"COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been

"data generated in the development & testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralising antibodies)"
"be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)."
"This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials."
"Covid-19: vaccination roll-out correlates with worse mortality trends" @InProportion2
https://t.co/MbAoJDXI2A

More from Robin Monotti MA FRSA⭐

The problem with meta-analysis like this is that it obfuscates the most important issue of treatment, which is timing.


This meta-analysis of controlled trials only looks at hospitalized patients. How long were the patients ill for before being hospitalized? One week? Two? Three? Too late for zinc ionophores (HCQ) (+ZINC? No zinc no point..) to work. Severe illness becomes bacterial in nature.

Was azythromycin administered when the bacterial infections were also too advanced? I have seen Azythromycin work with my very own eyes but that's not to say that if administered too late it may not save the patient. How many patients were given AZT & ventilated? It's all timing.

All the meta-analysis is telling us is if you leave it too late you may have missed the early window for antiviral zinc treatment (Zn+HCQ) & that if you are given AZT when you are ventilated or very severe it may too late for it to save you & corticosteroids may be last resort.

And of course antibiotics need also probiotics, or they may harm the bacterial flora which is part of the immune response. Difficult to tell from a meta-analysis how this problem was managed.
I have now re-examined this document:


It clearly does indicate both the risks of bacterial infection & to prescribe broad spectrum antibiotics as part of treatment:
"Collect blood cultures for bacteria that cause pneumonia and sepsis, ideally before antimicrobial therapy. DO NOT
delay antimicrobial therapy"

"6. Management of severe COVID-19: treatment of co-infections
Give empiric antimicrobials [broad spectrum antibiotics] to treat all likely pathogens causing SARI and sepsis as soon as possible, within 1 hour
of initial assessment for patients with sepsis."

"Empiric antibiotic treatment should be based on the clinical diagnosis (community-acquired
pneumonia, health care-associated pneumonia [if infection was acquired in health care setting] or sepsis), local epidemiology &
susceptibility data, and national treatment guidelines"

"When there is ongoing local circulation of seasonal influenza, empiric therapy with a neuraminidase inhibitor [anti-viral influenza drugs] should
be considered for the treatment for patients with influenza or at risk for severe disease."

More from Category c19

It's all here folks...How the CoVid Con was 37 years in the marking

3/4
https://t.co/WBAnAUO0UU
1/: Avicenna was a Persian scientist, who lived 1000 years ago. He put two lambs in separate cages, which had the same health conditions. But only one lamb could see a wolf that was put in a third cage. The observations were astounding. (h/t @farmer_student) ⬇️a thread⬇️


2/: Both lambs were provided with the same feed. Also, the weight was exactly the same when the experiment started. Several months later, the lamb with sight on the wolf became cranky, restless, weak, and showed a significant weight loss and signs of poor development.

3/: The lamb that was under chronic stress as it was placed in a situation of constant apparent danger died eventually. 🐑🪦 In fact, the wolf did not pose a danger at all, but this was beyond the lamb's perception.

4/: This experiment showed that increased levels of the stress hormone cortisol have a bad impact on the metabolism of mammals. And 1000 years after this experiment, we are facing a similar situation again but with the difference that we are aware of the impact of stress.

5/: Currently, we are overwhelmed with medial and governmental propaganda with respect to a common cold virus (that might hypothetically be more lethal though) that doesn't do harm to the majority of the people. Extreme global measures are taken.
1/: The inventor of the corona PCR-Test @c_drosten is one of the #protagonists of the current crisis. He is known for involving himself in contradictions. In 2014, he gave a legendary #interview to @wiwo (https://t.co/jzTRh5Suhc) that I will address in this ⬇️short thread⬇️.


2/: The interview is significant because @c_drosten made totally sane statements back then that follow the principle of common sense. Considering his involvement in the "genesis of the current pandemic", his assertions appear in an entirely different


3/: In 2014, for instance, washing the hands was sufficient against being infected by coronaviruses. Several years he demands measures that destroy national economies and social life worldwide.


4/: Young @c_drosten also severely criticized the fact that Saudi Arabia used the PCR method to detect potential infections. From his point of view, that specific method could lead to many irrelevant cases. Nowadays, his view shifted his opinion towards 'collective punishment'.


5/: Whereas he demands "testing, testing, testing" nowadays and spreads panic and fear via (social) media, he heavily condemned that behaviour of Saudi media in 2014. On top of that, he expressed his concern that medial panic could increase the number of lab tests significantly.

You May Also Like