The Triggering

People have every right to refuse consent to physical contact. Freedom of association.

Picture the shrieking and wailing if their shedding turns out to be permanent.


This private school knows something.

A team of researchers from the US and the Netherlands recently reported that antibodies to the spike protein and the RBD are detected in saliva samples from healthcare workers vaccinated with mRNA vaccines. Within 1-2 weeks after receiving the 2nd dose of vaccine, 37 of 37 and 8 of 8 recipients of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, respectively, had IgG antibodies against the spike protein in their saliva, while IgA was also found in a significant proportion. These observations may be very crucial to understand vaccine-mediated protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease.

Any SP?

RNA is required for protein synthesis, does not integrate into the genome, is transiently expressed, is metabolized and eliminated by the natural mechanisms of the body and is therefore considered safe4,5,6,7. RNA-based prophylactic infectious-disease vaccines and RNA therapeutic agents have been shown to be safe and well-tolerated in clinical trials.

genome part is wrong

transience likely wrong too

On the basis of the tolerability profile of the first dose at 100 μg and the second dose at 30 μg, participants randomized to the 100-μg group did not receive a second vaccination. Reactogenicity was generally greater after the second dose in the other two dosing levels; however, symptoms were transient and resolved within a few days. Transient decreases in lymphocyte counts (grades 1–3) were observed within a few days after vaccination, and returned to baseline within 6–8 days in all participants. These laboratory abnormalities were not associated with clinical findings.

RNA vaccines are known to induce type-I interferon, which has been associated with transient migration of lymphocytes into tissues19,20,21,22.


Assuming that the neutralization titres that are induced by natural infection provide protection from COVID-19, comparing vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 neutralization titres to those from sera of convalescent humans provides a benchmark for the magnitude of the vaccine-elicited response and the potential of the vaccine to provide protection.

Because the titre at which human neutralizing antibodies are protective remains unknown, these findings are not proof of vaccine efficacy.

Efficacy will be determined in a pivotal phase III trial. Because the cohort that received the 100 μg dose level did not receive the booster dose, no data for immunogenicity after a second vaccination at this dose level are available; however, there were no substantial differences in immunogenicity between the 30-μg and 100-μg dose levels after the first dose. This observation suggests that a well-tolerated and immunogenic dose level may be between 10 μg and 30 μg for this vaccine candidate…..

Our study had several limitations. Although we used convalescent sera as a comparator, the kind of immunity (T cells versus B cells or both) and level of immunity needed to protect from COVID-19 are unknown. Furthermore, this analysis of available data did not assess immune responses or safety beyond 2 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. Both are important to inform the public health use of this vaccine.

Follow-up will continue for all participants and will include collection of serious adverse events for 6 months and COVID-19 infection and multiple additional immunogenicity measurements for up to 2 years. Although our population of healthy adults up to 55 years of age is appropriate for a phase I/II study, it does not accurately reflect the population at highest risk for COVID-19. Adults who are 65 years of age and over have already been enrolled in this study and results will be reported as they become available. Later phases of this study will prioritize enrolment of more diverse populations, including those with chronic underlying health conditions and from racial and ethnic groups that are adversely affected by COVID-1923.

The cope is extreme

Regular readers will recognize the usual antivaccine claims, just with the hyperbole and ridiculousness dialed up to 11 and beyond. I’ve mentioned many times how antivaxxers like to make the false claim that vaccines are made from the “tissue of aborted babies,” ignoring the fact that cells isolated from a fetus in the 1960s and maintained in culture in dishes over 50 years are not the same thing as “tissue from aborted human babies”.


Non-neutralizing antibodies also recognize and attach to dangerous invaders, but they cannot prevent it from spreading. In a way, non-neutralizing antibodies are like GPS trackers. These proteins signal T cells and other parts of your immune system that there’s a problem, but not deal with it directly. Non-neutralizing antibodies are helpful, but they’re not as powerful for fighting infections as neutralizing antibodies. source

Non-neutralizing antibodies are also produced after viral infection. Such antibodies bind specifically to virus particles, but do not neutralize infectivity. They may enhance infectivity because antibodies can interact with receptors on macrophages. The entire virus-antibody complex is brought into the cell by endocytosis. Viral replication can then proceed because the antibody does not block infectivity. This pathway may allow entry into cells which normally do not bear specific virus receptors.

Non-neutralizing antibodies with Fc-mediated functions, such as antibodydependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), are of increasing interest in HIV-1 vaccine design. There is evidence that HIV-specific ADCC antibody responses are associated with slower HIV-1 progression.11 Further, ADCC responses can force immune escape, implying they impart significant pressure on virus replication.12 Macaque studies suggest that ADCC functions of antibodies can assist in protection from SHIV acquisition.13 The partially successful RV144 Thai HIV-1 vaccine efficacy trial utilized a prime-boost regimen of a canarypox vector followed by a protein boost and induced robust ADCC responses.14,15 Interestingly, non-neutralizing antibody responses to specific Env regions were associated with protection from HIV-1 acquisition.14View chapterPurchase book

If a patient’s immune system produces only lower-affinity antibodies (or even non-neutralizing antibodies that do not block the receptor binding site of the spike protein at all), cellular protection becomes compromised, even though the immune system might try to compensate by producing increasing amounts of these weak or non-neutralizing antibodies.


COVID-19 and its Modes of Transmission

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), was initially reported in December 2019 as pneumonia with unknown etiology in Wuhan city of China. The World Health Organization recognized SARS-CoV-2 as a public health concern and declared it as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Over 12 million people have been affected across several countries since it was first recognized [1]. The disease, unless combined with other comorbidities or other preexisting diseases, is usually mild. Approximately 11% of cases require acute medical aid [2]. Broadly, two modes of transmission of COVID-19 exist—direct and indirect [3]. The direct mode includes (1) transmission via aerosols formed via surgical and dental procedures and/or in the form of respiratory droplet nuclei; (2) other body fluids and secretions, for example, feces, saliva, urine, semen, and tears; and (3) mother-to-child. SARS-CoV-2 is thought to commonly spread via respiratory droplets formed while talking, coughing, and sneezing of an infected person. The exposure and, hence, risk of transmission are increased if the infected person is present within 1-m length of susceptible host. Less number of infected patients has shown to shed virus from sources other than the respiratory tract. Though not high, the risk of transmission through modes other than respiratory tract can still be possible. Indirect transmission may occur via (1) fomites or surfaces (e.g., furniture and fixtures) present within the immediate environment of an infected patient and (2) objects used on the infected person (e.g., stethoscope or thermometer) [34].

that means skin

Several of these modes may be underestimated and cause increased spread of virus. The goal of this paper is to briefly review how SARS-CoV-2 is shown to transmit via various modes and propose measures to reduce the risk of spread within the population and operating personnel.

As the document states, one can be “exposed to [the] study intervention due to environmental exposure,” including “by inhalation or skin contact” with someone involved in the study, or with another who has been exposed in the same way.

2 responses to “The Triggering

  1. So far, I’m immune. Can’t wait to see what freaky fauci and his buddies in Wuhan cook up next. And now we know why liberal politicos are so against taking vitamins…

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s