“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” - Ronald Reagan
Nobody wants to say it. Hint at it, yes. Express bewilderment, advance a working hypothesis, all the while referencing academic research that demonstrates that, not only is it possible, it conforms with all known evolutionary evidence; but never actually say it out loud. Science didn't start in January 2020. And here is what science, as previously understood, is telling us.
Start with what we know of ourselves and our adaptability. We learn as we go along; we find out how to do things better, to overcome roadblocks, to work around problems and still get things done. It is one of humanity's most enduring and important characteristics. It has enabled us to settle and thrive in places wholly disparate in nature, such as Finland and Singapore, with average annual temperatures of 5°C and 27°C, respectively.
And we adapt quicker when we are under pressure; think Flight of the Phoenix or Shackleton in Antarctica. Well, a virus is just the same, it's just as smart, and we are providing it with the perfect conditions to force swift adaption and it is not letting us down. We are creating what scientists would call a serial passage experiment, only we are doing it not in a lab but in the human population. We are enabling the virus to gain functionality.
What we are not doing is what we've always done before; limited human intervention. And how it normally works is that the virus does its thing, it has no need to mutate to survive, it becomes milder in order to maintain a steady supply of host organisms (us) and, eventually, our natural and adaptive immunity wins out. This is what happened with the Spanish flu, for example. It lasted around a year and was remarkably homogeneous, with few mutations and none of any consequence. Some mutations, but none that altered the virus sufficiently to vitiate adaptive immunity. And if we wanted to mitigate its effect on the vulnerable, we could have achieved that without disrupting the behavior of the virus
Now, in a hypothetical world, a world where we already had a vaccine prior to the current outbreak, it would have been worth vaccinating (notwithstanding all the potential problems with experimental mRNA vaccines), as we would have stopped the virus in its tracks. We would have been ahead of it and we would have wiped it out before it had the chance to mutate sufficiently to escape immune surveillance; it would still have been the original Wuhan strain.
That is the time for vaccines; before a pandemic, not during it. This is why we have never been done this before. There's one other thing that's never been done before; mandatory lockdowns. And it's these two measures combined that have created a greater threat than the original virus. To understand more fully why this is, we need to take a look at our immune system.
We have two types of immune response: adaptive/acquired immunity and natural/innate immunity. Adaptive immunity is the system that is called upon by vaccines, the one that we have some knowledge of. Usually, an attenuated viral vaccine is introduced, the body recognizes a foreign invader and creates specific antibodies to cope with the viral antigen. These antibodies, once called into being, have a memory and are recalled to action upon any future encounter with the live virus.
The natural immune system is less well known, even by the experts. We do know it exists; for instance, blood type plays a part in natural immunity. O blood groups are known to have antibodies against A type blood. If the virus comes wrapped in an A type membrane, O immune systems will destroy them. This was shown with SARS-CoV, back in the 2000s.
This innate system is, however, much less specific in its response; it recognizes that there is a problem when a disease alters a molecule's appearance and it destroys those cells, without ever knowing exactly what the disease is. It's a very quick response, the first line of defense via what are called natural killer (NK) cells. Then natural antibodies (which exist alongside the NK cells) and adaptive antibodies join the fray.
So, the natural immune system is not antigen specific and it has no memory. It will be called upon when an infection occurs, even if it won't know precisely why. Even so, it can be seen that the body has a sophisticated immune system. In military terms, it would be similar to a quick reaction artillery response that seeks to flatten any part of the enemy it can reach, followed by a targeted ground attack. It can also be deduced that, if the immune system is compromised by age and/or other serious conditions, it may not work as effectively.
In the specific case of Covid, our bodies react in predictable fashion, as described above; a combination of the natural and adaptive immune systems. It is also likely that the viral load, the amount of the virus that has entered our system, plays a part in how sick we get. Nonetheless, the egress of the virus prompts our adaptive system to produce antibodies that target the entire virus, not just a part of it, and our innate system zaps any cell it doesn't like the look of. And, provided we are not already weak or sick with other conditions, we survive and move on with adaptive antibodies resting until they are needed again and the natural system primed and ready for the next invasion.
But that's not what happens when you vaccinate in the midst of a pandemic. And especially not when you do so after imposing mandatory lock-downs, (or 'infection prevention measures', as the scientists would have it) and for the same general reason. Both actions drive immune escape and when they follow on each others' heels, we have the worst possible scenario.
If we think back to adaptability; if we don't lock-down, the original strain runs wild, attenuating (growing milder) as it goes, with no need to significantly mutate (a la Spanish Flu). If we lock down, by contrast, the original Wuhan strain is put under pressure by isolation. It needs to adapt to survive and, because hosts are limited, it has to become more transmissable. Which is exactly what it did.
It's the same threat that exists with antibiotics, which is why we are always enjoined to finish the course whenever we take them. We will inevitably feel better before the infection is entirely gone but, if we stop then, the pathogens that are still alive are effectively selected and then next time, they (the strongest) will proliferate. Gradually the disease will become more robust.
We've probably all heard about the UK, South African and Brazilian strains. The former was a damp squib, inasmuch as it was still dealt with by the vaccines when they arrived. But the other two had significant mutations on the spike protein, an inevitable consequence of selection pressure, as the spike protein is the part that first encounters human cells and is, therefore, a prime mutation location for a virus that wants to survive.
So, by locking down, we've forced what's known as an antigenic shift; we've made the virus mutate quicker than it otherwise would and in more transmissable ways. The result is two variants (and probably many more, as yet undiscovered) that have superseded the original strain and assumed dominance. Enter the vaccines. You can probably see what the problem is.
A vaccinated individual, the recipient of an mRNA vaccine, has produced antibodies that only target the spike protein part of the virus. But because these variants no longer sufficiently resemble the Wuhan strain on that very same spike protein, an encounter with the live virus will stimulate what is quaintly termed a sub-optimal response in a vaccinated individual. Or, in layman's terms, you'll get the virus despite your vaccination.
If the vaccine targeted the entire virus, as a naturally adaptive immune system does, things would be different. The virus, in its entirety, would still look similar enough to be neutralised, but because the vaccines only target 12-13% of the genome, sufficient variation in this one area renders them ineffective. And because viruses are smart, that's exactly where they choose to mutate in order to live on.
That outcome would be disastrous enough; all that hope washed away, all those vaccinated people potentially as vulnerable as the rest of us. But it's not that simple; the worst case scenario isn't that the vaccines won't work any more and we'll have to get top up ones, or different ones next year – which is exactly what we are being told. It's a lot worse than that. The more we vaccinate, the more we force that antigenic shift, and the more dynamic we make it.
The vaccines are continuing the work started by lock-downs. The vaccines are targeted at the Wuhan strain – in order to survive, the virus will mutate further and further away from the original strain. The more we chase it with increased vaccinations, the more it will adapt. And the more we 'breed' highly infectious variants, the more chance there is of everyone becoming infected in the end. That's when innate immunity becomes much more important. Herd immunity is largely due to innate immunity. This, unfortunately, is where another problem rears its head.
Adaptive antibodies will still be liable to be deployed if a vaccinated person encounters the live virus; they won't do their job, but they'll still stick to the spike protein. (This is not pie in the sky theory – common cold antibodies do not cross neutralize Covid, but they do bind to the spike protein.) And because they are antigen specific and comprise the adaptive immune response, when they stick to the spike protein they will impede the natural immune response. Antigen specific antibodies outcompete non specific antibodies. And, not only that, adaptive immune response antibodies have memories; they will always be recalled to duty.
In a normal flu outbreak, for instance, adaptive immunity is initially overwhelmed, but it then adjusts within the community and the outbreak dies out. There will also have been a reliance on innate immunity. But, if you are forever changing the antigen, because of selection caused by vaccinations, adaptive immunity will never catch up. We are training it to stay ahead. And our natural immunity is quarantined.
The implications of this response are serious. If the adaptive immune system doesn't work, because the vaccine is too specific and the virus has outsmarted it, innate immunity is the only remaining defense. But if non neutralising antibodies are blocking the NK cells and natural antibodies, that defense is kiboshed too and we are left wide open. The vaccine will have compromised both of our immune systems, to no useful effect, permanently.
Now, imagine what mutations this could force. The younger and healthier people in society, the ones with strong immune systems, have largely been spared serious consequences with Covid. Indeed, large numbers of them have been shown to have antibodies without realizing that they ever had the disease. Both their natural and adaptive immune systems have protected them. But if we vaccinate them? The virus may not have to mutate at all, because if their adaptive system is hijacked by the vaccine (which doesn't recognize the variant) and their innate system is blocked, they are suddenly vulnerable when they weren't before.
This logically leads to the conclusion that those people who are still relying on adaptive and natural immunity will have a better chance than those who are vaccinated. Their immunity is two fold and targeted at the entire virus and, if they have a fully functioning system and are relatively healthy, they run a similar level of risk as they do every year with the seasonal flu. If they are infected and then re-encounter Covid, they will not be infected again. Their NK cells and specific antibodies will recognize the virus. Even if they are more liable to be infected due to the continuing presence of a virus that would have died out by now, had we just left it alone, they are still in a stronger immune position.
So, if this hypothesis is viable, is there anything that can be done to avert a looming disaster? Given the strategy that our leaders are employing, which we are abetting, not much other than a polite 'No, thank you' when the inevitable offer is made, because there is only that or the possibility of other, more viable (and safer) vaccines. The problem is that these have been attempted and found wanting.
Numerous attempts with SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses have never advanced beyond animal trials, due to dangerous immune response problems which are common to all coronavirus vaccines attempts thusfar. Vaccinated animals, when exposed to the live virus, became seriously ill and/or died. In any event, while live attenuated viruses do normally induce innate and adaptive responses, they won’t in people who have already been vaccinated with mRNA vaccines because, as soon as an antigen that is similar to the one vaccinated against is introduced, those spike protein antibodies will be recalled to the fight, but will not match with the mutant viral strain. Immune escape and mutations will, once again, be the result.
If you had wished to create the most havoc, this is what you would have done:
Lab engineer a virus that is highly transmissable between humans.
Release it across the globe.
Lock-down, apply selection pressure. Only the most transmissable variants survive.
Then use vaccines that only target one part of the virus (the spike protein), but which hinder the natural immune response. Eliminate the original strain and let wild virus mutation do what it always does.
The only part of that scenario that is hypothetical is the first part. Whilst the other parts of the 'plan' do not give the human involvement theory an unarguable legitimacy, they do serve to bolster it; after all, why would you wait for a genuine zoonotic virus to come along, if parts 2-4 are already good to go? And, of course, there is strong separate circumstantial evidence that this virus was man made in Wuhan.
What can we expect to see, then? We can expect the vaccination campaign to be unsuccessful. In fact, we are already seeing it in some parts of Europe where, despite vaccinating for over two months now, cases are spiking. The same is occurring in Chile, where the Brazilian variant is thriving. Due to the seasonal nature of all coronaviruses, we should see a drop in infections during the warmer months, but we will see another 'surge' when the cold returns. Vaccinated people will be testing positive.
The virus may start to affect other groups in society, ones that have so far been largely unaffected. If the immune system of younger people is compromised, they may well start to suffer. Quite why younger, healthy people should be targeted for vaccination is a mystery, if we were to 'follow the science' only. But we're not following the science and never have been.
In retrospect, then, the drive to lock-down and wait for the vaccines was completely wrong from the beginning. By locking down, we helped eliminate the Wuhan strain in favor of other strains that managed to adapt. We sped up the process of mutation, so that by the time the vaccines were initiated, there were already different strains in existence. But the vaccine only targeted the Wuhan strain. Immune escape was inevitable.
I say this from the perspective of a person with no prior specialist knowledge in this field; but that's not the same as saying that the authorities didn't know the consequences of their strategy. If the facts are as I have laid out, we only have the two choices as to causation; they are stupid or they are malign. One or the other. When they do obviously stupid things, like impose curfews or randomly decide what's a non-essential service and what isn't, we tend to think that they actually are stupid. But I don't believe they are; I think they want us to think that.
Look at what they've created and ask yourself; did they go wrong because they lacked knowledge? How could that be so? The evolutionary principles, as laid out above, are well known to the experts in the field; the ones advising the governments. So how is it that virtually all the Western world did the same things, at the same time? Are we to think that every single country has the misfortune to have experts that are totally incompetent and ignorant of evolutionary science 101?
Then look at the likely outcomes. More infections, more variants, more pressure to vaccinate, more support for vaccine passports, which can (and will) lead to more control by the state and less individual autonomy. As more and more people get vaccinated, the worse it will be for those that don't. It will mean that other groups of people may be at risk in the future. It will mean that the vaccinated will still be at risk without even realizing it. And think how devastating it will be to those most in need, the ones these lock-downs and vaccines were supposed to protect.
It means that governments can continue gaslighting the people. The state will get no pushback from people who believe their propaganda and those of us who don't buy it will become increasingly marginalized, with the blessing of the majority who see us as selfish and irresponsible. This may all seem a bit too dystopian for you. But the science makes sense and the events I have described have either already happened or are on a viable continuum from where we are today. And I don't think any of it is an accident. I think we still have Covid because the powers-that-be made it that way, because it suits their purpose. They want to maintain the control they currently enjoy and this is the way to do so.