Wassily Kandinsky Painting with Houses 1909
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) December 21, 2021
“..the “neutralizing immunity” provided by Omicron infection extended to the Delta variant..”
The rapid spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19 worldwide “may have positive implications in terms of decreasing the Covid-19 burden of severe disease,” according to a new study funded by the Gates Foundation and South African, U.S. and U.K. government agencies. Led by researchers in South Africa, where the variant was first identified, it’s the latest study to suggest the pandemic is approaching endemic status, calling into question the benefits of strict mitigation policies beyond high-risk groups. The preprint, not yet peer-reviewed, found that the “neutralizing immunity” provided by Omicron infection extended to the Delta variant, which appears to be more “pathogenic” than Omicron and still comprises a substantial proportion of COVID infections in several countries.
It was based on 15 participants, mostly vaccinated, who were tested at a median of four days after symptom onset and again 14 days later. They showed 14.4-fold increased neutralization of subsequent Omicron infection but also 4.4-fold increased neutralization of Delta infection, as determined by antibody response. Two of the original 15 were later excluded because they did not “detectably neutralize Omicron at either timepoint.” The results suggest Omicron infection “may result in decreased ability of Delta to re-infect those individuals,” the researchers wrote. If the new variant is indeed less severe, “the infection may shift to become less disruptive to individuals and society.”
Beyond South African institutions, the 30-odd researchers in the study are affiliated with Columbia University, the University of Washington and Imperial College London. The enhanced immunity to Delta was “especially” strong for vaccinated participants, tweeted lead author Alex Sigal, who is affiliated with the Africa Health Research Institute, University of KwaZulu-Natal and Germany’s Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology.
Very small study.
While it is now evident that Omicron is rapidly replacing Delta, due to a combination of increased transmissibility and immune escape, it is less clear how the severity of Omicron compares to Delta. In Ontario, we sought to examine hospitalization and death associated with Omicron, as compared to matched cases infected with Delta. We conducted a matched cohort study, considering time to hospitalization or death as the outcome, and analyzed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Cases were matched on age, gender, and onset date, while vaccine doses received and time since vaccination were included as adjustment variables.
We identified 6,314 Omicron cases that met eligibility criteria, of which 6,312 could be matched with at least one Delta case (N=8,875) based on age, gender, and onset date. There were 21 (0.3%) hospitalizations and 0 (0%) deaths among matched Omicron cases, compared to 116 (2.2%) hospitalizations and 7 (0.3%) deaths among matched Delta cases. The adjusted risk of hospitalization or death was 54% lower (HR=0.46, 95%CI: 0.27, 0.77) among Omicron cases compared to Delta cases. While severity may be reduced, the absolute number of hospitalizations and impact on the healthcare system could still be significant due to the increased transmissibility of Omicron.
Who wants vaccine induced T cells if natural infection does the trick better?
The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has multiple Spike (S) protein mutations that contribute to escape from the neutralizing antibody responses, and reducing vaccine protection from infection. The extent to which other components of the adaptive response such as T cells may still target Omicron and contribute to protection from severe outcomes is unknown. We assessed the ability of T cells to react with Omicron spike in participants who were vaccinated with Ad26.CoV2.S or BNT162b2, and in unvaccinated convalescent COVID-19 patients (n = 70). We found that 70-80% of the CD4 and CD8 T cell response to spike was maintained across study groups.
Moreover, the magnitude of Omicron cross-reactive T cells was similar to that of the Beta and Delta variants, despite Omicron harbouring considerably more mutations. Additionally, in Omicron-infected hospitalized patients (n = 19), there were comparable T cell responses to ancestral spike, nucleocapsid and membrane proteins to those found in patients hospitalized in previous waves dominated by the ancestral, Beta or Delta variants (n = 49). These results demonstrate that despite Omicron’s extensive mutations and reduced susceptibility to neutralizing antibodies, the majority of T cell response, induced by vaccination or natural infection, cross-recognises the variant. Well-preserved T cell immunity to Omicron is likely to contribute to protection from severe COVID-19, supporting early clinical observations from South Africa.
Because it’s so mild…
Dr. Anthony Fauci said Wednesday it’s “conceivable” that a fourth dose of a COVID-19 vaccine will be recommended to protect against the Omicron variant — though more research is needed about how well the current boosters prevent severe disease. “Before we start talking about a fourth shot, it would be very important for us to determine the durability of protection, particularly against severe disease for the third-shot booster of an mRNA [vaccine] and the second shot of a [Johnson & Johnson],” Fauci said at a White House COVID-19 task force press briefing. But Fauci said it’s possible that more protection will be necessary against the variant.
“It is conceivable that in the future, we might need an additional shot, but right now, we are hoping that we will get a greater degree of durability of protection from that booster shot,” Fauci said. “So we’re going to take one step at a time, get the data from the third boost and then make decisions based on scientific data.” Fauci warned that Omicron has been better at evading the immunity provided by vaccines, causing breakthrough infections. But he said that “boosters bring back up that degree of protection to a level that is approximately what it was before.” “So boosters are critical in getting our approach to Omicron to be optimal,” he said.
Dutch goverment wants 3rd jab in January, 2 more in 2022, and then no. 6 in 2023. How many people will comply?
Australians may have to receive two or even three Covid jabs each year to maintain defences against the virus if early results on the efficacy of booster shots turn out to be a useful guide. Weekly data published just before Christmas by the UK’s Health Security Agency shows the effectiveness of both the Pfizer and Moderna boosters against symptomatic diseases is lower for the Omicron than the Delta variant across all periods after the injection. The analysis included 147,597 Delta and 68,489 Omicron cases in the UK. The agency stressed the “results should be interpreted with caution due to the low counts and the possible biases related to the populations with highest exposure to Omicron (including travellers and their close contacts) which cannot fully be accounted for”.
The UK data showed both Pfizer and Moderna boosters had 90% effectiveness against symptomatic diseases from the Delta variant up to at least nine weeks. By contrast, efficacy against the Omicron strain was about 30% lower, and appeared to drop away further after nine weeks. Israel has already begun administering a second booster dose to follow the original three-dose treatment, and at least one US medical centre is considering recommending staff have a second booster. Medical experts in Australia said results beyond the 12-week dataset would be needed to get a longer term picture. Jaya Dantas, a professor of international health at Curtin University, said it was still early days for the understanding of the efficacy of the vaccinations but “it appears that there might be a need for regular boosters”. “You might need boosters, say maybe two a year or three a year,” Dantas said, with elderly people more likely to be in line for a triple annual dose.
“..the politics in the USA realizes that this is not going well and they need to shift gears or all be thrown out in the next election.”
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is finally withdrawing the PCR test for COVID for it is seriously flawed and is incapable of distinguishing between the COVID and influenza viruses. I have stated that I was tested 5 times in 2020 and all were negative only to have two doctors, including the head of pulmonary at the hospital, inform me that they believed I had COVID despite the tests because they were “invalid” and that was back then. Social Media was blocking any discussion about that calling it conspiracy theory and misinformation. This agenda to terrorize the public for political gain has been at the heart of the abuse of politics and media intruding into the medical field. Doctors who have gone along with this terror campaign are a disgrace to their field.
The CDC is withdrawing the COVID PCR Test and the media is not making this front page. The withdraw of the COVID PCR test as valid for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2 is critical for all the restrictions and lockdowns. It appears that the collapse in the approval ratings for BIDEN has sent a shock wave through the Democrats as they see their own demise on the horizon. They are now back-peddling in hopes of surviving the 2022 elections. The CDC has stated on its website: “After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only.”
The CDC has finally admitted that the PCR test cannot even differentiate between SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. As I was told personally that the test was invalid, the politics in the USA realizes that this is not going well and they need to shift gears or all be thrown out in the next election.
“..because PCR tests can stay positive for up to 12 weeks..”
The newly updated CDC guidelines don’t require testing at the end of isolation because PCR tests can stay positive for up to 12 weeks, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told “Good Morning America” Wednesday. “So we would have people in isolation for a very long time if we were relying on PCRs,” Walensky said. Walensky also addressed Tuesday’s news from the FDA that, according to early data, rapid antigen tests may be less sensitive when it comes to the omicron variant.
“We do know that the most sensitive test you can do is a PCR test,” Walensky said. “So if you have symptoms and you have a negative antigen test, we do ask you to go and get a PCR to make sure those symptoms are not attributable to COVID.” Walensky said rapid tests do work “quite well,” especially in places where people are being tested regularly, like at schools. “They may not work as well as they have for the delta variant,” Walensky said, but “we still are encouraging their use.”
CDC Director Walensky on the reduction of quarantine: “It really had a lot to do with what we thought people would be able to tolerate.”
This says it all. As much tyranny as the people will tolerate. This ends when we demand they end it—unconditionally.pic.twitter.com/63aodHJMut
— Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 29, 2021
“Over a half million followers gone in a blink of an eye..”
I think maybe Malone got banned because he’s about to go on Joe Rogan. Whose interview with Peter McCullough was the most popular one he did at 40 million listeners.
A social media purge may be accelerating against reporting and commentary perceived at odds with conventional storylines on COVID-19. Twitter permanently suspended mRNA vaccine pioneer-turned-critic Robert Malone’s account Wednesday for “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information” about the novel coronavirus, according to a notice Malone shared with Just the News. [..] Malone’s only previous sanction was a 12-hour suspension for “posting something with a commercial intent (near as I could tell),” Malone said. He has also received complaints about his tweets required by “German law” over the past year. But he suspects his “big sin” was sharing the Canadian Covid Care Alliance’s analysis of Pfizer’s “adverse event reports” from the first six months of its COVID vaccine’s emergency use authorization.
In a Substack essay Wednesday, posted before his account went down, Malone characterized that analysis as showing the “inoculations cause more illness than they prevent” – a claim at odds with mainstream scientific opinion. France-owned newswire service AFP countered the Canadian Covid Care Alliance’s claims several months ago and similar claims earlier this month, arguing the Pfizer data had been misconstrued. It quoted a Pfizer spokesperson who said the causes of the 1,223 fatalities among 158,893 adverse effects had not been verified, and reflect “spontaneous” reports from sources in several countries. An FDA spokesperson said “the vast majority of the deaths reported are not directly attributable to the vaccines.”[..]
The last archive of Malone’s Twitter page Wednesday afternoon doesn’t show him promoting the analysis. But his final tweets linked to a British Medical Journal investigation into “data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial” and a related interview. He also claimed the World Economic Forum had published a “roadmap” for “managing us,” citing WEF’s “Transformation Map” on peace and resilience. “This is the face of global information control and warfare,” he told Just the News, referring to the map. “It’s not just Twitter.” Malone announced his suspension on Substack and encouraged readers to sign up for his newsletter. “Over a half million followers gone in a blink of an eye,” he wrote, referring to his Twitter audience. “That means I must have been on the mark, so to speak.”
Created less than a month ago to share “deeper” essays and research, the newsletter had 35,000 subscribers Wednesday morning, he told Just the News. It “just exploded” after Twitter deplatformed him later in the day. A much larger audience will get to hear from Malone soon. He’s scheduled to go on Joe Rogan’s podcast, by some measures the most popular in America.
The report Malone mentioned.
Watch this video of the Pfizer 6 month data which shows that Pfizer’s COVID-19 inoculations cause more illness than they prevent. Plus, an overview of the Pfizer trial flaws in both design and execution.
Rescheduled for October?! By then, what will he talk about?
Joe Rogan’s sold out Vancouver show, scheduled for April 20, has been canceled after the podcast host said he likely would be unable to enter Canada from the U.S., where he lives, because he is not vaccinated against COVID-19. In a Dec. 24 episode of his podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” Rogan told his guest, comedian Tim Dillon, that Rogan’s springtime show in Vancouver was likely to be canceled because of COVID-19 restrictions in British Columbia. The Canadian territory requires proof of vaccination to gain entry into some indoor businesses and event spaces, including Rogers Arena, where Rogan’s show was set to take place.
“I should probably say this because I haven’t yet. My 4/20 show that’s sold out in Vancouver — I don’t think that’s happening,” Rogan said. “I don’t think I can even get into the country. I’m not vaccinated. I’m not gonna get vaccinated. I have antibodies, it doesn’t make any sense.” Rogan announced in an Instagram post in early September that he had been diagnosed with COVID-19 after running a high fever and said he had been taking a mix of medications, including monoclonal antibody treatments, Z-Pak, the anti-inflammatory drug prednisone and the antiparasitic ivermectin, which the FDA has said is not recommended for treating COVID-19.
“It is outrageous and unfair that a story that is completely accurate and points out an important legal distinction between the two versions of vaccines gets blocked and my account suspended..”
Twitter suspended the account of Just the News founder John Solomon for sharing an article about the legal distinctions between Pfizer’s fully approved and emergency use authorization (EUA) COVID-19 vaccines, which could affect the legality of vaccine mandates. The social media company is also warning users who click the link to the article from individual tweets that it “may be unsafe” and “could lead to real-world harm.” An immunologist who reviewed the article told Just the News he saw nothing wrong with it factually. Solomon’s Dec. 27 tweet shared the link and headline: “Pfizer to continue distributing version of COVID-19 vaccine not fully approved by FDA.”
The report noted that Pfizer and several experts have claimed that the fully approved Comirnaty vaccine has the same ingredients and manufacturing process as the EUA vaccine, known as Pfizer-BioNTech. But it also cited the FDA’s acknowledgment that the two are “legally distinct” owing to more stringent requirements for the Comirnaty vaccine, whose biologics license application (BLA) was approved. In a legal challenge to the U.S. military’s vaccine mandate, a federal judge ruled in November that “FDA licensure does not retroactively apply to [EUA vaccine] vials shipped before BLA approval.” U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor cited DOD guidance that limits mandates to fully approved vaccines, which must be “produced at approved facilities.”
“It is outrageous and unfair that a story that is completely accurate and points out an important legal distinction between the two versions of vaccines gets blocked and my account suspended,” Solomon told Just the News. “The distinction was important enough for a federal judge to note. The story and my post weren’t unsafe,” he said. “The only threat is to the safety of the 1st Amendment afflicted by Twitter’s wrongheaded decision.” [..] According to the notice Solomon received, Twitter “temporarily limited” his account features for 12 hours because the tweet violates its policy on “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information” related to COVID.
What got Solomon banned.
Is Pfizer refusing to make the fully authorized version available, while continuing to sell an EUA product because doing so could open up Pfizer and BioNTech to legal liability issues? Pfizer and an HHS spokesperson talked to The Washington Post in a previous “fact check,” and claimed that there’s no additional legal immunity benefits between the EUA product and Comirnaty. However, these entities have never explained why Pfizer and the federal government would go through the trouble of recognizing two legally distinct products. An EUA fully protects the drugmaker and grants zero legal recourse to the patient. This surefire protection measure was bolstered by the PREP act and other measures implemented to shield COVID companies from liability. Now, here’s where it all gets very nefarious.
Due to a law passed during the Reagan Administration, in order for drug makers to be granted more robust legal liability protection for their vaccines, they must first secure full approval for the children’s version of their shot. Steve Kirsch has explained this at length last month on his Substack. Additionally, Robert Kennedy Jr mentioned it on a recent podcast with Mikhaila Peterson. I looked into these claims extensively, and they appear accurate. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), which was passed into law in 1986, provides a legal liability shield to drug manufacturers if they receive full authorization for all ages. Is Pfizer seeking approval for children so that it can protect itself from lawsuits? The company is working with regulators, even clandestinely altering vaccine ingredients (a process that should require them to get full approval for an entirely separate product), in a seeming bid to clear the path to legal indemnity.
Surely, there’s also a monetary incentive in play, but maybe there’s another reason why Pfizer, Moderna, and others are working relentlessly to authorize their products for children, who face near-zero risk from COVID-19, but continue to showcase alarming side effects from the vaccine. A vaccine on the children’s schedule provides a definitive, government-incentivized liability boost. If Comirnaty becomes available for all ages, that means Pfizer receives an extensive, additional layer of protection. Is Big Pharma using children as legal human shields for their products?
RFK: If a vaccine is introduced under EUA, the maker can’t be sued. When it IS approved, they can be sued. Unless they can get it recommended for children. That’s why 5 year olds are being jabbed.
RFK Jr On Vaccines Liability: "They Know This Is Going To Kill And Injure A Huge Number Of Children, But They Need To Do It For The Liability Protection" pic.twitter.com/CL62aAIv14
— Tim Truth (@TimTruth1) December 29, 2021
There is no federal solution. Ask Joe….
Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo accused the Biden administration of “actively preventing the effective distribution of monoclonal antibody treatments” in the United States, according to a Tuesday letter addressed to Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra.The Biden administration recently paused shipments of COVID-19 antibody treatments manufactured by major drug companies Regeneron and Eli Lilly amid claims that such treatments are not effective against the omicron variant of the coronavirus. The federal government continues to supply Sotrovimab, a monoclonal antibody from the company Glaxosmithkline, which reportedly does work against omicron. Ladapo concluded his letter by referencing comments Biden made Monday that there wasn’t a solution by the federal government to end the nearly two-year-old pandemic.
“There is no federal solution. This gets solved at the state level,” Biden said at the time in response to Arkansas Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson warning the president against letting “federal solutions stand in the way of state solutions.” A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) pushed back against Ladapo’s assertion, telling Fox News Digital in a statement: “The federal government has and will continue to supply Florida with treatments that can help improve patient outcomes, reduce stress on healthcare facilities, and save lives. We have never stopped allocating or shipping COVID-19 therapeutics to Florida. “With regard to monoclonal antibody treatments, the federal government has allocated about 22,000 doses in just the past two weeks (11,050 doses last week and 10,576 doses this week). That’s in addition to the approximately 28,000 doses of product that they have on hand from their previous orders,” the statement continued.
“He claims not to be Nakamoto, but I’m not sure that’s neither here nor there.”
The true identity of Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, who has been one of the financial world’s enduring mysteries, is still unknown. However, Elon Musk says he might have the answer. Musk says hyper-secretive cryptocurrency expert Nick Szabo might be the creator of the world’s most popular cryptocurrency. “You can look at the evolution of ideas before the launch of Bitcoin and see who wrote about those ideas,” Musk told artificial-intelligence researcher Lex Fridman in a podcast on Tuesday. The Tesla CEO also denied the allegations that he could be Satoshi, stating he would not hide it if he were. Musk said while he “obviously” doesn’t know exactly who created Bitcoin, Szabo’s theories seem fundamental to the creation of the world’s leading cryptocurrency.
“It seems as though Nick Szabo is probably, more than anyone else, responsible for the evolution of those ideas,” he said. “He claims not to be Nakamoto, but I’m not sure that’s neither here nor there. But he seems to be the one more responsible for the ideas behind Bitcoin than anyone else. In 2014, a team of researchers studied Nakamoto’s Bitcoin whitepaper alongside the writing of Szabo and 10 other potential creators. “The number of linguistic similarities between Szabo’s writing and the Bitcoin whitepaper is uncanny,” they said, adding that “none of the other possible authors were anywhere near as good of a match.” Before Bitcoin debuted in 2008, Szabo was seen commenting on his blog about his “intent to create a living version of the hypothetical currency.” He had developed a digital money mechanism known as Szabo Bit Gold between 1998 and 2005.
The FBI sealed 20,000 photos seized from Epstein’s residences, as Ghislaine was found guilty. Who’s in those photos? Clinton, Gates, who else?
Summit of irony: The BBC had Alan Dershowitz on to opine on the verdict.
If America’s so free and fair, why is Julian Assange, innocent in natural law, so terrified of being extradited to the USA? And why must journalist Glenn Greenwald live abroad, after heroically helping whistleblower Edward Snowden, now safely ensconced in Russia? American heroes living abroad for fear of the American Security State? Time perhaps to shut up about China? In 2010, Snowden had shared internal NSA documents with Mr. Greenwald, the guardian of American freedoms at the British Guardian newspaper. Facilitated by Greenwald, Snowden divulged that the National Security Agency boasted of having “direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, PalTalk, YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL, and other servers.”
It transpired that, contrary to what you’d been told by officials under oath, “the world’s largest surveillance organization” can and does “obtain targeted communications without having to request them from the service providers and without having to obtain individual court orders.” This is contrary to the Bill of Rights, and the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, in particular, which specifies that “warrants shall issue” only “upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation. Tellingly, the tools of Big Media and Big Government had not apprised you of these facts.
It took Snowden to come forth, in his words, “to reveal the criminality.” In Snowden’s poignant words, “You can’t wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realized that leadership is about being the first to act. … I’m neither traitor nor hero. I’m an American,” he summed-up so simply. “Thank you for your service,” Mr. Snowden. For his part, a decade before he was broken, an insouciant Assange told the New Yorker that “a social movement to expose secrets could bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality — including the US administration.” A naïve Assange had vowed to skewer “lying, corrupt and murderous leadership from Bahrain to Brazil.”
With its many epic “data dumps,” Assange’s WikiLeaks enlightened and educated, providing definitive proof that the mass media are lapdogs, not watchdogs. Democratic lapdogs. The colluding quislings of the major American networks and newspapers had actively worked to elect Mrs. Clinton. Thanks to WikiLeaks, Americans also learned of the contempt with which these Democrats hold them. [..] Well, America has jurisdiction over Assange because it has simply asserted it based on trumped-up charges equating his journalism with espionage. Which is why Assange now fears being “Epsteined.”
Elon and Bernie
This is the best thing you’ll see on the Internet before 2021 ends. pic.twitter.com/n6WUj8JHt5
— Bhavik Lathia (@bhaviklathia) December 28, 2021
OSCAR WILDE / JULIAN ASSANGE
History repeats itself
— Artists for Assange (@artAssange) February 17, 2021
Support the Automatic Earth in virustime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.