CDC Attempts Damage Control Through The WaPo

Last night an article came out in the WaPo, presumably to complement the damaging admissions that CDC Director Rochelle Walensky has made regarding the high viral loads that asymptomatic vaxxed persons are carrying--and presumably spreading. My impression last night hasn't been changed by anything I've seen this morning: this is damage control. For what it's worth, here's a link--and note the emphasis on "messaging" rather than on, say, "getting the data out":

‘The war has changed’: Internal CDC document urges new messaging, warns delta infections likely more severe

The internal presentation shows that the agency thinks it is struggling to communicate on vaccine efficacy amid increased breakthrough infections

Note, too, that the key assertion in the messaging--that the Dread Delta is "likely more severe"--is ... likely not true, except in defined demographics. The real story that CDC doesn't want released is that these problems were likely caused by this ill considered gene therapy experiment. More on both points below, but issuing administrative diktats ordering people to participate in a medical experiment, but without the backing of scientific data, is in itself a form of messaging that speaks volumes.

Robert Malone has offered a series of tweets this morning that dissect the CDC narrative that's being peddled via the Bezos WaPo. I've taken the liberty of reformatting these tweets a bit for readability--including correcting some typos:

Key quote from the CDC slide deck:

"Risk of reinfection with Delta may be higher [aOR 1.46 (CI 1.03-2.05)] compared to Alpha variant, but only if prior infection ≥180 days earlier"  

That suggests waning protection from natural infection at 180 days, and is another ADE breadcrumb 

Recall that ADE--Antibody Dependent Enhancement--is a vaccinologist's worst nightmare. An 'enhanced' virus is a more dangerous virus, and ADE has been the major pitfall for ALL previous attempts at a coronavirus vaccine. Which is why Sucharit Bhakdi and others have repeatedly stated that coronaviruses are "poor vaccine candidates." Not all viruses are equally susceptible to control through the arsenal of vaccines. A higher risk of reinfection through later variants like Delta is a key signal or confirmation that ADE is in process.

"vaccinated individuals infected with delta may be able to transmit the virus as easily as those who are unvaccinated. Vaccinated people infected with delta have measurable viral loads similar to those who are unvaccinated and infected with the variant." - WaPo

But this business about viral loads of vaxxed persons being "similar to" the viral loads of unvaxxed persons is the line Fauci was peddling the other day--based on inadequate nasal titers, rather than reliable blood titers of viral load. While "similar to" is a relative term, the real situation is likely to be the one that Rochelle Walensky shared with the NYT--which suggests much higher viral loads among the vaxxed:

vaccinated people infected with the Delta variant carry tremendous amounts of the virus in the nose and throat

Continuing with Malone:

The Noble Lie:

"The presentation highlights the daunting task the CDC faces. It must continue to emphasize the proven efficacy of the vaccines at preventing severe illness and death while acknowledging milder breakthrough infections may not be so rare after all and that vaccinated individuals are transmitting the virus. The agency must move the goal posts of success in full public view."

...

“You don’t, when you’re a public health official, want to be saying, ‘Trust us, we know, we can’t tell you how,’” Jamieson said. “The scientific norm suggests that when you make a statement based on science, you show the science. …"

And the second mistake is they do not appear to be candid about the extent to which breakthroughs are yielding hospitalizations.”

This appears to be a reference to the Pfizer study that Malone referenced yesterday, and which he says dropped some patients from the study. IOW, Malone suspects that hospitalization rates among the 'breakthrough' cases are higher than are being reported and that the data is being, um, jiggered. That, in turn, suggests that hospitalizations of breakthrough cases are not so rare after all, and therefore not so 'mild' as the CDC wants us to believe. But, as Jamieson says: How can we know if they don't provide the data in a trustworthy form? Perhaps the default response should be skepticism.

I take no pleasure in observing that this sounds a lot like vindication of much of what I have been saying.  And by the way, Reuters, the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein is a toxin...

Another of Malone's cryptic tweets. He's ticked off at Reuters' "fact checking" of him. What he's communicating substantively is that, maybe using gene therapy to induce the human body to produce a known toxin that is foreign to the body isn't such a good idea. And never was.