It has been a year and 5 months since we first experienced the work product of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.  I must admit, that if you would have asked me on March 16, 2020, the date we originally locked down, I would have assumed the issue of the virus would be well and truly over by this time.  It looks like I underestimated things. 

It appears that we are expected to become overwrought with each new variant. Unfortunately, there are 24 letters in the Greek alphabet. We are only on #4. 

Given that this is the end of Summer, we are dealing with controversies regarding school openings.  School boards were in a difficult position.  They were stuck trying to placate both sides of a fierce debate.   In general, it seems logical to let individual districts, with the input of parents, decide the issue.  

 Though it is unclear to me that masks do anything in the school environment, the decision to require them should be made based on the case burden locally.  What is appropriate for a rural district in, for instance, Potter County may be very different than an urban school district in Pittsburg.   

Now, the state Department of Health has stepped in and mandated masks for all schools in the state, taking the decision out of local hands.  I am sure school boards everywhere are sighing in relief. Still, this seems like Harrisburg overreach…again. 

The CDC has recently announced guidelines that support masking children in schools. They are citing an observational, retrospective study they sponsored, using data from multiple school districts in Georgia. 

The study was conducted on data from November and December 2020, prior to vaccine availability. It showed that improving ventilation in schools and the masking of teachers and staff (i.e.: adults, who are more susceptible to infection) resulted in a decreased incidence of infection. Improved ventilation as it turned out was statistically the much more effective intervention. It was a sloppy study with a lot of inconsistencies which reduces the power of the data. 

 Here is a paragraph from the article’s conclusion:  

 In the current study, the lower incidence in schools requiring mask use among teachers and staff members is consistent with research on mask effectiveness (6), and investigations that have identified school staff members as important contributors to school-based SARS-CoV-2 transmission (7). The 21% lower incidence in schools that required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional.  

Now, with teachers likely vaccinated, I’m not sure this data is valid. As evidence, this seems like a very “thin gruel” to require masks for entire student populations. 

Let’s turn now to a curious set of facts surrounding the FDA approval of the Pfizer vaccine.  It turns out that the current product, the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid vaccine, is not legally the FDA-approved product.  That vaccine is the Pfizer “Comirnaty” vaccine.  The original vaccine is still under “emergency use authorization”.  Interestingly, very little of the new product has been manufactured, but there is plenty of stock of the Pfizer/BioNTech product, which will continue to be given.   

Why would this be, you ask?  Well, remember that these vaccines have had a significant number of adverse events according to the VAERS data. The older product under EUA is immune from legal action, whereas Comirnaty recipients can sue Pfizer for any complications. 

I’m not trying to discourage vaccine use.  Again, let me say that I believe each person, with the input of their physician, should make this decision based on their particular risk-benefit ratio. 

Pfizer is obviously manipulating the situation, which doesn’t surprise me. I do find it very disturbing that the FDA seems to be cooperating with its efforts.  Pfizer clearly benefits from the P.R. generated by the approval without giving up its legal immunity. 

This manipulation also works for those in government that seek to mandate vaccinations.  Meanwhile unknowingly, we will still receive a product that is still experimental.  

Interestingly, two of the most senior people in the FDA involved with vaccine approval just suddenly resigned. Apparently, they were very unhappy with the rushed vaccine approval. 

 More to come on that, I suspect. 

Finally, I once again return to the matter of natural immunity.  2 articles caught my eye recently.  The first is an immunologic study from Cell Reports Medicine. This looked at the immune responsiveness over time (8 months) to Covid in 254 subjects who had contracted the disease early in the pandemic.  They studied serial blood samples, measuring antibodies and other immunological markers. They conclude that: Taken together, these results suggest that broad and effective immunity may persist long-term in recovered COVID-19 patients. 

Then there is a very large study in preprint from a group in Israel. They studied data from 700,000(!) patients. The study looked at recent infections with the delta variant. It compared those with natural immunity without vaccination, natural immunity with a subsequent dose of vaccine, versus Covid-naïve patients who have been vaccinated. All the previous Covid infections or vaccinations were in the January/February 2021 timeframe. 

  They came to several conclusions.  #1.  Vaccinated Covid-naive patients were 13 times more likely to have a breakthrough infection with the delta variant, than those with natural immunity. They were 27 times more likely to get significant symptoms.  Those results were among patients who had been infected in January–February 2021.  They then looked at a broader group of previously infected subjects whose illnesses go back as far as March 2020.  Those patients were still at an advantage with 5.7 times more infections in the vaccinated group.  They did find that a single dose of vaccine (Pfizer) seemed to have a slightly positive effect on those with previous infections but the data did not reach statistical significance.  

Still, with more and more data reinforcing the strong immunity of recovered patients, the CDC and the NIH ignore the issue and want to mandate “the jab” for the recovered. It is important to remember that the incidence of side effects of these vaccines is much higher in those previously infected. Those of us who are in that situation clearly have no ethical obligation to be vaccinated and are rightfully wary to do so. 

By the way, very quietly in the last week or so, the CDC changed its definition of vaccination. Here’s what things look like in late August:

Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.

Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Here’s what it looks like now:

Immunity: Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.

Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.

Lowered expectations?

One last topic. It is become fashionable among my vaccine-obsessed friends to use the term” horse wormer” to describe ivermectin. I believe this was pioneered by Rachel Maddow to mock its use. Ivermectin is a WHO essential medication, given to literally millions of people for treatment of parasitic infections. It is very inexpensive and very safe. Obviously, it is also used in veterinary circles.  

It has been known for some time to have antiviral properties.  There is now a significant amount of data to suggest that it is useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of Covid 19. I’ve been easily able to acquire the tablet form at my local pharmacy. The problem is medical boards that are suppressing its use, in concert with the NIH and Pharma. Remember, if Ivermectin works, there’s no EUA for any vaccines, per CDC policy.  

Interestingly, I understand Pfizer and Merck are coming out with a ”Covid treatment pill”. This will be on-patent, and likely fairly pricey. I wonder if they’ll call it Newvermectin.

It’s just a thought. 

If there is an overriding theme to this post, and to my previous posts, it is that this very real pandemic, has resulted in the unmasking of the players: public health authorities, and big Pharma who are not working for our welfare but for their own. They manipulate facts, ignore others, and create rules meant to increase their power and wealth, often at our expense. They deny us early treatment despite the data supporting it. Their partners in the media assist in their subterfuge. As a physician, this has caused me to question almost everything I have happily gone along with in the past. The scales have fallen off my eyes. 

I believe our best bet is to study closely the real data, to utilize vaccines, and medications when they will be efficacious, and remain very skeptical of the “facts” as presented, by government health agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry. 

Quite honestly, we’re on our own. 

As always, I’d be honored if you’d share this post.

Header image: Monarch Feeding (Fujifilm XE4, XF 55-200 f3.5-4.8)