American Front Line Doctors (AFLDS.org) presents SUMMIT SESSIONS: The Science, part of a series of presentations delivering accurate scientific facts, the latest medical research, and sensible health policy solutions, featuring Dr. Lee Merritt. August 3, 2021
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
@Adam
Background:
The immune system creates a record of every disease/bacteria/virus/fungi/toxin that a person is exposed to that does not result in his death. So chicken-pox virus creates an immune-memory just like the diphtheria vaccine does. When you are exposed to these things like the chicken-pox virus for example, your immune system compares the organism to its library of prior immune responses and finds the immune-memory that you had developed when you were 10yrs old, and it will be protective. The same is true of anything that your immune-memory will recognize.
When you have an immune system that has no memory of a prior exposure to a given organism such as SARS-Cov2, you have no immunity and you will face the virus as any other person with a naive immunity(no immunity) – you get Covid.
The vaccinated will have no memory of the virus that either escapes its immune-memory or hides in its immune cells, so it will be like they never had any immunity, ie they will respond as if they have a naive immunity – in fact this is what is happening right now in Israel and elsewhere as the vax fails.
Many will say that they vaccine reduces disease in the vaccinated, but this is not true. The vaccine will kill anything that its immune-memory identifies, so there may be some virus variants that are identified by the immune-memory that is triggered by the vaccine, but it does not reduce disease, to be clear. It might reduce the number of viruses infecting cells and triggering inflammation and causing tissue damage, but it does not reduce the disease itself. If it reduces the numbers low enough, ie there are not many of these Delta+ variants(for example), this could increase your chances of having less inflammation and less damaged tissues and reduce the recovery complications/hospital time, but it is a numbers game and no one can really predict the ratio of variants in your infection. In any event, reducing the numbers of infecting viruses doesn’t stop the disease process if the numbers are high enough to trigger an immune response. Remember the virus does not cause the disease, the inflammation causes disease. There is a minimum number of viruses that will result in triggering the inflammation, but it is unknown like so much about this disease. Some have put the number at 100 viruses, which is ridiculously small number, but in truth they really don’t know, at least as of about June 15 when I last pursued the latest research on this point(it is an important topic).
Early Treatment does stop infections from entering cells if given early enough, but if it is not given early enough, it still does stop disease. If, for example, you get Covid on Day 0, and you take IVM cocktail on Day 4, it will stop the disease process on Day 4-5. This is because it addresses the cause of the disease, ie the inflammation. The cocktail has an anti-inflammatory component that specifically addresses the inflammation. Most people are already sick when they are treated for Covid and make, like Litzman and Trump, a remarkable recovery.
If all of this is too much, the quick answer to your question is that you will develop Covid if you have no previous infection and no early treatment.
I am very glad you were able to understand that last explanation. Again, my apologies for making things too complicated.
@ Peloni. Peloni, I understand now most of what you write in your latest post. But there is one thing that I still don’t understand. What if in reference to possibility “B,” you have not been infected with the COVID19 virus. And you also don’t have access to early treatment. Are you then likely to develop a serious or perhaps fatal case of COVID?
@Adam
Diagram
viral outbreaks+vaccine=>increased viral mutations=>possible vaccine escape and/or possible immune system hijacking
**Refer to this diagram above as I discuss the following
We’re at an inflection point, so what happens in the future is dependent upon 2 things:
– Will they continue using untested new vaccines to replace the failed vaccines as is being done with Pfeizer.
– Will they continue to block Early-Treatment
They could change or continue either of these and it is important to guess the answer here to accurately guess the result which your question requires.
Early treatment would treat the emerging threats from the virus. But the vaccine will continue to create variants that are dangerously looking for a way to:
1. Evade the immune system(vaccine-escape)
2. Hijack the immune system(ADE – think of it as the virus variants hijacking the immune system and killing the patient)
#1 is already occuring with the failing vaccines. #2 may occur if the vaccines are not stopped per some experts.
Let’s assume the govts do not relent and restrict all HCQ/IVM treatments.
If they refuse to use the Early-Treatments, no treatment will prevent the virus from making quadrillions of copies and probably millions of new variants. Each new variant provides the possibility of creating both #1 and #2 listed above, and nobody can know what millions of variants could.
If they distribute Early-Treatment/Prophylaxis, it will likely prevent any vaccines working. But it would end the creation of new variants.
If they continue the vaccines, especially with new untested vaccines like the new untested “booster”, who knows what will come of it.
But you asked my opinion to your questions. If I had to guess, A is easy, but B is too difficult to know.
A. Yes, I do, because all the many variants of SARS-Cov2 are all life-threatening and deadly. They have killed and maimed many millions. This is not likely to change if Early Treatment is forbidden and vaccines are continued. Easy answer.
B. There is no evidence yet that the immunity of Covid recovered patients is in threat, but it has been estimated recently that at least 1 mutant per infected individual is being created. If this is true(very bad thing), there have been >200million people infected. >200million variants is a large number of mutations to say anything is not possible, and the vaccines are failing because of this process of mutations.
If the immune system is hijacked by variants(due to the millions of new mutants), we are all likely to face the consequences. The Covid-recovered would have a better chance of their immune system recognizing some part of the new variant and surviving. Vaccinated have no such hope.
This is far from a Yes/No answer, but there is a lot of fortune-telling required to answer these questions. I have written this now about 10 times to simplify it, so if you want to know more of anything I wrote or if you don’t understand it tell me what it is you are confused about and I will readdress it. For example, if you are confused what I mean by immune hijacking(ADE) or are interested in expert opinions(more important than mine), tell me, and I’ll explain it more carefully with some examples. I just don’t want to overwhelm you with too much info/details, which I think I have been doing.
#ADAM
Every studio has an “expert” who can scan over a doctor’s or scientists expected answers to arranged questions, on the shows, and his expertise is to put the intended discussion into language understandable by the listeners.
According to your rundown, you HAVE spotted an inconsidtency, the Vaccine s “dangerous”, but then those vaccinated are less ikely to contract the virus again except in a mutated, less harmful stage. So the vaccine actually DOES have a beneficial over-all effect. I have seen reports that those vaccinated are 13 times less likey to catch it again than those unvaxxed.
So I think we can assume that the vacine being dangerous, means that it IS to some, the evidence of which s always covered by the press, that is, those who have dangerous side effects-even death- shortly after being vaccinated.
Like this previously heathy 14 year old girl, now on a respirator, with serious pneumonia-like lung infection. (Arutz report)
I get this “clarifiaction” from YOUR post not Peloni’s, whether you meant it or not.
@Peloni. Peloni, many thnks for your understanding of my somewhat contentious and demanding tone. I have learned a great deal from you since you began posting on Israpundit about medical and other scientific matters about which I knew nothing at all previously. And I am deeply grateful to you for taking the time and trouble to educate us readers of Israpundit about medicine and science.
I should also mention that several other readers of Israpundit who have responded to your posts, including Michael, understand far more about medicine than I do. And your posts have to be “pitched,” so to speak, to their level of understanding as well as to mine. Having to communicate to people whose levels of comprehension vary so much is a difficult task.
Again many thanks for your patience, Adam.
@Adam
So, I appologize, for my technical language. The truth is that when not using medical terminology which is a very specific language, many things can be suggested that are quite untrue, which is why I try to straddle that line to explain the matter well enough to impart the info, but I see that I have failed. So I truly am regretful of this. I just wrote something to Michael that may add clarity to this confusion, as I found this morning the point I think which is causing the confusion. Do me a favor and read that post and let me know if it helps you…I think/hope it does. And I don’t think it is arrogant for people to express that they are confused. It better informs us all that our communication is flawed so we can address it better…
Here is the link to the post I wrote to Michael – it’s two parts:
Part1
https://www.israpundit.org/landmark-mass-study-finds-vaccinated-people-13-times-more-likely-to-catch-covid-19-than-those-who-have-recovered-and-have-natural-immunity/#comment-63356000240905
Part2
https://www.israpundit.org/landmark-mass-study-finds-vaccinated-people-13-times-more-likely-to-catch-covid-19-than-those-who-have-recovered-and-have-natural-immunity/#comment-63356000240907
I will address your 2 questions in the next post
Peloni, please give me a “yes” or “no” answer to these two questions:
a)Do you think it is likely that vaccinated individuals will be exposed to deadly, life-threatening variants of the COVID-19 vaccine in the foreseeable future?
b)the same question with respect to unvaccinated people.
I realize that this is arrogant of me to ask youfor a yes-or-no answer. Please forgive me. I am unable to understand the medical language in which you write. Even when you think you are simplifying the matter, your posts are far too technical in language for me to make sense of them.
Peloni, In an earlier post you asked me if I understood your explanation of why you think the vaccines are dangerous. I didn’t understand your explanation at all. After saying you thought the vaccinations should be halted, you then said that the vaccinations were causing mutations to the CV2 virus that were making it less and less potent and less and less likely to cause serious illness. This of course is a strong argument for getting vaccinated.
I have noticed the same contradiction in the talks and writings of several other physicians who oppose vaccinations. After first saying or writing that they oppose continuation of the vaccinations, they then say that the vaccinations have caused the cv2 virus to be less and less llikely to cause serious illness, even though it may cause more infections. As with your posts about the vaccines, these are strong arguments in favor of getting vaccinated. I just don’t understand this apparent inconsistency.
I think part of my problem may be a “cultural” obstacle to my understanding what learned physicians are saying or writing. These physicians are used to communicating about medical matters to other physicians and medical scientists. Unfortunately, they use the same kind of technical language when speaking or writing to the general public. These physicians and medical scientists don’t seem to grasp that the “man in the street” or the “woman in ther kitchen” can’t understand a word they are saying.
I strongly suggest everybody watch this more complete version of this very short video. Very revealing of the many real harms people are at risk of facing without being informed of these risks or even being aware of these potential harms. Thank you for sharing this Ted.