A study from Stanford University, published in Cell, has found that vaccine mRNA and spike protein persist in lymph nodes for up to two months following the second vaccine dose. This is in contrast to what happens following infection, where spike protein was found only rarely.
In contrast to disrupted germinal centres in lymph nodes during infection, mRNA vaccination stimulates robust germinal centres containing vaccine mRNA and spike antigen up to eight weeks postvaccination in some cases…
The observed extended presence of vaccine mRNA and spike protein in vaccinee lymph node germinal centres for up to two months after vaccination was in contrast to rare foci of viral spike protein in COVID-19 patient lymph nodes… COVID-19 patient lymph nodes showed lower quantities of spike antigen.
The researchers also found the concentration of spike protein in the blood following vaccination was similar to that during infection.
At least some portion of spike antigen generated after administration of BNT162b2 becomes distributed into the blood. We detected spike antigen in 96% of vaccinees in plasma collected one to two days after the prime injection, with antigen levels reaching as high as 174 pg/mL. The range of spike antigen concentrations in the blood of vaccinees at this early time point largely overlaps with the range of spike antigen concentrations reported in plasma in a study of acute infection, although a small number of infected individuals had higher concentrations in the ng/mL range. At later time points after vaccination, the concentrations of spike antigen in blood quickly decrease although spike is still detectable in plasma in 63% of vaccinees one week after the first dose.
The researchers found evidence of ‘original antigenic sin’ from the vaccines, where a person vaccinated and then infected with a variant develops a weaker antibody response to that variant than an unvaccinated person infected with the variant. They describe it as a “strong imprinting effect of prior vaccination”.
We find that prior vaccination with Wuhan-Hu-1-like antigens followed by infection with Alpha or Delta variants gives rise to plasma antibody responses with apparent Wuhan-Hu-1-specific imprinting manifesting as relatively decreased responses to the variant virus epitopes, compared with unvaccinated patients infected with those variant viruses…
The extent to which vaccine boosting or infection with different variants will effectively elicit antibody responses to new epitopes or rather increase responses to the epitopes of antigens encountered previously, as in the ‘original antigenic sin’ phenomenon described for influenza virus infection and vaccination, will be an important topic of ongoing study.
The researchers confirmed the fast decline of antibodies following vaccination, finding a 20-fold drop after nine months.
Our data demonstrate that vaccinee plasma and saliva spike and receptor-binding domain-specific IgG concentrations decrease from their peak values by approximately 20-fold by nine months after primary vaccination but quickly exceed prior peak concentrations in seven to eight days after boosting with a third vaccine dose.
The study also confirms that vaccination doesn’t generate IgA antibodies (found especially in the respiratory and digestive tracts and mounting a first defence against infection) or IgM antibodies (found especially in the blood and lymph fluid), but only IgG antibodies (found in the blood). This has been proposed as a reason that vaccination is so poor at preventing infection and transmission.
Surprisingly, perhaps, the researchers found that vaccination (whether mRNA, adenoviral or inactivated virus) stimulated a broader antibody (IgG) response than infection, leading them to predict that “antibodies derived from infection may provide somewhat decreased protection against virus variants compared with comparable concentrations of antibodies stimulated by vaccination”.
However, the post-infection IgG antibody response improved over several weeks.
Over time, infected patient plasma samples showed improvement in variant receptor-binding domain binding relative to Wuhan-Hu-1 receptor-binding domain, suggesting evolution of the antibody response through at least seven weeks post-onset of symptoms.
In addition, the apparent breadth-benefit of vaccination over infection disappeared when “whole spike antigens” were tested rather than just the receptor-binding domain targeted by the vaccine, suggesting the benefit may be an artefact of the study design not found in a real encounter with the virus.
Notably, the increased breadth of vaccinee IgG compared with COVID-19 patient IgG binding to viral variant antigens was greatest for receptor-binding domain, the main target of neutralising antibodies, and was decreased or not detected when whole spike antigens were tested.
Other limitations mentioned include not looking at “antibodies binding to the spike N-terminal domain” or other antibodies: “Our data do not reflect potentially functional antibodies binding to the spike N-terminal domain, or antibodies that may have other activities in vivo.”
The study also didn’t look at T cell responses, among other things:
Further mechanistic investigations into the differences in antibody breadth elicited by vaccination and infection are needed to define the roles of T cell help, antibody affinity maturation, germinal centre function, and innate immune responses to vaccine components, as well as the cellular and subcellular distribution of vaccine RNA and expressed antigen in lymphoid tissues.
The high concentration in the blood of spike protein following vaccination and its persistence along with vaccine mRNA in lymph nodes for months, in contrast to the situation post-infection where such persistence is rare, will fuel concerns about the safety of these Covid vaccines. It has been argued that the spike protein is itself pathogenic, not inert, and that the free spike proteins generated by the vaccines have greater capacity to bind to more types of cells than the virus particles themselves, and that this may be what lies behind many of the serious adverse events reported to regulatory bodies and identified in case reports. This warrants further investigation.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
There is clearly something going on beyond just ideology. Why is the trans agenda being pushed so hard and who is behind it? Unscrupoulous politicians looking for the next victim group to ‘champion’ and then abandon when they’ve moved on to the next? Depopulation enthusiasts happy to help people to sterilise themselves? Pharma companies, surgeons and
psycho-the-rapistspsychotherapists who stand to make big money off of all the drugs, surgeries and treatments?If someone with expertise in the field notices an increasing number of children bringing up concerns they hitherto had not, and the children doing so are increasingly younger, it suggests the children are being fed ideas and they are not voicing these concerns out of their own awareness.
Are we all being groomed for a time when a 5-year old suggests that he or she is “attracted to an older person” and we should then accept this as normal and encourage it? This whole development is beyond insidious. A child cannot have a sip of wine or one puff of a spliff due to concern for longer term damage (which we rightly deem them too young to comprehend), but pumping them full of hormones and chemicals is just hunky-dory?
One of the things that really bothers me about this is that I do not doubt that there are children, teenagers and adults who are struggling with some type of identity crisis, depression, anxiety issues, however one wishes to term it. It would now appear that most of that will quickly be categorised as some type of gender issue, drugs will be administered, and whatever is truly causing their unhappiness will be ignored. When they remain unhappy after self-identifying or fully transitioning, they are then abandoned, as their use as political victims is over.
A partial explanation, perhaps, is that on the one side activists have an ideology and a well-tested playbook of infiltration and propaganda. I noticed it a few years ago when you would have half a dozen articles in one day in (say) The Independent on gay marriage, homophobic attacks, rainbow flags etc. That’s all gone, because society was successfully conditioned, but now there are half a dozen articles at a time on people going trans, on transphobic attacks, and flags like a Dulux patch-chart.
On the other hand, the rest of the society (probably thinking they’ve outgrown religion), has no ideology and so caves in to the one on offer, failing to notice that they have been groomed over decades to an ever more bizarre belief system in which they can’t even be sure that the ground under their feet is real. As you rightly say, paedophilia seems the new rising star – and that was on the agenda way back when Foucault and the trendy left were advocating it in Paris in the late 1960s.
Look for the origin of the trajectory in the first intellectuals to advocate the abolition of the family. Abolish the most fundamental human ties, and atomised and confused individuals can be manipulated at will (ie, the will of those who stand to gain).
The trans push is being used so that once ‘transness’ is made normal the push to legitimise paedophilia will be ramped up. I am convinced that paedophilia is at the root of our current problems. One way or another too many people have been trapped in paedophiliac webs which is why they so readily go along with the orders of the Davos Deviants.
The grooming gangs issue has never been fully investigated and it is now clear why – too many officials are caught up in this. They dare not let the people know what is really going on.
https://stopworldcontrol.com/wef-pedophilia/
This is a disturbing read. Whether we believe it or not an awful lot of world politicians appear to have been compromised and this article suggests the reasons why and how.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-01-07-oregon-hospital-expansion-gender-mutilation-children-castration.html
And there’s more.
As it’s (see other comment) based on the necessarily religious assertion that humans are a composites of souls and bodies which are inherently different from each other and that there’s some procedure/ deity pairing souls with bodies which doesn’t always work (and they’re doubtlessly secretly convinced that it really never works) what’s going on here is simple: It’s a cult (and a particularly digusting and dangerous one as it glorifies chirugical multilation of teenagers to turn them from biologically functioning mammals into bizarre fantasy creatures).
Sounds to me like they want to make trans compulsory!
How did we let things slide this far?
It’s almost as if there is some sort of Common Purpose infiltrating these organisations one by one.
It bears repeating here that the ideological basis of this nonsense is the Christian body/ soul duality, something people with a Christian background have been strongly conditioned to believe in. But who is the trans-god Stonewalls claims to have created its souls somehow ‘trapped’ in bodies (as opposed to the conscience being a function of the body just like the digestive system)? If they’re preaching in xis name and seek to proselytize, they ought to tell us. Also, their status should be changed from charity to an organization of the Scientology-type, ie, a modern day (pseudo-)science religion.
Some of us Christians are hylemorphic dualists, rather than Cartesians, and that’s a lot more consistent with the biblical view and totally opposed to the “wrong body” idea. Who would want to worship the god who can’t even get his assembly process right?
One of the points I was trying to make is that Stonewall, being modern, certainly rejects the notion of a god and especially, the Christian god. They’re just stealing the concepts and hope nobody notices this (a very common practice for all branches of wokery). But without one, their central theological (for it is one) axiom makes no sense.
A fair observation though this duality of soul separate from body has never been used as some sort of subversive mechanism within Christianity and its teachings – as a Christian my soul being separate from my body gives me great comfort knowing I won’t need my body after it dies (to continue on somewhere). If Christianity – The Religion had some nefarious intent, the orthodoxy would’ve eventually used it for some evil purpose – off the top of my head.. you can commit suicide with no consequences to your soul (which is separate).
Maybe you can, I’m not all-knowing of course but there’s something inherently negative about suicide, conversely challenged by our celebration and respect for life. Of course some might argue Jesus committed suicide on the cross though that is surely misguided. Jesus did not desire to die, it was the Romans and the state of humanity at that time that put him on the cross. Jesus was giving us a reason for hope.
So where there are similarities in this duality of body and soul within Christianity it’s never been used for evil so the similarities are only coincidental – why our leaders within the CofE should know better. Why this more recent push to use it as a mechanism to confuse our young is evil at its very core (at least with no definitive evidence – I’m open to change my opinion but on the face of it it’s highly subjective). That and other more disturbing trends like arguing the case to rid ourselves of the so-called useless eaters is all borne out of pure evil in my opinion.
They’re certainly not coincidental. The w-hucksters have also misappropriated the original sin in various forms, eg, white privilege, male privilege, (completely idiotically) German privilege (some American actually came up with that) and I’m convinced they’re either doing this intentenionally to exploit the already existing acceptance for the concepts in their target audience or because it comes naturally (so to say) to them because of their own Christian background.
I think this makes an important counter-argument here: People can only be trapped in their bodies if these just something like a garment they’re forced to wear. Hence, someone preaching such theories ought to be able to answer the question If people are separate from their bodies, what are they and where do they come from?
Again, fair enough though with those examples and beliefs like that, some might argue they’re not Christian anymore (or perhaps never were). I’m reluctant to get too bogged down in to the orthodoxy and dogma of Christianity, it’s riddled with inconsistencies. The best way to describe my personal beliefs is I am a Christian (because I was brought up that way) and find comforting fables to explain things and live my life.. but I’m not religious.
Christianity and by extension.. Religion is a funny phenomenon, our humanity trying to define the impossible. Sure there are fundamental beliefs that are formulated with no proof or perhaps even make sense, that is its power which can be used for good AND bad – why it’s difficult to argue against your comparison.
On the whole though it’s been a force for good, though if out of context with all other commandments this duality of body and soul suddenly becomes its achilles to argue the case of sex and gender being separate it’s a subversion of its true meaning – a meaning of there being more to life that this simple existence – not.. you’re a woman in a man’s body etc etc. That’s a perversion of our confusion with the unexplainable. A longing for there being something more than just our physical body. (as I said, I’m open to change my opinion, but on the face of it with next to no evidence, there’s no doubt we’re experimenting with children’s lives).
Interesting discussion RW