Comment on Adhikari et al. (2024): their findings invalidate the postulated mechanism and effects of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines and their predominant efficacy measures
Preprint published
Just published a preprint on OSF. Here is the abstract.
A recent paper in Front. Immunol. finds that among the adult patients admitted to Ohio State University hospital with acute respiratory failure and various comorbidities between 05/2020 and 11/2022, in those diagnosed with COVID-19, the mortality rate among the vaccinated was about twice that of those who were not. To account for this unexpected finding, Adhikari and colleagues evaluated antibody (Ab) responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection/vaccines and those to common cold coronaviruses. Some of the results reported seem incomplete or even contradictory. Here, an independent logical analysis of the data provided shows that many of the believed mechanisms of action of the mRNA vaccines are not substantiated and instead give rise to several hypotheses. In particular, the most potent mediators of protection are likely not those commonly described. The conclusions and hypotheses of this analysis are analogous to a recent publication in Science Translational Medicine which revealed that heterotypic immunity from prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, but not COVID-19 vaccination, is associated with lower endemic coronavirus (CoV) incidence. Overall, any survival protection against a wide array of CoVs seems to be facilitated by natural and broad immune responses, even though this is commonly falsely attributed to the injections. The core mechanisms and effects of mRNA vaccines, as widely believed, are contradicted by the published clinical findings by Adhikari et al., and the commonly used measures to evaluate their effectiveness are unwarranted.
Some of the hypotheses derived from the data presented in the Frontiers article are summarized in the figure below.
In sum (for details, please see the preprint):
The article by Adhikari et al. shows much more than the increased mortality among their Vax’d patients compared to the NVax’d. Not only do the COVID-19 mRNA injections present a substantial hazard without offering protection – even in terms of survival. The observations, questions, and hypothesis raised in the preprint could have far-reaching consequences as they may reveal that the most foundational arguments of their believed protective role seem to be seriously flawed.
Obviously, it is impossible to validate and confirm such important conclusions from one study alone. Given the seriousness of the matter, independent and in-depth studies to further analyze the above issues are urgently warranted.
Already PfiBis trial C4591001 demonstrated thzat the "effect" on the RT-PCR starts 12 days after first dose, while ABs occurred only 21 to 28 days after first dose. Hence, already in December 2020 it was clear that ABs do not contribute to what they defined as efficacy.
Later, FDA und Pfizer had to admit that the mechanism of action would be unclear or unknown. LOL as regards Pfizer.
Going deeper, theses modRNA product cannot have any effect of "severe COVID-19", they again only lower the incidence of hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test. But presumably increase the overall SAE rates. Must be, as these products definitely cause deaths!
The explanation is just simple:
The modRNA products interact with the RT-PCR test, either by producing a peptide that interferes with the RT (a bit more likely) or by producing antisense sequences (less likely) that make the primer of actual the PCR-test (on DNA) blind.
For more arguments see here:
English: https://kremer.tentary.com/p/GNV9M3
German: https://kremer.tentary.com/p/My5eA4
Chapter 6.
I will need to read this in depth, since I struggle a bit with immunology. But thank you. I have always been suspicious of the antibodies and their efficacy given what I knew about the mRNA and its translation.
However, I think my conclusion on the vaccines which I stated in Oct 22 and for which I was thrown off Twitter remains essentially correct.
synthetic mRNA
synthetic lipids
synthetic Ab and immunological response
Only the adverse events are real