Lockstep political decision to roll out leaky “vaccines” occurred around the world immediately following the Omicronannouncement.
Circumstances with a new, heavily mutated variant, vastly different population immunity and knowledge about “genetic vaccine” effectiveness, nothing like those 12 months ago when first generation COVID injections were rolled out globally.
Omicron may be more infective, is likely no more dangerous — but may be more likely to evade injection-induced immunity.
There is no conclusive evidence that Omicron originated in Africa — which happens to have the lowest injection rate and case rate of COVID-19.
Mass injection of first gen injections, followed by re-worked Omicron-specific jabs, could cause disastrous consequences, including accelerating development of further variants and antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of disease.
We consider some of the possible political and economic drivers behind the new unscientifically backed policy to up the ante on injections.
No sooner had the Omicron hysteria hit the headlines, politicians, aided by a compliant global lockstep media, started telling the world’s population to prepare to roll up their sleeves.
What’s more, three scapegoats have been identified: the unvaccinated, HIV patients and the least vaccinated continent on the planet: Africa.
One of many similar calls was made in the influential Scientific American magazine by Southampton University public health and vaccine hesitancy researcher, Michael Head Ph.D., not unsurprisingly a Gates Foundation funding recipient. For many in the industrialized world, there is a sense of déjà vu from this time last year — but with a twist.
Last year the population had been primed to expect almost impossibly high levels of protection from infection based on the results of phase 3 clinical trials. Only recently have these trials been brought into question.
Last year, the majority had also bought the line that these new generation “genetic vaccines” would stop transmission and yield herd immunity. The head of the Oxford Vaccine Group, Prof. Andrew Pollard, subsequently told the world that possibility is now “mythical.”
Knowing what they knew then, people flocked to the vaccination centers as the promise being offered was a return to normal life. Only time would tell how misplaced that view was. This time around things are very different.
The indisputable reality is that the COVID-19 injections are “leaky.” The spike-targeting neutralizing IgG antibodies they so readily elicit just don’t neutralize (block) very well so they can’t stop infection or subsequent transmission.
Table 1. SARS-CoV-2 “Variants of concern”
Main data sources: WHO and GISAID. *Note that the WHO has not claimed either Botswana or South Africa as countries of first documentation — see discussion below. † Based on media reports by Dr. Anthony Fauci
The limited information available from the small numbers of cases that have been reported so far is that disease severity (i.e., deadliness) is not significantly greater than with delta.
It’s too early to say if Omicron will out-compete delta as this depends on many factors, such as the ability or otherwise of Omicron to evade innate and/or adaptive immunity in populations with different immune backgrounds (generated by COVID injections and naturally-acquired infection), and latency prior to high viral loads being generated.
Early reports, such as those by South African, Dr. Angelique Coetzee, who first spotted the new symptoms of Omicron-mediated COVID-19 were that the severity of disease wasn’t worse than delta. It’s likely though that the pattern of symptoms will be different.
Younger people may also be more vulnerable, especially if their trained innate immunity is damaged by injections. This view is of course not wholly in line with that of the WHO that stated the following on Nov. 28:
“There is currently no information to suggest that symptoms associated with Omicron are different from those from other variants. Initial reported infections were among university students—younger individuals who tend to have more mild disease — but understanding the level of severity of the Omicron variant will take days to several weeks.”
Many independent experts have opined that transmission might be higher based on the configuration of the mutations and if that’s the case and latency isn’t extended significantly over delta — Omicron may readily replace delta as the dominant variant in most countries.
While it will likely be days or weeks before Omicron’s potential virulence and transmissibility can be better appreciated, the configuration of mutations — highly conserved within the spike protein itself — tells us that there’s a high likelihood that existing injections will be even less effective than on delta.
This view is confirmed by none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci, as well as others, such as Dr. Samiran Panda who heads the Epidemiology and Communicable Diseases Division of the Indian Council of Medical Research.
The pace at which the new variant has been used by politicians to push first-generation injections on the public, along with everything else we know about the host-pathogen-injection interaction, is breathtaking given the uncertainties involved with this policy.
They know, for example, these injections were designed to elicit antibodies that are highly specific to the original Wuhan strain’s spike protein and they also know the configuration differs substantially to that of the Omicron variant.
While the public is being told they should boost their immune system with the existing injections, they’re not being told that there could be grave costs to this, like damaging innate immunity, inducing more severe reactions to disease, enhancing transmission or exposing countless people to unnecessary, potentially debilitating or life-threatening adverse reactions.
Pfizer has already announced it’s working on making new injections built specifically for Omicron and these might be 100 days away. The immediate decision to foist the old injections on the public to “boost” immunity with what are probably even more weakly neutralizing antibodies at best is clearly based on political or economic, not medical, expedience.
Source: Our World in Data
What we also know is just after South Africa announced it didn’t want to accept more COVID injections from Pfizer or Johnson & Johnson, the Omicron alarm bell was sounded. Coincidence?
The conditions are set for escalating risks of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of disease when injected people are exposed to disease, as well as an ever greater toll of adverse events and deaths mediated by autoimmunity, inflammation, neurological and cardiac issues.
The consequences of a bad outcome for humanity are scarcely worth considering — and it seems that’s why the politicians, ushered along by a vaccine/biotech/pharma industry with an insatiable appetite for maximizing profitability while avoiding any liability for any damages caused — are going with it.
If vaccine passports and digital IDs for everyone on the planet, as precursors to a new digital currency and the merging of man and machine (transhumanism), are elements of the real end-game, it makes even more sense why global leaders are so up for it. Just don’t be fooled that this is about a virus, medicine or science.
It is the reaction of governments, health authorities, politicians and business leaders who seem hell bent on continuing this failing, ever more risky endeavor of installing synthetic instructions into our bodies, the consequences of which will not be well known to the public for some years.
Bear in mind that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration asked a federal judge to make the American public wait until 2076 (yes, 55 years!) before all of the data on Pfizer’s “genetic vaccine” it relied on for approvals are made public.
The great news is the judge has just forced Pfizer to release the documents incrementally — the first lot being something of a revelation in terms of the adverse event profile. More on that next week.
Without our trust, one wonders if “they” are beginning to understand why so many of us around the world are conscientious objectors?
With that said, our content may be reproduced and distributed as long as it has a link to the original source and the author is credited prominently. We don’t mind you using our content as long as you help out by giving us credit with a prominent link. If you feel like giving us a tip for the content, we will not object!
JD Rucker – EIC @jdrucker
***
This article has been archived by Conspiracy Resource for your research. The original version from Based Underground can be found here.
