and told me that her doctor was pressuring her to submit to the C19 injection even though she had recovered from C19 months ago.
The friend asked to have a test to determine her immune status, but the doctor said that a positive antibody test doesn’t mean that she didn’t need to get the ‘vaccine’.
She said her doctor told her that the data shows that the vaccine protects you from the virus as well as the variants much better than a previous infection because of the neutralizing antibodies that increase with the vaccine that aren’t necessarily there after you get infected.
I couldn’t believe my ears! What this doctor said is the exact opposite of the truth, and his advice to her to submit to the vaccine could put her in grave danger.
Apparently this doctor doesn’t know about antibody dependent enhancement (ADE).
According to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s Vaccine Education Center:
Immune responses to pathogens involve many cells and proteins of the immune system. Early during an infection, these responses are non-specific, meaning that although they are directed at the pathogen, they are not specific to it. This is called innate immunity.
Within a few days, adaptive immunity takes over; this immunity is specific to the invading pathogen. Adaptive immune responses include antibodies. A major goal of antibodies is to bind to the pathogen and prevent it from infecting, or entering, a cell. Antibodies that prevent entry into cells are called neutralizing antibodies.
Many vaccines work by inducing neutralizing antibodies.
However, not all antibody responses are created equal. Sometimes antibodies do not prevent cell entry and, on rare occasions, they may actually increase the ability of a virus to enter cells and cause a worsening of disease through a mechanism called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).
What is ADE?
ADE occurs when the antibodies generated during an immune response recognize and bind to a pathogen, but they are unable to prevent infection. Instead, these antibodies act as a “Trojan horse,” allowing the pathogen to get into cells and exacerbate the immune response.
None of the COVID Vaccine companies claim that their vaccines will prevent infection, and because of this, as noted above, the vaccines actually allow the virus to more readily infect the cell.
So it really is the height of ignorance for a doctor to suggest that a COVID-recovered patient receive a C19 injection. I can excuse the average person for not understanding that C19 injections for COVID-recovered patients puts them at greater risk of infection when exposed to the virus or its variants subsequent to the vaccination, but there is no excuse for a doctor to not understand this. What has this doctor been doing for the last 18months? Apparently he has done no independent investigation into the vaccines and is just plain being lazy.
Here is a link to: Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE) and Vaccines
https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/antibody-dependent-enhancement-and-vaccines
I suggested that her doctor read this recent LETTER TO THE EDITOR in The Journal of INFECTION:
Infection-enhancing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan/D614G strain and Delta variants. A potential risk for mass vaccination?
https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(21)00392-3/fulltext
Highlights
– Infection-enhancing antibodies have been detected in symptomatic Covid-19.
– Antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) is a potential concern for vaccines.
– Enhancing antibodies recognize both the Wuhan strain and delta variants.
– ADE of delta variants is a potential risk for current vaccines.
– Vaccine formulations lacking ADE epitope are suggested.
Because her doctor may not realize how many vaccinated persons are getting sick, I also suggested that her doctor read this article by Sharyl Atkisson titled:
(STUDY) Why so many vaccinated people are getting sick: Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE)
https://sharylattkisson.com/2021/08/study-why-so-many-vaccinated-people-are-getting-sick/
I also told her to inform her doctor of this article in the Journal “Nature” in which the Sars-Cov-2 INFECTION induces a robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03647-4_reference.pdf
I also told her to inform her doctor about the difference between ABSOLUTE (effectiveness) and RELATIVE(efficacy) in relationship to the effectiveness of vaccines, because there is so much confusion about it.
Here is the link to the Lancet paper:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext#%20
…”Vaccine efficacy is generally reported as a relative risk reduction (RRR). It uses the relative risk (RR)—ie, the ratio of attack rates with and without a vaccine—which is expressed as 1–RR. Ranking by reported efficacy gives relative risk reductions of 95% for the Pfizer–BioNTech, 94% for the Moderna–NIH, 91% for the Gamaleya, 67% for the J&J, and 67% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford vaccines.
However, RRR should be seen against the background risk of being infected and becoming ill with COVID-19, which varies between populations and over time. Although the RRR considers only participants who could benefit from the vaccine, the absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack rates with and without a vaccine, considers the whole population.
ARRs tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs: 1·3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford, 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH, 1·2% for the J&J, 0·93% for the Gamaleya, and 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccines.”
So as you might imagine it is much easier to market a vaccine using relative risk reduction than by using the accurate representation of absolute risk reduction.
And lastly, I suggested that she inform her doctor of the disturbing ingredients found in all of the brands of C19 injections.
I have attached the pdf of Dr. Robert O. Young’s findings.
Many other scientists around the world have found similar findings within the vaccine vials.
In light of these findings, we should not rush into continuing the vaccination campaign, but should put a firm stop to it while the actual vaccines vials are examined further by many researchers.
I hope that her doctor reads the information that I provided her with and that he uses it to inform his approach to the vaccines.
Take care,
Joan
Categories: Contributors, Uncategorized