What the Medical Authorities Told Us vs What They Actually Knew

Where "Following the Science" Actually Leads us To

Introduction

Recently, a scientific journal article entitled “Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenza viruses, and other respiratory viruses” was published, and the authors included none other than Dr Anthony S. Fauci. This is basically a big review of the science literature on vaccines and immunity, as applied to respiratory viruses.

Upon reading the paper, I was shocked and appalled at the stark contrast between what the paper reveals to have been well known in the open scientific literature prior to the pandemic, and hence presumably well known to the likes of Fauci, compared to what the public health and medical officials have been telling us during it.

Indeed, Fauci et al’s narrative in this new paper is so diametrically opposed to the pandemic stories we were told by him and his cronies, and to the stories still being told and sold to the public, that it is jaw-dropping in the implications.

I was particularly galled that there was not only no hint of an apology for the untruths we were told, but also there is still not any backtracking on the public narratives, even though this is openly opposed in the scientific literature. The bare face lying is so brazen!

There has also been no apology for those who were saying all along the very same things which Fauci et al. are now being very explicit about in their writings. Where are the grovelling apologies for the people who were demonized, cancelled, silenced, ridiculed and vilified by Fauci and his gang, and their counterparts in other countries, for saying the exact same things he is now saying here?

So I spent some time going over the introduction/background section of this Fauci et al. review paper in depth, and made myself a set of notes and questions [I often do this with scientific papers as a way to make sure that I fully understand, and remember, what a paper says]. I am so appalled by this, I’ve decided to release my notes, written for myself, here, in case anyone else finds them useful as a reference.

My over-arching conclusion is that this is a stark case in point and clear illustration of why we need to take our health in to our own hands, and take responsibility for ourselves, including developing our own knowledge about how our brains and bodies work. The moral of this story, I feel, is that it underlines the points I previously made about why I would never take health advice from politicians, including in this case, politicized “scientists” and bureaucrats:

Why I Won't Take Health Advice from Politicians

Notes and Analysis

Fauci et al. start off by denigrating flu vaccines. This is a first warning sign that all is not well in the public health and medical advice messaging: what is written here about the flu vaccines is unlike anything I’ve ever personally heard about them from public health, governments or doctors in the UK.

“Until the emergence of COVID-19, influenza had for many decades been the deadliest vaccine-preventable viral respiratory disease, one for which only less than suboptimal vaccines are available. Surprisingly, little has changed with influenza vaccines since 1957 when they were first administered in US national vaccination programs. Over the years, influenza vaccines have never been able to elicit durable protective immunity against seasonal influenza virus strains, even against non-drifted strain.”

It gets worse.

“…their effectiveness against clinically apparent infection is decidedly suboptimal, ranging from 14% to 60% over the past 15 influenza seasons. Furthermore, the duration of vaccine-elicited immunity is measured only in months. Current vaccines require annual re-vaccination with updated formulations that are frequently not precisely matched to circulating virus strains.

While the review article consistently undermines the benefits of vaccines for certain viruses in this way, what is completely missing throughout is any weighing up against the risks side of the equation. especially as relatively small risks could easily outweigh these decidedly sub-optimal benefits.

They are not finished with the flu jab yet.

“As of 2022, after more than 60 years of experience with influenza vaccines, very little improvement in vaccine prevention of infection has been noted. As pointed out decades ago, and still true today, the rates of effectiveness of our best approved influenza vaccines would be inadequate for licensure for most other vaccine-preventable diseases.”

This long history with the flu vaccine is important as it sets the scene, and strongly informs what the likely outcomes of trying to vaccinate against covid will be. Indeed, given this, unsurprisingly:

“… during the COVID-19 pandemic, the rapid development and deployment of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines… as variant SARS-CoV-2 strains have emerged, deficiencies in these vaccines reminiscent of influenza vaccines have become apparent.”

The question is whether they knew how deficient and sub-optimal the covid vaccines were likely to be from the start, i.e. how predictable this was a priori. What this review article by Fauci et al. makes very clear is that these deficiencies were not only likely, they were predictable, and, indeed, virtually inevitable, because:

“the vaccines for these two very different viruses [flu and covid] have common characteristics: they elicit incomplete and short-lived protection against evolving virus variants that escape population immunity…”,

although, as we will see below, the evolving variant and escape populations are not sufficient to explain fully why vaccines for these types of virus keep failing.

Given that these predictable and predicted deficiencies are now very apparent in the covid jabs too, as acknowledged and discussed by Fauci et al. here, why is the US still promoting that everyone, including babies, keep getting multiple injections?

“Considering that vaccine development and licensure is a long and complex process requiring years of preclinical and clinical safety and efficacy data, the limitations of influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines remind us that candidate vaccines for most other respiratory viruses have to date been insufficiently protective for consideration of licensure”

This is some admission! This says that the pre-test probability of a covid vaccine working was precisely zero [no other attempt has ever come close to working], even if it had gone through the proper years long clinical procedures.

“More than 50 years ago, the development of successful vaccines against some of the most important respiratory viruses, including measles, mumps, and rubella, led to the hope that vaccines could soon be developed for all other respiratory viruses.”

So what is the difference?

“However, natural infections with these three vaccine-controlled respiratory viruses, as well as smallpox and varicella zoster virus (VZV), are not representative of infections caused by most respiratory viruses.”

The main ways these viruses differ from RSV, covid, flu and common colds, is that while they also enter through the mucosal compartment of the immune system - the nose, mouth, throat, respiratory track, digestive tract - they replicate relatively slowly, and eventually escape the mucosal compartment into the blood stream. This gives our immune system time to develop a strong response, and a systemic one as the virus gets everywhere. This response then gives long lasting or lifetime immunity.

“In stark contrast, the non-systemic respiratory viruses such as influenza viruses, SARS-CoV-2, and RSV tend to have significantly shorter incubation periods and rapid courses of viral replication. They replicate predominantly in local mucosal tissue [in the mucosal compartment], without causing viremia [not getting into the bloodstream], and [hence] do not significantly encounter the systemic immune system or the full force of adaptive immune responses, which take at least 5–7 days to mature, usually well after the peak of viral replication and onward transmission to others".

This is precisely why many immunologists and vaccinologists said from the outset that the covid vaccines delivery system obviously wouldn't and couldn’t work: injection into the deltoid squirts the contents into the body proper, where the virus isn't, compartmentalized away from the mucosa where the virus is (replicating), i.e. in the wrong place. These knowledgeable people were called names and were censored, especially by Fauci and his gang. The above also explains why there was never any possibility the covid vaccines would stop transmission.

“[So]… the non-systemically replicating respiratory viruses, apparently including SARS-CoV-2, tend to repeatedly re-infect people over their lifetimes without ever eliciting complete and durable protection”,

even with vaccination.

Fauci et al go on to explain that rapid evolution of new variants cannot fully explain vaccine and immune response failures for these viruses.

“Although rapid evolution of antigenically variable mucosal viruses like influenza A viruses and SARS-CoV-2 complicate next-generation vaccine design, other mucosal-only respiratory viruses, such as RSV, have shown much less [evolution]; however, it still causes repeated infections over a lifetime without the development of long-term protective immunity. Thus, although genetic and antigenic variability of viruses like influenza and SARS-CoV-2 make vaccine design more challenging, these factors by themselves cannot fully explain the lack of elicitation of long-term protective immunity against other respiratory mucosal viruses like the more phenotypically stable RSV.”

Also, recall an earlier sentence, in this context:

“… over the years, influenza vaccines have never been able to elicit durable protective immunity against seasonal influenza virus strains, even against non-drifted strain.”

Their summary, however, is the real kick in the teeth:

“Taking all of these factors into account, it is not surprising that none of the predominantly mucosal respiratory viruses have ever been effectively controlled by vaccines.”

On the contrary, I think many people will find this very surprising indeed, especially those who bought into Fauci's public health narrative, or Chris Whitty’s in the UK, because all the above vaccine and immunity science which was “settled”, and known by the medical authorities, well before covid. What this science tells us is the polar opposite of everything we were told, which guaranteed that the vaccines could not and would not work in the way they were sold to us.

Finally, this is their most damning sentence:

“… this observation raises a question of fundamental importance: if natural mucosal respiratory virus infections do not elicit complete and long-term protective immunity against reinfection, how can we expect vaccines, especially systemically administered non-replicating vaccines, to do so?"

Quite. There was never any chance they would work for this.

I don’t know about you, but my trust in public health and medical authorities was really rock bottom before the pandemic. However, now I will not only never trust anything they say again ever again, but I will also err on the side caution: that is it safer to assume anything they say is the opposite to the truth from the outset.