I’ve made a number of posts by now, where I outlined what I consider to be the main problems that led to the vaccines exacerbating the SARS-COV-2 pandemic. What I consider my best post on this subject so far, can be found here. As far as I am concerned, the biggest problem with the vaccines we deployed is that they trigger mainly an IgG antibody response, whereas the natural pattern for our body is to deploy an IgM antibody response against rapidly mutating respiratory viruses.
The higher affinity of the IgG antibodies deployed against this virus then prohibit affinity maturation of our IgM antibodies. To put it in simpler terms: You have big antibodies (IgM pentamer/hexamer) and you have small antibodies (IgG monomer). The big antibodies have a bunch of parts that bind to a virus particle, but to improve the binding quality, these antibodies first need to get to do their actual job. You start causing problems, when you induce an antibody response with the small antibodies, that lead to many of these small antibodies tightly binding all over the virus and prohibiting the big antibodies from binding there, to gradually improve their own binding quality. If the big guys lose the race to bind at the start, they miss out on the opportunity to get better as time goes on.
This particular problem, is a problem I would mainly expect to see among those people who had never really been exposed to this virus before they were vaccinated. There are other problems with this vaccine, that seem more independent from moment of exposure. As an example, the antibody dependent enhancement of infection problem seems more independent of previous exposure: We know the antibody repertoire looks similar regardless of preceding infection history, with binding on locations like the N-Terminal Domain, where a conformational change is induced that serves to enhance infection.
What I wish to explain today however, is how the population got stuck with this IgG dominated antibody response. The reason for that is relatively simple. There is a difference between the big IgM antibodies and the small IgG antibodies. The IgM antibodies generally can’t enter into your tissues. These antibodies exist in your blood and they show up in your lungs and other mucous membranes, but they’re not supposed to show up in the rest of your organs.
This is useful for a number of reasons. As an example, their inability to pass the placental barrier ensures that when a pregnant women gets infected by a respiratory virus, the baby doesn’t have to end up exposed to a bunch of antibodies that can bind to its tissues and cause harm: The IgM antibodies get rid of any viral particles showing up in blood, so the woman and the baby are protected. If you were to have an IgG dominated antibody response against such a virus, these antibodies would pass the placental barrier and show up in the baby, who may very well suffer a degree of harm from these antibodies.
With these vaccines, we expose your immune system to the Spike protein in a position where you would normally not expect the Spike protein to show up: In the Deltoid muscle. To get rid of this alien protein there requires penetrating deep into the muscle, where the IgM antibodies normally don’t reach. And so in the race to bind to this Spike protein, the IgG antibodies have a strong advantage.
This is especially true for the Adenovirus vaccines, which are good at infecting the muscle cells. The mRNA vaccine lipid particles seem to go more for endothelial cells than the Adenovirus vaccines. What we see as a result is that the Adenovirus vaccines are even worse at inducing an IgM response than the mRNA vaccines.
A natural mild infection tends to focus on antibodies against the Fusion peptide, which is a great strategy. The vaccines on the other hand have a broader response, against the NT domain and the CT domain, but with a uniform escape pattern (meaning it’s very easy and useful for the virus to evolve around this response by changing these regions). With sufficient shots, you also start to see a response all over the receptor-binding domain.
That’s great right, those antibodies will stop binding to the ACE2 receptor? Well there’s the thing: Of course that would stop binding to the ACE2 receptor, so the original variant of the virus that spread everywhere and the vaccines are based on evolved in a way that makes it costly for your body to deploy antibodies against the Receptor Binding domain: That whole region is full of sequences found in your own human body, so a broad and strong antibody response against that region would risk all sorts of autoimmunity problems.
Why do these vaccines have such high rates of adverse effects, which get worse with further shots? One reason is because we’re trying to induce an immune response against a version of the virus that was somehow very good at resembling our own protein structures. Natural immunity, when it bothers to target the Receptor Binding Domain, focuses on those parts of it that for whatever reason happen not to look like endogenous proteins in the particular person who is developing this natural immune response. This differs from person to person and so it’s much harder for the virus to escape those responses.
As time went on, the changing antibody repertoire of the human population encouraged SARS-COV-2 to evolve in a way that increased ACE2 affinity, while reducing its resemblance to our own proteins. This is good for us, it means our IgM antibodies can pick out more parts of the RBD to develop immunity against, but this of course only happens if you’re not stuck with a high affinity IgG dominated antibody response that binds to places where IgM would like to bind.
We’re now stuck with the tragic situation, where entire populations are stuck with IgG dominated antibody responses, that are often autoreactive (everyone shows signs of cardiac damage upon vaccination) and most importantly: ARE RECALLED EVERYTIME YOU’RE EXPOSED TO THIS VIRUS AGAIN!
Have a look at an example of the problem we’re dealing with: People who get infected by this virus, develop antibodies that are cross-reactive with brainstem antigens. However, because you have a blood-brain barrier, the IgM antibodies never reach those brainstem antigens, whereas the IgG antibodies against those regions do reach the brain stem. As a result, we see that the IgG antibodies are associated with damage to the brain stem resulting in breathing problems, whereas the IgM antibodies are not.
It’s worth asking yourself this: We have a bunch of young women now who have been exposed to three shots of these vaccines, stuck with an IgG dominated antibody response that is cross-reactive with a bunch of human antigens. These antibodies can pass through the placenta, which the IgM antibodies your body would normally deploy can’t do. What will happen to their children? My expectation is that these women will give birth to children with autism and other disorders associated with brain inflammation at a higher rate than before, among other problems.
The strangest thing is that with constant repeat vaccination, we’re now reaching the point where the IgG antibodies in the vaccinated are switching from IgG3 to IgG4, which is normally the least common IgG antibody in human serum. These are anti-inflammatory antibodies that don’t activate complement and are generally associated with immune tolerance.
In other words, the IgG dominated immune response of highly vaccinated people is starting to show signs of simply tolerating the virus, instead of performing the important role that IgG antibodies normally do of ringing the alarm bells for the rest of the immune system.
I have to ask: What do people think is going to happen, when we have a bunch of people whose immune systems learned to tolerate the Spike protein? I expect it would go a long way towards explaining this:
Along with the mysterious pattern of Paxlovid rebounds in the constantly boosted.
I just can’t emphasize this enough: These midwits fooled the human immune system into deploying the wrong tool for the job, by inducing a first exposure to the Spike protein in a place where the IgM antibodies can’t reach. When you study nature very closely, you’re supposed to develop great respect for its minute details. When you fail to have such respect, then you start causing trouble.
What about the drop off in births in heavily vaxed countries like Oz?
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/how-are-australias-covid-authorities-going-to-explain-away-a-63-drop-in-births/
“How, then, are Australia’s all-knowing “authorities” going to explain away the scarcely believable drop in Australia’s birth rate that has just been revealed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics? From October to November in 2021, there was a 21 per cent decrease in births (when compared with the average over a 10-year period), and from November to December there was a 63 per cent decrease. December was about nine months after the roll-out of the COVID vaccines. ”
hmmm. Something tells me it’s much worse than just possible autism and other issues.
I think we have an explanation for that drop in births: The vaccines induce a transient decrease in male fertility. The drop in births reversed in recent months in most places as far as I’m aware.
First off, great article, very interesting and clearly explained, thank you.
Second: are you aware of the syncetin-1/spike protein antibody cross reactivity claims/confirming studies, and the consequences for placenta formation (or lack thereof)? So much dodgy data hiding going on but many sources reporting misscarraiges through the roof
>Second: are you aware of the syncetin-1/spike protein antibody cross reactivity claims/confirming studies, and the consequences for placenta formation (or lack thereof)?
Heard of the potential risk, but the potential risks with this insane experiment are numerous, so I haven’t looked into how viable the risk is.
Good article, as always.
Do you know if there are any other established vaccines that also rely on an IgG-dominant immune response?
It’s not per definition a problem to have an IgG-dominant immune response, for example for tetanus it makes perfect sense. It’s specifically a problem here as we’re looking at a rapidly mutating respiratory pathogen with close resemblance to our own proteome.
I think you could expect similar problem with influenza vaccines, if you were to administer them to people who never had exposure to the virus before a flu shot. The immune response to influenza is normally also IgM-dominant.
Good article, as always.
Do you know if there are any other established vaccines that also rely on an IgG-dominant immune response?
yes, nice summary. This point (IgG vs IgM) is what Geert V.B. has been discussing since the beginning of the vax campaign, but you present in more layman friendly terms. thank you
Great stuff, as always.
My daughter had a natural infection first. She then was forced to take the jab to go to college. We got her the J&J adenovirus (just 1 shot). I concluded at the time that it was the least effective vaccine so I figured it would screw up her immune system the least. From what I gather in your post, the issue of IgG versus IgM should hopefully be mitigated by the fact that she fought off a natural infection prior to getting the vaccine.
Obviously, the best thing is to never take the shot. The next best thing is to develop natural immunity before taking the shot. My question is, if you develop natural immunity first, which shot is likely to be least damaging afterward – the adenovirus shot or the mRNA shot?
You’re effectively asking me to give you some vague reassurance, after doing something you regret.
>She then was forced to take the jab to go to college. We got her the J&J adenovirus (just 1 shot). I concluded at the time that it was the least effective vaccine so I figured it would screw up her immune system the least.
If your daughter wants to learn how to play beer-pong you can teach her.
If she wants to fuck rando’s she can install Bumble on her phone.
If she actually wants to learn something she can use the Internet.
You already know this, you send her off to college so she can get a certificate that signals she’s a good obedient conscientious prole.
And that’s where the problem lies. When you participate in that zero-sum obedience signaling game, they will simply keep making the game more complex. You’ll have to prove you have the right extracurricular activities, you have to get through three or four Halloween parties without being accused of racism and now you have to prove that you trust a bunch of dorks who want to inject you with their gene technology.
She was never “forced” to get the vaccine. She wanted to participate in a test for obedience that promises to reward you with upward social mobility and the test was recently updated so that the first step is now to participate in a medical ritual.
Almost every big tragedy in human history was carried out by a small ideological minority, enabled by a large crowd of people who “go along to get along”. And now I’m supposed to provide you some sort of reassurance that injecting your daughter with a genetically manipulated chimpanzee adenovirus was the right decision so you feel a little better.
But it’s defectors like you, who enabled the ideologues to shove this down our throat. They can’t threaten 30% of the population with jailtime, they tried in Austria and had to back off because they had too many people resist. They can’t force 30% of the people to show a QR code before they’re allowed into the supermarket either.
No, the more defectors we get, who know that what they’re doing is nonsensical (your daughter already got infected) or actively dangerous, but go along with the ideologues anyway, the more endangered those of us who didn’t want to go along became.
You defected. In a sense what you did is worse than what the morons did, who signed up for these shots because they genuinely believed in these shots. You had your daughter sign up for it, knowing that it was bullshit, just to make your own lives easier.
If you defected from me, if you decided to leave me and others to deal for ourselves with the prospect of living out the rest of our lives as second class citizens, why do you now come to me to ask you for some reassurance I can’t possibly give you?
I mean, I don’t like to be a dick, but this isn’t something casual for me to glance over.
It’s not just some personal cost-benefit calculation.
It’s first of all consenting to technocratic transhumanism, a power-grab where a cabal of unelected pencil-lickers and ivory tower academics endow themselves with the right to decide how your body should be permanently altered if you wish to have any basic civil liberties.
And second of all, it’s participation in an unprecedented experiment on the human holobiont, that enables this man-made virus to continue to circulate and maim and kill people of all ages for years to come.
Memorable answers, Radagast! I guess that many of us have developed similar thoughts to tell to our obedient friends and relatives, but they really still pretend it was us who were behaving irresponsibly.
You write:
“What will happen to their children [ viz. the children of women vaccinated during their pregnancy ]? My expectation is that these women will give birth to children with autism and other disorders associated with brain inflammation at a higher rate than before, among other problems.
Please, have look at these studies:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.105544
“The numbers and frequencies of hematopoietic stem progenitor cells (HSPCs) in the umbilical cord blood (UCB) decreased significantly in donors with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and more so with COVID-19 vaccination via the induction of apoptosis … These results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination impair the functionalities and survivability of HSPCs in the UCB.”
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12015-020-10056-z
“Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) expand less effectively and have less functional colony forming capacity when grown with S protein, while peripheral blood monocytes upregulate CD14 expression and show distinct changes in size and granularity (cells in the monocyte size distribution become smaller (decrease in forward scatter) and more granular (increase in side scatter) … This shift in morphology may be indicative of cell death, suggesting that peripheral blood monocytes grown in the presence of S protein may eventually undergo apoptosis or necrosis). That these effects are induced by recombinant S protein alone and not the infectious viral particle suggests that simple exposure to SARS-CoV-2 [ resp. to COVID-19 vaccine ] may impact HSCs/HPCs and immune cells via S protein interactions with the cells, regardless of whether they can be infected.”
And you know what HSCs and HPCs are good for …