I don't know if it has been posted anywhere yet. But this came across my path today. Unfortunately only in German, but I tried to translate the article with Deepl into English. (I hope it is not just noise I am sharing)
Professor Winfried Stöcker has developed an antigen against Covid 19 and has already tested it on himself and on his coworkers and friends. When he tried to get it out in the public, of course, a case was brought against him. He also presents the recipe for the vaccine on his site so that interested doctors can make it and give it to their patients.
Unfortunately, I know too little about medicine to say if it is anything useful, but my thought was why else would they denounce him?
In the past, under my leadership, an extremely efficient research and development department was established at Euroimmun, dealing, among other things, with the diagnostics of infectious diseases. Our scientists were among the first to create reagents for the detection of a number of emerging infectious diseases, often in collaboration with specialists from international infectious disease research institutions, in Germany including the Bernhard Nocht Institute in Hamburg and the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin: Crimean-Congo, West Nile, Japanese Encephalitis, Usutu, Dengue, Chikungunya, Mayaro, MERS-Corona, Zika, SARS 1, Ebola.
Based on our extensive experience in reagent development for the diagnosis of novel viral diseases, we have rapidly and accurately created and recombinantly produced an antigen construct that can reliably detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. It is based on the receptor-binding domain within the S1 subunit of the spike protein, which the virus uses to bind to receptors on target cells. To me, it stood to reason that immunization with this protein would provide a protective effect against infection.
There are vaccinations with a large potential danger and others with a very small one. There is a difference between injecting a healthy person with attenuated viruses or viral RNA and injecting a small inconspicuous recombinant protein that cannot do much in the organism except for specific immune stimulation. For decades, recombinant antigens genetically engineered in culture cells have been used in immunization against infectious hepatitis A and B. In the past, the immunization antigen was obtained from blood donations of people formerly suffering from hepatitis, but the recombinant antigens come from the retort, they are easy to produce and carry no risk of infection - a major advance. I myself have immunized thousands of my employees with them. However, you have to take three injections in the first quarter of the year, then measure the antibody level every five to ten years and give a booster vaccination if necessary.
This uncomplicated vaccination scheme, which has been tried and tested for decades, with a trivial antigen that has long been available, would be the order of the day in the case of Covid-19. The fact that completely new approaches are being pursued here, such as introducing viral RNA into the body of the vaccinated person, which is supposed to synthesize the immunization antigen in the person's own organism first, may be very effective, but many people are afraid of this because they fear that the viral RNA will take on a life of its own in the body and cause unexpected damage. Lengthy vaccination studies have therefore had to be set up, during which the virus has been able to spread through the population like an avalanche. And the active ingredient is very difficult to produce, requires a continuous deep-freeze chain from production to vaccination, many people are allergic to the polyethylene glycol additive needed for stabilization, and half of the vaccinees report sick after the second injection. Above all, however, it takes years to manufacture the vaccine until demand is met and everyone is immunized. Scientists can make a name for themselves and the patent holders can make a lot of money, while millions of people die because they cannot be vaccinated in time. "Woe, woe, whoever stealthily commits the murderous deed!" Who attaches himself to his soles?
Likewise, culture-produced and inactivated coronaviruses are obsolete for me as vaccine antigens, with hepatitis such a thing is long outdated, what is the point then with corona? It is also not necessary to infect anyone with vector viruses in order to introduce viral antigens. I apply the ready-made, extracorporeally genetically engineered antigen, which poses virtually no danger. And so far, none of the more than one hundred vaccinated people has become ill, none has been incapacitated.
Some resistance has developed to my approach. People are not able or willing to recognize the potential of the vaccination I propose, but it is virtually risk-free, based on an inactivated vaccine that can be shipped unrefrigerated and kept in a refrigerator, that does not introduce the dreaded genetic information of the virus, that does not contain an attenuated virus or vector, that causes few allergic reactions, much less to polyethylene glycol, that any doctor can administer in his office, virtually risk-free, and that would therefore be far more acceptable to the public. And which can easily be produced in large quantities. Excellent for mass vaccination. The first vaccination was anything but heroic, but banal. No vector, no RNA, no inactivated coronavirus, just a small peptide.
Take 15 micrograms of recombinant RBD of S1 subunit (Arg319-Phe541) three times for one person. I used Alhydrogel from InvivoGen as the adiuvant: Shake properly and draw up 200 microliters of it with the tuberculin syringe. Draw up 10 milliliters of saline into a larger syringe and add the 200 microliters, mix. Of that, 500 microliters per shot to mix your portion of antigen with. Everything pretty sterile.
A single 2000-liter reactor can produce 45 grams of antigen per day, which would be enough for 1 million people. A high-density culture system can produce five times that amount. Within half a year, vaccine for 80% of the population of Germany could be produced in a medium-sized laboratory.
I have asked the Paul Ehrlich Institute for permission to immediately replicate this trivial immunization with a larger number of volunteers to see if it works as well as it did for me and my family, and if there are no side effects in them either, including exposed individuals. If the PEI had not objected, we could long ago have put a manufacturer in a position to supply the whole of Germany and provide effective protection.
Instead of responding to my proposal, the Paul Ehrlich Institute coldly sued me. Perhaps because they felt ignored in their divine function - after all, I had already carried out a trial on five (!) people (which I am entitled to do as a doctor, so I can mix together whatever I think is right for my therapy: Who knows so well with the paragraphs, should actually know that) -, perhaps to give an advantage to other applicants, to whom one feels obliged? But I do not act as a vaccine manufacturer, I have no profit intention in this matter. I deliberately went public with my action right away and did not apply for a patent, so that no one else would claim this way for themselves, but I only want to show a simple and harmless way to counter the pandemic quickly and effectively.
Necessity justifies unconventional means - in the case of this pandemic, one cannot wait two years until the last doubts about possible side effects have been resolved, as is the case with other vaccines, but action must be taken quickly. In this respect, the Paul Ehrlich Institute must be accused of complete failure. They had to foresee that the delivery of the vaccines that were granted approval would take several years. In this situation, sensible people would examine all possible alternatives and support their implementation. People would have immediately come up with the highly effective immunization in Lübeck, would have supported the project, and by the end of 2021 the whole of Germany could be virtually free of Covid-19! The vaccination of over one hundred patients with recombinant S1-RBD antigen in Lübeck was almost free of side effects and extremely effective, 95% of the vaccinees developed protective antibodies in high concentration within six weeks.
The regulatory authorities are overwhelmed. They can do nothing but proceed according to a tried and tested pattern. They are helpless in the face of the catastrophe, but they have caused it themselves. As the very first institution, they could and should have foreseen the avalanche-like outbreak of the pandemic. If they had immediately taken up my suggestion to immunize the population with such a banal antigen, the spread of the disease would have been stopped very quickly. Hundreds of thousands of people would not have become ill, tens of thousands would not have died.
It is unbelievable how the PEI is still being courted, like gods who are pleased to approve a vaccine under certain conditions and after long and careful examination of every single detail, whether every stamp is in the right place and every piece of paper is folded correctly, while social life and the economy are collapsing. For me, these slowing down authorities are just as bad as the disease itself and unworthy to bear the name of Paul-Ehrlich, whose achievements would not have come to us in the environment of increasing excessive bureaucracy. Entrepreneurial qualities would be more in demand here, not paralyzing dirigisme. And no impotent stammering on television. It would do our society good if the Paul Ehrlich Institute had a little competition, something like the Technical Inspection Agency or DEKRA.
In the current catastrophic situation, one does not need lengthy double-blind trials to precisely work out differences in efficacy. Vaccinate the first thousand test persons (preferably with the Lübeck method) and make them immune right away. If that goes well, ten thousand people get it, and then the rest. But some clinicians always have their eye on their third-party funding account and want to approach the matter scientifically in a way that is tried and tested for them, and first carefully find out whether a few percent more or less anti-covid antibodies develop in a vaccine candidate. After all, not every vaccine will be able to induce antibodies in very high concentrations that eliminate (neutralize) the coronavirus in 95% of patients, like the one from Lübeck.
Initially, it is not important to prove a long-term effect in a time-consuming manner. First of all, a herd immunity has to be established immediately, and in one or two years we will see if the pandemic has been largely contained. The main thing to check was whether the side effects were kept within limits, and this is precisely what takes too much time with RNA vaccination and the like; with the Lübeck variant, this could be answered within six weeks.
By the way, my suggestion of rapid immunization with the Corona S1 antigen was received with enthusiasm by several scientists. And by others it was dismissed and criticized without any sense: Who did not come up with this idea themselves, or who possibly get their research budget financed by (newly) established vaccine manufacturers. Perhaps some "scientists" receive so much in third-party funding that they talk down my simple approach to a solution so as not to go away empty-handed. Because the manufacturers will not allow a comparison, because they are afraid that my vaccine can compete with their newly patented substances, then the patents become worthless and the expected sales of hundreds of billions of dollars and euros are questioned. I do not rule out the possibility that our so admired god-like authority is not only hostile to innovation, but may even have acted on someone else's behalf by turning a blind eye to the simplest solution and suing them. And with so much money at stake, I am now putting my life in danger as well. "From you, you Corona victims up there, if no other voice speaks, then be my murder complaint raised!" Victims of short-sighted "scientists", cowardly paragraph servants and bureaucrats.
In the same context is to be seen certainly the demand of the Paul Ehrlich institute that one is to recognize a positive antibody result in the vaccination certificate only if it came by a certified vaccine. There even persons are to be inoculated again after survived Corona infection, who earned their antibody honestly. Apparently so that the minions do not miss anything. Will someone report the Paul Ehrlich Institute?
To avoid the stupid accusation of some of the said "scientists" that my "self-experiment" has no probative value, I gave in to the fervent wish of some of my colleagues and friends and legally immunized them according to my scheme - as I did with my family last April. As a physician, I am authorized to do so and do not require the approval of any authority. During our vaccination series from December 2020 to January 2021, we did not experience any relevant undesirable side effects, and we were able to detect very high titers of anti-spike IgG in 60 of 65 patients in our laboratory in Lübeck; five are still being revaccinated, and in 64 the antibodies were virus-neutralizing. No vaccinee became incapacitated. All positive patients are happy about their newfound freedom.
Why do so many people distrust vaccines?
Now that vaccines are available, there are legions of people who don't want them. A long dormant vaccine distrust is coming to the surface.
Pieternel Gruppen - March 4, 2021, 14:21
Germans are foregoing their vaccination appointments en masse and only half of the French say they want to be vaccinated against the coronavirus anyway. As groups other than the most vulnerable in Europe are gradually being targeted, resistance to vaccination is also becoming apparent. Various samples have shown that in some European countries the rest of the population is not yet eager to be vaccinated. For example, the EU Recover project concluded last month that less than 60 percent of Germans and Belgians plan to be vaccinated.
"Numbers don't tell me much," responds anthropologist Stuart Blume of the University of Amsterdam. Blume has been researching vaccination programs for twenty years. "I'm an anthropologist, I don't like numbers, I like stories. But the conclusion you can at least draw from all the different samples is that the percentage of people who are reluctant to vaccines in some European countries can be as high as tens of percent."
The roots go back at least forty years
According to Blume, the story behind the figures is not so simple to explain. "This distrust did not arise in the past year; its roots must be sought at least forty years back. All sorts of complicated phenomena such as globalization, neoliberalism and populism play a role in this."
Trust is the key word according to Blume. And in the broadest sense of the word. Because trust in vaccines, he says, has a lot to do with trust in the government, but also with fiduciary confidence in the pharmaceutical industry. And it is precisely in these areas that things are not going equally well throughout Europe. The emergence of large international pharmaceutical companies, for example, has made vaccine production more opaque. "For the public, it is now no longer clear where vaccines are produced; they can come from all over the world. That used to be different. In the Netherlands, for example, vaccines were produced for decades by the RIVM in Bilthoven; that was much more tangible."
Secrecy about pharmaceutical companies
The fact that the agreements with the pharmaceutical companies surrounding the corona vaccines have not been made public has not helped their reputation either, Blume believes. "That secrecy has encouraged all sorts of conspiracy theories," he says. If the system is not transparent, the wildest ideas can easily arise, such as that Bill Gates would have spread the corona virus to make money on vaccines.
Moreover, pharmaceutical companies have recently been in the news badly for failing to deliver the number of doses promised. All in all, the population was not given much confidence; not at all in countries where leaders openly doubted the effectiveness of some vaccines. "French President Macron initially considered the AstraZeneca vaccine unsuitable for people over 65. Later, however, he went back on that."
In Germany, too, various reports circulated about the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine. The result: hundreds of thousands of doses of the vaccine lie unused in storage, because people prefer to wait for a shot from Pfizer or Moderna.
Dislike of the political elite
In places where there is a lot of distrust of the government, enthusiasm for vaccinations drops, thinks Blume. This is visible, for example, in some Eastern European countries, where suspicion of the government due to the communist past still runs deep. Something similar is happening in European countries where populist parties have gained a firm foothold, concludes sociologist Jonathan Kennedy, who conducted research into the phenomenon at Queen Mary University in London.
A dislike of the 'political elite' can translate into a dislike of vaccination campaigns organized by the state, Kennedy explains. "We saw that in Italy, for example. In 2017, when the number of measles cases rose sharply, the government legislated that schoolchildren must receive an MMR vaccination. The populist Five Star Movement and the Lega Party made a big issue of this during the 2018 election campaign. The state had no right to interfere in family life, they argued."
Kennedy is not surprised that in France, where the yellow vests and Marine Le Pen's right-wing populist party are doing well, vaccine skepticism is currently so prevalent. "The distrust of politicians there is deeply entrenched among large sections of the population," he said.
Good reasons for anger
Kennedy does want to say that he understands that people in different places in Europe feel marginalized and sometimes have good reasons to be angry with their politicians. "But it is worrying when they then turn against medical science."
Anthropologist Blume is not too worried about vaccine readiness for the time being anyway. Sometimes a new vaccine is also a matter of getting used to, he has found. "The turnout for the HPV cervical cancer shot was also not very high at the start in the Netherlands, but in the meantime the vaccination rate has picked up considerably."
Translated with DeepL Translator
Even the vulnerable Bulgarian doesn't crave a shot
In the EU, only Bulgaria vaccinates even more slowly than we do, many Dutch people grumbled recently. But while the Netherlands is catching up, Bulgaria is at the bottom of the list. Only 3.5 percent have been vaccinated there.
Thijs Kettenis - 4 March 2021, 17:38
The cause is surprising. It is not the lack of vaccines, but the lack of enthusiasm among Bulgarians to get the shot that is causing the country to lag behind. Only one in ten wants to get vaccinated as soon as it is possible, a survey showed.
More than half, 52 percent, have no intention of doing so at all. Even among people whose poor health makes them a priority, willingness is low. Not even one in three shows up for their shot appointment. Hospitals and doctors' surgeries are therefore left with vaccines. Reason for Prime Minister Bojko Borisov to change the strategy: since one and a half weeks, anyone who wants to can get vaccinated. Even an appointment is not necessary: just joining the queue is enough. "As long as those with priority wait, hesitate or refuse, we are going to vaccinate everyone who wants it," Borisov said.
Loads of fake news
Lack of trust in the government, loads of fake news, conspiracy theories and fear of side effects are the main reasons why many Bulgarians prefer to wait and see. It is telling that among the reluctant risk groups who can be vaccinated first in Bulgaria are doctors, nurses and teachers. If they are not eager to be vaccinated, it is not surprising that the rest of the population is not at all excited.
Those who now report to the vaccination centers are mainly city dwellers; among them are many healthy people in their twenties and thirties. They can be vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Pfizer and Moderna vaccines remain reserved for vulnerable groups. Young people must now serve as an example to the rest of the population.
Vaccination curve now moves steeply upwards
The new strategy seems to be paying off: since everyone can get a shot, the vaccination curve is going up steeply. "At first we had to beg people to come. Now all our teams are fully staffed," administrator Silvia Cholakova of Pirogov Hospital in the capital Sofia told news agency AFP. The government even had to shut down the program of the "green vaccination corridors" for several days, because there were not enough vaccines and high-risk groups still get priority.
On Monday, they reopened. In Sofia this led to long lines. This is also criticized. After all, they ensure that the elderly and chronically ill have to wait a long time for their turn.
It is important to Prime Minister Borisov that the vaccination does not end in a fiasco. Elections are in a month's time and the popularity of his government is in a sorry state. Only one in ten Bulgarians is satisfied with the policy.
"The vaccination plan is not going to fail, despite the spread of false information about the vaccinations," said Health Minister Kostadin Angelov. "We are making a huge effort to convince Bulgarians. Believe me, that is very difficult." What may also bring votes is that since Monday, the hospitality industry is open again, despite the fact that the number of coronas infections is still high in Bulgaria as well.
Translated with DeepL Translator
As I hope is becoming clear to some of you, Rappoport is one of those who claims that only terrain plays a role in disease. He rarely spits it out, but between the lines in his articles he is claiming that one cannot 'catch' something from without because - for him - external pathogens do not exist.
From the article:As I hope is becoming clear to some of you, Rappoport is one of those who claims that only terrain plays a role in disease. He rarely spits it out, but between the lines in his articles he is claiming that one cannot 'catch' something from without because - for him - external pathogens do not exist.
Sounds like an acknowledgment that external pathogens exist. He makes the argument that many other factors can cause Ebola-like symptoms, but these are ignored in favor of the Ebola diagnosis.Here is a particularly illuminating quote: “…it is becoming clear, to us at least, that the more work you do with the FA-Test [an antibody test for Ebola diagnosis] the more interesting, the more complicated and the more biologically sloppy the results become. I would urge very great caution in making any kind of final interpretation of what you have just heard [from other presenters]…I cannot explain how a Panamanian Indian can have antibodies to Ebola virus. I don’t think these are real antibodies. Of course if these are not, it means that any others in a given serum [blood sample from a patient] may not be as well. It is clear that we must have an alternative and a much more specific method with which we can answer these questions. Several facts suggest endemicity of Ebola in Zaire…I’m beginning to believe that the virus may in fact be endemic in Zaire.”
What do the last two sentences mean? They mean there is a significant chance that Ebola has been present in Zaire for a long, long time, and people have developed natural immunity to it, as they would to, say, measles or mumps.
We are all being horrified how the sars-cov-2 virus is being used to subjugate and, via vaccines, even euthanize people worldwide. Is Ebola being queued up to be the next "weaponized virus" of choice once Covid-19 runs it course? I believe that is what Rappoport is attempting to alert us to.Repackaging a set of common symptoms under different disease labels is a standard practice of the medical cartel.
Even assuming the Ebola virus exists, the experts were expressing grave doubts all the way back in 1977. Right at the beginning of Ebola hysteria.
The 1977 reference here is: “Ebola Virus Haemorrhagic Fever: Proceedings of an International Colloquium on Ebola Virus Infection and Other Haemorrhagic Fevers held in Antwerp, Belgium, 6-8 December, 1977.”
This report is 280 pages long. It’s well worth reading and studying, to see how the experts hem and haw, hedge their bets, and yet make damaging admissions:
For example, “It is impossible to consider the virological diagnosis of Ebola virus infection loose [apart] from the diagnosis of haemorrhagic fevers in general. The clinical picture of the disease indeed is too nonspecific to allow any hypothesis as to which virus may be responsible for any given case.”
Irrelevant or non-existent viruses function as cover stories to conceal actual and inconvenient causes of illness, such as industrial pollution, ag pesticides, GMO food, fracking chemicals, radiation, etc.
When I think about Russia I always remember what Cayce said about it:The Free West is dead, long live the Free East.
Lavrov: Russia Is Against Vaccine Passports For Traveling, It's Contrary to Voluntary Inoculation
"Through Russia, Cayce said "comes the hope of the world. Not in respect to what is sometimes termed Communism or Bolshevism -- no! But freedom -- freedom! That each man will live for his fellow man. The principle has been born there. It will take years for it to be crystallized; yet out of Russia comes again the hope of the world." (1944 Edgar Cayce)
Pan is the piece of garbage who sponsored the law making vaccines mandatory for school kids in California. It looks like he's setting his sights on all Americans now.
FOMO means 'fear of missing out'
I have no problem with this kind of transparent propagenda. It's a sign that the PTB are overplaying their hand. The vaccine is anything but popular with the people.