We start with several interesting tweets from Dr. Robert Malone. His tweets and links can be somewhat cryptic--intended, I think, for a more professional audience, an audience attuned to his field. Still, there is matter of interest for all of us.
This is simple enough. #2 and #3 are the points he's making. Covid is getting less lethal--as expected based on all standard virology--so what's with this big vax the world campaign?
Study- Those previously infected are at increased risk of side effects when they take vaccine— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) July 29, 2021
"prior COVID-19 infection was associated with increased risk of any side effect" as well as "increased risk of severe side effects, leading to hospital care."https://t.co/jv6rMM5wMy
I assume Malone wants us to draw some conclusion from this. My conclusion is, if you've been previously infected getting vaxxed makes no sense--and that's outside of the fact that a vax gives no additional protection against the disease, because you've already got that if you've had a prior infection. No, the reason it makes no sense is because it's risky.
There's an additional problem: How do we know who's been previously infected? Does that mean, actually having the disease, symptomatically? There is data to suggest--based on antibody studies--that twice as many people have encountered Covid as have been diagnosed. Coercing vaxxing among the general population means you'll be coercing a large group of people--quite a few millions--who don't need the injection under any rationale but who will be at higher risk from taking it. Ethical problem here? Bonus issue: What about those who have been fully vaxxed and now could be persuaded to take a booster?
The good stuff is in the supplementary data— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) July 29, 2021
There do appear to be patients that were dropped from the study and analyses. This is an odd paper - not standard.
"Six Month Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine"https://t.co/bXNjgs5quDhttps://t.co/NL2Y3F9qj5
Cryptic. BNT162b2 is Pfizer. So this is a six month safety study on Pfizer--or at least it claims to be. As you can see, Malone has questions about this study. One is that "patients ... were dropped from the study and analyses." My guess is that Malone is flagging this because he found no adequate explanation for a procedure that presumably affected the results of the study. So, by "good stuff" he really means "dodgy stuff."
More about spike protein toxicities. Please forward to Reuters. They are apparently still denying that spike is associated with any toxicity, based on their factchecking of me. https://t.co/OTkTJrQ4ZW— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) July 29, 2021
This is a disturbing study. Here's the full title of the paper:
SARS-CoV-2 spike protein interactions with amyloidogenic proteins: Potential clues to neurodegeneration
The first sentence reads:
The post-infection of COVID-19 includes a myriad of neurologic symptoms including neurodegeneration.
In other words, Covid-19, as we've read elsewhere, has the potential to cause long term harm--with neurodegeneration prominent among them. I don't know about you, but I can do without that. The author of the paper is arguing that it's the spike protein that's responsible for the observed neurodegeneration, because of the way it affects some complex (to me) binding of proteins.
Next question: Why is Malone drawing our attention to this?
My best guess is this. The spike protein, of course, is an important part of the Covid-19 virus and is, as Malone points out, toxic all on its own. The importance of that fact, as I understand it for this tweet, has to do with the gene therapy vaccines that induce our cells to produce the spike protein. Since we now know that the spike protein travels widely throughout the body, including to the brain, some researchers have been arguing that not only could Covid the disease be causing neurodegenerative symptoms, but the "vaccines" themselves could be doing so by fostering the production and spread of the spike protein to places like the brain. This is a controversial view for now, so my guess is that Malone is giving a sly nod to it rather than directly pointing to it.
Moving on. Lost in the masking talk yesterday was this change in policy:
The policy for a while now has been that vaxxed people should only be tested if admitted to a hospital with Covid symptoms. It sure sounds to me like the regime is freaking, as they realize that there are a lot of fully vaxxed people coming in with symptoms. Just like in the rest of the world. Is this part of the "impending doom" that Rochelle Walensky feels?
Finally, there's the Surgeon General urging the vaxxed folks to mask up in any indoor location. Of course he adds that he's really, really concerned about the unvaxxed folks, but still he's gonna give special instructions to the vaxed:
I want to emphasize though that if you are vaccinated the likelihood of having a breakthrough infection is still low because, again, the vaccines are working to help prevent infection, particularly serious infection. But in the unusual event that a breakthrough does happen, we know transmission can take place," he added. "So that's why, especially when you have a lot of virus circulating in a community, it's important to take that extra step, go that extra mile, wear that mask in indoor settings, outside the house, so you don’t contribute to transmission.
Does that word "still" seem like a weasel word to you, like it does to me? My reading of this is that they're very worried about breakthroughs or breakouts or whatever. Something is going on here--or, certainly, they're worried that something is going on.