Jonathan Jarry is paid by “McGill University Office for Science and Society”. McGill, a university in Quebec, Canada, is generously sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and received 20 grants in the amount of $13,930,286. That support, obviously, is due to the pure generosity of Bill and Melinda Gates and in no way affects the independence of McGill and the pro-vaccine activities of Jonathan Jarry. Just sayin.
Jonathan’s debunking was, ironically, tagged under “Critical Thinking” and “Pseudoscience”. What is incredible here is how false — not even mistaken — was Jonathan’s entire article and how well Geert’s predictions have played out.
The latest example of this phenomenon comes in the form of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, who recently published an alarming manifesto. In it, Dr. Bossche makes a number of incorrect or exaggerated claims about the use of mass vaccination during a pandemic and urges international health authorities to stop the current crop of COVID-19 vaccines or else risk unleashing “a global catastrophe without equal.” This is scary stuff, but it’s all quite misguided.
Just to remind everyone, what Geert was warning about is that vaccination during the pandemic, which is not “sterilizing”, will lead to the evolution of numerous vaccine evading virus variants.
Jonathan Jarry eagerly explains why Geert’s warning is wrong. He admits the possibility (confirmed by CDC’s Dr. Offitt) but explains it away by saying “we have strong antibodies”. He goes on and on about antibodies, not realizing the irrelevance of this talk. His explanation is completely nonsensical because it does not refute what Geert said. Geert said that “antibody counts” do not matter, if the vaccine is not neutralizing. In this case, Geert explained, the virus mutates, then new variants will appear, and antibodies may turn from an asset into a liability.
Dr. Bossche’s idea that the coronavirus will simply continue moving from person to person and that vaccines will only prevent severe disease is contradicted by the data that is accumulating.
We know how that played out. The virus is — and was — moving from person to person, and vaccines no longer even prevent severe disease. But even more importantly, Jonathan’s explanation was a lie. Breakthrough infections appeared even in the Pfizer trial and were a thing when Jonathan wrote his article — but he chose to ignore them.
Another important counterpoint to Dr. Bossche’s claim is that we can simply reformulate our vaccines to match new variants of concern. … Similarly, if a new SARS-CoV-2 variant emerges and is so different that our current crop of vaccines don’t match it, scientists can simply tweak their vaccines.
This paragraph, as mistaken as it is, is actually at the heart of the problem with “Covid vaccine”. The “science” found it impossible to create a “variant vaccine”. Sars-Cov-2 mutated into not one, but numerous genetically and antigenically distant variants (Delta, Ba.1, Ba.2, Ba.2.12.1, Ba.4, Ba.5, etc), such that there is not even one antigen that could convey immunity to ALL of these distinct variants.
Jonathan Jarry moves on to personal attacks, which I will not address for brevity. Feel free to peruse them.
Famously, Geert predicted that Covid-19 will get more severe over time as the virus evolves to not only bypass but also to take advantage of the vaccinal antibodies.
Has that prediction turned false? If so, both myself and, I am sure, Geert would be very happy, as we want to see our human race prosper and thrive, for all humans, vaccinated or not.
Before we declare his prediction to be true or false, we need to properly understand what “severe disease” is.
Can we call a certain illness, let’s call it “disease X”, severe if only one person per 600 infected dies? (as is the case in Portugal right now on Jun 5)
Many of you would answer that “disease X” is not severe, “milder than the flu”, and is nothing to worry about.
Now let me ask you a question: what if disease X strikes its sufferers four times a year?
This suddenly looks more serious, right?
You would quickly realize that even if there were no cumulative cascading effects from having such a disease 4 times a year, Disease X becomes an illness that can take roughly one out of 150, to the grave, every year.
What if Disease X invades and kills immune T cells with HIV-like peptides? What if each case worsened amyloid clot formation and created cardiovascular problems and caused seemingly unrelated sudden deaths?
And what if Disease X’s immune-suppressive qualities make its repeat sufferers have endless and unusually severe flu bouts? What if destroyed immune systems are more likely to pick up exotic illnesses like monkeypox or whatever?
Chronic Covid, meaning Covid that does not clear at all or recurs very frequently, is a theme familiar to my readers. Chronic Covid, which does not kill its sufferers like the plague did, but instead makes them into walking, contagious superspreaders who decline gradually, is a concern of mine that seems to find more and more confirmation.
Chronic Covid starts with inability to acquire lasting immunity. The subsequent cases come more and more often, as immune systems wear off due to T-cell exhaustion, first initiated by repeat vaccinations.
If this is correct, Chronic Covid may be the “Severe Covid” that Geert was warning us about.
Many signs are that Chronic Covid is a threat to a number of people. What is even worse, Pfizer’s medication Paxlovid, never tested on vaccinated people, seems to turn a 5-day illness into a 15-23 day illness.
Pfizer’s CEO Bourla is also anticipating “constant waves of Covid”, but fortunately for him, it is a business opportunity.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.