Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Geert Vanden Bossches Covid predictions

  1. #1 Geert Vanden Bossches Covid predictions 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    8
    I guess you have heard of him.
    Basically as i understand he says it was insanity to mass inject people with a "leaky" vaxx during a pandemic.

    Because we left the virus to mutate so that resistant variants will have an advantage and become dominant.


    He also expects more dangerous variants. As far as i understand he mean non neutralizing antibodies take over when the virus is resistant to neutralizing abs.


    The non neutralizing abs protect against severe disease but eventually there may be variants that overcome this immune pressure.
    Usually dangerous variants can´t spread well but what about now when so many got the shots?


    So he recommends governments implement large antiviral drug campaigns in heavily vaxxed countries.

    I´m actually told some ADHD medication will help. Have seen a possible scientific explanation that they can boost methylation but have no idea since i´m no scientist.


    What do you think of his thoughts? The first parts about the danger of mass vaxxing this way seems obvious to me.
    An interview with Bossche from April.


    https://www.voiceforscienceandsolida...future-and-why


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    8
    "Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein

    The deployment of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 brings the question of mutational escape from antibody prophylaxis to the forefront. Rapid evolutionary evasion of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) poses a number of threats to biomedical interventions aimed at bringing the virus under control, namely the risk of reduced vaccinal efficacy over time as resistant variants continue to emerge (which may or may not be rectifiable with annual vaccine updates), the risk of waning effectiveness of natural immunity as a result of evasion of common nAbs, and the risk of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)."


    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0250780


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    8
    "COVID vaccines can't keep up with new Omicron subvariants

    New subvariants of the Omicron strain of the COVID-19 virus "appear to be even more immune-resistant than the original," Axios reported Wednesday.
    The original Omicron strain was known as BA.1, but that's old hat by now. All the cool kids are getting BA.4, or even BA.5. Unfortunately, while the virus has moved on, vaccine makers are stuck in the past."

    https://news.yahoo.com/covid-vaccine...145138040.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    8
    From Vanden Bossches paper. Why he believe the mass vaxx will result in more dangerous variants for the vaxxed.


    Natural selection of new, O-glycosylated variants, which I have predicted to rapidly emerge (https://www.voiceforscienceandsolida...-c-19-pandemic),would allow to overcome binding of both, potentially infection-inhibiting (i.e., neutralizing) Abs directed at theimmuno dominant receptor-binding domain (RBD) and potentially ‘trans infection’-inhibiting (note 2) (i.e., virulence-mitigating) Abs directed at the conserved antigenic site within the N-terminal domain of S protein (S-NTD). Consequently,O-glycosylation of the S-RBD would overcome population-level immune pressure that results from boosting of vaccine-primed Abs directed at conserved NTD-specific epitopes that cross-protect against severe disease. This is because NTD-associated ‘trans infection’-inhibiting (i.e., virulence mitigating) epitopes will be shielded against their corresponding Abs by the O-glycosites inserted at the predicted O-glycosylation sites of the new variants (New covariants). At the same time, these O-glycosites would also shield RBD-associated infection-inhibiting (i.e., neutralizing) epitopes against their corresponding Abs. Natural selection of the O-glycosylated Newco variants would, therefore, enable SC-2 to effectively counter the growing virus-neutralizing and virulence-mitigating capacity of a highly vaccine-experienced population that is exposed to Omicron, and thereby relieve the pressure on the viral life cycle.
    The more Omicron expands in prevalence and the more frequently vaccinees get re-exposed and fall victim to breakthrough infections, the higher the prevalence of both elevated virulence-mitigating anti-S Abs will become. The higher this prevalence and the higher the anti-S Ab titers, the higher the site occupancy of the predicted O-glycosylation sites will need to be for Newco variants to resist the trans infection-inhibiting immune response of Omicron-infected vaccinees. This is because more densely O-glycosylated variants will more effectively prevent mitigation of viral virulence. Given the population-level immune pressure caused by the exposure of highly vaccinated populations to the highly infectious Omicron, Newco variants will primarily rely on glycosite instead of amino acid mutations in their RBD to gain the required fitness advantage in a landscape of increasing population-level immune pressure on S-NTD.
    This already explains why the upcoming Newco variants are likely to evolve to a super variant that is not only highly infectious but also highly virulent and fully resistant to C-19 vaccines, including those that have been adapted to the spike protein of the circulating variant. This is why the authors of this paper are desperately wrong in thinking that tailoring the vaccines to the polypeptide sequence of S on the dominantly circulating variant would have a beneficial effect on the outcome of the mass vaccination program. On the contrary, usage of so-called ‘updated’ vaccines to continue this program will only aggravate the outcome due to further boosting of anti-NTD Ab titers.
    Conclusion:In the absence of large scale antiviral prophylaxis, the vicious circle of steadily increasing immune pressure causing steadily rising infection rates will ultimately drive highly vaccinated populations to promote the expansion of a super variant that will likely be featured by full resistance to potentially neutralizing epitopes (due to lack of immunogenicity of these epitopes) combined with a high propensity to cause Ab-dependent enhancement of infection (ADEI; facilitated by the infection-enhancing Abs) and a high propensity for causing ADEI-mediated Ab-dependent enhancement of disease (ADED).This is how the evolutionary dynamics of the virus will unfold and how the end station of this misguided mass vaccination program will look.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    8
    Basically if i understand Bossche the problem is the narrow protection from the shot + immune imprinting. So when the virus is resistant infections in the vaxxed lead to a boost of non neutralizing abs. It becomes a vicious circle.

    Those abs prevent severe disease but eventually the virus will likely mutate to variants that will overcome that immune pressure. More dangerous variants. Guess they can spread easier because the distance between vaxxed is shorter.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Masters Degree Double Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    612
    Quote Originally Posted by jb71 View Post
    I guess you have heard of him.
    Most of us have not heard of him since he is a side-show in the science of the pandemic.

    A rebuttal of Vanden Bossche’s arguments is posted below from the U.S. National Institutes of Health website*. This is only one of several I found in a quick search.

    This is very complex virology and immunology, and it would be very easy to cook up fraudulent or misleading claims about vaccinations and their impact on the future of the pandemic. According to numerous sources, Vanden Bossche’s arguments are without evidence or rationale, and grounded in pseudoscience. This is usually not a good sign.

    Vanden Bossche is also a "self‐described vaccine expert", which is almost always a bad sign.


    "Lamarck redux and other false arguments against SARS‐CoV‐2 vaccination"

    * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8982595/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,743
    This poster is spamming identical crap elsewhere: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/...ge/2/#comments
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Political predictions?
    By 15uliane in forum Politics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 8th, 2011, 01:53 AM
  2. Politics: My Wrong Predictions.
    By Vexer in forum Politics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: May 29th, 2009, 04:58 AM
  3. predictions
    By lavender in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: July 4th, 2008, 05:10 PM
  4. Predictions
    By polluxlm in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2006, 11:18 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •