子どもにmRNAワクチンはヤバないですか？

投稿日投稿者しとらす

遅くとも今年2月頃にはmRNAワクチンの欠点を指摘した論文とか既にチラチラ出ていたような・・・？
オミクロン株に対して効果がほとんど無いことと併せて。

◆Innate Immune Suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs
【AUTHOREA：Stephanie Seneff　2022年1月21日】

Abstract

The mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were brought to market in response to the widely perceived public health crises of Covid-19. The utilization of mRNA vaccines in the context of infectious disease had no precedent, but desperate times seemed to call for desperate measures. The mRNA vaccines utilize genetically modified mRNA encoding spike proteins. These alterations hide the mRNA from cellular defenses, promote a longer biological half-life for the proteins, and provoke higher overall spike protein production. However, both experimental and observational evidence reveals a very different immune response to the vaccines compared to the response to infection with SARS-CoV-2. As we will show, the genetic modifications introduced by the vaccine are likely the source of these differential responses. In this paper, we present the evidence that vaccination, unlike natural infection, induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. We explain the mechanism by which immune cells release into the circulation large quantities of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances are shown to have a potentially direct causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, increased tumorigenesis, and DNA damage. We show evidence from adverse event reports in the VAERS database supporting our hypothesis. We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines excludes them as positive contributors to public health, even in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Introduction

Vaccination is an endeavor to utilize non-pathogenic material to mimic the immunological response of a natural infection, thereby conferring immunity in the event of pathogen exposure. This goal has been primarily pursued through the use of both whole organism and attenuated virus vaccines. Use of fragments of virus or their protein products, referred to as “subunit vaccines,” has been more technically challenging [1]. In any event, an implicit assumption behind the deployment of any vaccination campaign is that the vaccine confers the effects of a ‘benign infection,’ activating the immune system against future exposure, while avoiding the health impacts of actual infection.
Much of the literature on this related to COVID-19 suggests that the immune response to mRNA-based vaccination is similar to natural infection. A preprint study found “high immunogenicity of BNT162b2 [Pfizer] vaccine in comparison with natural infection.” The authors found there to be many qualitative similarities though quantitative differences [2]. Jhaveri (2021) suggests that mRNA vaccines do what infection with the virus does: “The protein is produced and presented in the same way as natural infection” [3]. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) makes the case based upon antibody titers generated by prior infection vs. vaccination, in addition to production of memory B cells, to argue that the immune response to vaccination is analogous to the response to natural infection [4]. It is this similarity in the humoral immune response to vaccination vs natural infection, paired with both trial and observational data demonstrating reduced risk of infection following vaccination, that stands as the justification for the mass vaccination campaign.
In this paper we explore the scientific literature suggesting that vaccination with an mRNA vaccine initiates a set of biological events that are not only different from that induced by vaccination but are in several ways demonstrably counterproductive to both short- and long-term immune competence and normal cellular function. These vaccinations have now been shown to downregulate critical pathways related to cancer surveillance, infection control, and cellular homeostasis. They introduce into the body highly modified genetic material. A medRxiv preprint has revealed a remarkable difference between the characteristics of the immune response to an infection with SARS-CoV-2 as compared with the immune response to an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 [5]. Differential gene expression analysis of peripheral dendritic cells revealed a dramatic upregulation of both type I and type II interferons (IFNs) in COVID-19 patients, but not in vaccinees. One remarkable observation they made was that there was an expansion of circulating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) in COVID-19 patients, but this expansion was notably absent following vaccination. A striking expansion in circulating plasmablasts observed in COVID-19 patients was also not seen in the vaccinees. All of these observations are consistent with the idea that the vaccines actively suppress type I IFN signaling, as we will discuss below. In this paper we will be focusing extensively, though not exclusively, on vaccination-induced type I IFN suppression and the myriad downstream effects this has on the related signaling cascade.
Since long-term pre-clinical and Phase I safety trials were combined with Phase II trials, then phase II and III trials were combined [6]; and since even those were terminated early and placebo arms given the injections, we look to the pharmacosurveillance system and published reports for safety signals. In doing so, we find that that evidence is not encouraging. The biological response to mRNA vaccination as it is currently employed is demonstrably not like natural infection. In this paper we will illustrate those differences, and we will describe the immunological and pathological processes we expect are being initiated by mRNA vaccination. We will connect these underlying physiological effects with both realized and yet-to-be-observed morbidities. We anticipate that implementation of booster vaccinations on a wide scale will make all of these problems only more acute, and it will serve to further erode antiviral immune competence and innate cancer surveillance and protection for the global population subjected to these repeated boosters.
The mRNA vaccines manufactured by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have been viewed as an essential aspect of our efforts to control the spread of COVID-19. Countries around the globe have been aggressively promoting massive vaccination programs with the hope that such efforts might finally curtail the ongoing pandemic and restore normalcy. Governments seem reticent to consider the possibility that these injections might cause harm in unexpected ways, and especially that such harm might even surpass the benefits achieved in protection from severe disease. It is now clear that the antibodies induced by the vaccines fade in as little as 3 to 10 weeks after the second dose [7], such that people are being advised to seek booster shots at regular intervals [8]. It has also become apparent that rapidly emerging variants such as the Delta and now the Omicron strain are showing resistance to the antibodies induced by the vaccines, through mutations in the spike protein [9]. Furthermore, it has become clear that the vaccines do not prevent spread of the disease, but can only be claimed to reduce symptom severity [10]. A study comparing vaccination rates with COVID-19 infection rates across 68 countries and 294 counties in the United States in early September, 2021, found no correlation between the two, suggesting that these vaccines do not protect from spread of the disease [11]. Regarding symptom severity, even this aspect is beginning to be in doubt, as demonstrated by an outbreak in an Israeli hospital that led to the death of five fully vaccinated hospital patients [12]. Similarly, Brosh-Nissimov et.al. (2021) reported that 34/152 (22%) of fully vaccinated patients among 17 Israeli hospitals died of COVID-19 [13].
The increasing evidence that the vaccines do little to control disease spread and that their effectiveness wanes over time make it even more imperative to assess the degree to which the vaccines might cause harm. That SARS-CoV-2 modified spike protein mRNA vaccinations have biological impacts is without question. Here we attempt to distinguish those impacts from natural infection, and establish a mechanistic framework linking those unique biological impacts to pathologies now associated with vaccination. We recognize that the causal links between biological effects initiated by mRNA vaccination and adverse outcomes have not been established in the large majority of cases.

◆Spike mutations of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron: more likely to occur in the epitopes【medRxiv　2022年3月6日】

Abstract

Almost two years since the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak in 2019, and it is still pandemic over the world. SARS-COV-2 continuing to mutate and evolve, which further exacerbated the spread of the epidemic. Omicron variant, as an emerging mutation recently in South Africa, spreaded fastly to other countries worldwide. However, the gene charicterstic of Omicron and the effect on epitopes are still unclear. In this study, we retrieved 800 SARS-CoV-2 full-length sequences from GISAID database on 14 December 2021 (Alpha 110, Beta 101, Gamma 108, Delta 110, Omicron 107, Lambda 98, Mu 101, GH/490R 65). Overall, 1320 amino acid (AA) sites were mutated in these 800 SARS-CoV-2 sequences. Covariant network analysis showed that the covariant network of Omicron variant was significantly different from other variants. Further, 218 of the 1320 AA sites were occurred in the S gene, including 78 high-frequency mutations (>90%). Notably, we identified 25 unique AA mutations in Omicron, which may affect the transmission and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2. Finally, we analyzed the effect of Omicron on epitope peptide. As expected, 64.1% mutations (25/39) of Omicron variants were in epitopes, which was significantly higher than in other variants. These mutations may cause a poor response to vaccines to Omicron variants. In conclusion, Omicron variants, as an emerging mutation, should be alerted for us due that it may lead to poor vaccine response, and more data is needed to evaluate the virulence and vaccines responses to this variants.

◆Role of the antigen presentation process in the immunization mechanism of the genetic vaccines against COVID-19 and the need for biodistribution evaluations
【Wiley Online Library　2022年3月17日】

The mechanism of ‘traditional’ vaccines consists in inoculating viruses, which have been previously inactivated (e.g. by thermal treatments), or attenuated (e.g. by multiple passages in suboptimal growth conditions). Such viruses, which lost the ability to cause acute infection, allow the immune system to recognize them as exogenous pathogens, promoting the production of specific antibodies and memory-T lymphocytes. The genetic vaccines against COVID-19 which obtained the authorization for use in the European Union, namely the adenoviral-based vaccines (produced by AstraZeneca and Janssen) and the mRNA vaccines (produced by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna), encode genetic information, which enables human cells to produce a viral antigen. More precisely, the aforementioned vaccines induce the protein synthesis machinery of human cells to translate the spike protein of the viral capsid of SARS-CoV-2.2 Upon its translation by the ribosomes, the spike protein gets processed by the Golgi apparatus and presented to the immune system in two forms: i) as an entire protein, displayed on the cellular membrane, which can be recognized by B cells and T-helper cells (Figure 1A); or ii) in the form of fragments loaded on the major histocompatibility complex I (MHC I), which presents the endogenous antigens to CD8+ T lymphocytes (Figure 1B). The immune system recognizes the exogenous antigen, initiates the inflammatory response and the subsequent steps leading to the production of specific antibodies by the B cells. In human cells, the antigen presentation process is performed by the MHC I and II, and this mechanism is essential for the cell-mediated immunity. The MHC I is a protein complex, located on the membrane of all nucleated cells, which presents to CD8+ lymphocytes fragments of endogenous antigens, generated upon the proteasomal degradation of intracellular proteins (Figure 1C). This mechanism allows the immune system to constantly screen the proteosynthetic activity of all nucleated cells of the body, in order to detect when a cell is synthesizing viral or mutant proteins. The MHC II is located on the membranes of professional antigen-presenting cells (APCs), such as macrophages, monocytes, B cells and dendritic cells, and it displays fragments of exogenous antigens ingested around the body to CD4+ lymphocytes (Figure 1D). In some cases, MHC II molecules can be found even on endothelial cells, as a consequence of inflammatory signals. When a CD8+ or CD4+ lymphocyte detects a cell expressing a viral gene (e.g. due to an infection), a mutant gene (e.g. due to cancer) or a foreign gene (e.g. due to a transplant), it binds the MHC activating the immune response that leads to the destruction of the abnormal cell. The aforementioned processes are essential for understanding the differences between the ‘traditional’ and the genetic vaccines, in terms of antigen presentation. The ‘traditional’ vaccines generally do not induce human cells to produce viral proteins, and thus, human cells do not expose viral antigens deriving from their proteosynthetic activity. On the contrary, the genetic vaccines against COVID-19 induce human cells to produce the spike protein, relying intrinsically to an autoimmune reaction, extended to all the cells that intake the genetic material and start the protein synthesis.