Questions for Dr. Geert- Anwers provided

You claimed that the COVID-19 vaccination was a mistake? Do you still hold the same opinion?

Of course, since I raised my voice at the beginning of 2021, I never ever changed my opinion. However, I’ve always been pointing to the fact that the devil is in the scientific detail. In this regard, it would be more appropriate to say that MASS COVID-19 vaccination during a pandemic of an acute, self-limiting viral infection was a mistake. The reason is that this MASS COVID-19 vaccination during a pandemic of an acute, self-limiting viral infection promotes immune selection of more infectious variants and thereby drives viral immune escape.

Did your opinion about the mistake of vaccinating in the middle of an epidemic apply to all types of vaccines or only to mRNA vaccines, given that the Chinese Sinovac vaccines were made using an old method?

That principle applies to all types of vaccines that are unable to induce cytolytic virus-specific immune cells (i.e., capable of killing virus-infected host cells). None of the Covid-19 vaccines – whether mRNA-based or not – have such sterilizing capacity. All Covid-19 vaccines are, therefore, prone to promoting immune selection of more infectious variants and favoring viral immune escape. mRNA-based vaccines inherently promote immune escape (after at least 2 injections) whereas non-mRNA-based C-19 vaccines only promote immune escape when high titers of vaccinal antibodies (typically starting after the 3^rd injection) encounter poorly matching circulating variants.

What should have been done when the epidemic broke out? Should the population have been left without vaccines?

First of all, we should acknowledge that overcrowding combined with poor hygienic conditions (e.g. slums and favellas in third-world countries/ regions) or high densities of vulnerable people (e.g., elderly/ nursing homes in industrialized countries) are a breeding ground for infectious epidemics or pandemics. However, since remediating such situations once a pandemic has started comes too late, the focus at the beginning of the pandemic should have been on early treatment using protocols as proposed by P. McCullough and other FLCCC frontline doctors. These protocols would have dramatically reduced the mortality rate in vulnerable people (i.e., elderly and individuals with underlying diseases) whereas exposure of healthy individuals (including children) would have fostered spread of the infection and thereby enabled protective herd immunity.

Time has shown that vaccines have not prevented the spread of the virus, but in the United States, vaccination advocates claim that they have prevented many deaths. Do you share their opinion?

It is true that C-19 vaccination initially largely prevented disease and subsequently (i.e., during the Omicron era) prevented severe C-19 disease. However, this allegedly ‘beneficial’ public health effect had 2 major public health disadvantages that primarily manifest in the longer term: 1. It made PH and RA authorities turn a blind eye on the side effects of the vaccines, some of which occur rather soon after vaccination (e.g., myocarditis) whereas others are due to  vaccine-associated immune dysregulation and occur in the longer term (e.g., reactivation of chronic/ latent infections, immunopathological disorders or cancers).  2. It promoted expedited viral evolution towards more infectious immune escape variants, which are ultimately highly likely of driving the emergence of more dangerous (i.e., more virulent) viral variants as explained in my latest and last Substack article (with a simplified summary for a broad audience attached at the end):  https://voiceforscienceandsolidarity.substack.com/p/when-the-trojan-horse-becomes-the?r=y46t6

Do you predict that the SARS-CoV-2 virus will return and hit much harder, especially among the vaccinated? Do you still have the same opinion?

Yes, I’ve been asserting this all along and never changed my opinion despite the spectacular shifts observed during this pandemic in terms of clinical, virological and immunological observations. Since the advent of Omicron, vaccine-breakthrough infections made the virus blow through the innate immune system such as to prevent training of their innate immune system whereas the adaptive immune system increasingly underwent functional dysregulation following re-exposure. To the extent they didn’t experience severe C-19 infection, unvaccinated individuals had the opportunity to train their innate immune system as a result of epigenic training of innate immune cells upon viral re-exposure. Re-exposure of healthy unvaccinated individuals therefore contributes to strengthening their first line of immune defense, thereby reducing the risk of contracting problematic symptomatic infection.

The history of the COVID-19 pandemic has already shown that a suddenly emerging, highly mutated variant (such as Omicron) can bypass humoral antiviral immunity due to widespread resistance to neutralizing antibodies. It is therefore highly likely that, in the context of currently increasing cellular immunity in C-19 vaccinees, a similarly sudden variant could arise that not only entirely bypasses humoral but also cellular adaptive immunity (the latter by developing widespread resistance to antiviral T cells) and thus leaves C-19 vaccinated individuals without any effective immune defense. There can be no doubt that a such variant would threaten the lives of many C-19 vaccinated people, especially those who experience long Covid or felt victim to serious vaccine breakthrough infections.

Can you specify what you mean when you say it "will hit much harder"?

What I mean is that mass vaccination-associated efficacy failure -driven by viral immune escape-will, in the long term, inevitably enable a suddenly emerging coronavirus lineage to acquire a high level of viral virulence and unleash a tsunami of hyperacute death in highly C-19 vaccinated populations.

What should people do in such a situation to protect themselves?

Any intervention that eventually succeeds in training the innate immune system of C-19 vaccinees could be considered (e.g., BCG vaccination). However, because the collective immune status of highly C-19 vaccinated populations is unable to control viral transmission, the only conceivable surrogate for herd immunity would be mass prophylactic treatment with safe and effective antivirals that are widely available in sufficient quantities and at an affordable price. The only drug with proven antiviral activity that meets these criteria is ivermectin. However, it is unlikely that public health authorities will decide to encourage mass antiviral prophylaxis with ivermectin!

As an expert in the field of vaccines, how do you explain the fact that mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) cause myocarditis, and do they have a connection to a kind of epidemic of cancer, especially in young people?

Injections of mRNA vaccines result in ‘unnatural’ expression of spike protein at the surface of mRNA-transfected host cells (i.e., the expression of spike protein at the surface of mRNA-transfected cells is different from that induced by natural infection with SARS-CoV-2). This abnormal expression leads to immune refocusing (i.e., the elicited Abs primarily target domains on S protein that are normally less immunogenic while largely ignoring its immunodominant domains). As less immunogenic domains tend to have higher analogy with self-proteins, the elicited Abs may promote autoreactive inflammation, especially in highly vascularized organs (e.g., heart). At a more advanced stage of the ‘immune escape’ pandemic, immune refocusing leads to enhanced targeting of a wide spectrum of poorly SARS-CoV-specific T cell epitopes, thereby promoting functional immune dysregulation, leading to autoreactive T cell-mediated inflammation or reactivation of chronic/ latent infections or flaring up of dormant cancers (primarily due to dysregulation of regulatory T cells). So, ‘yes’, the increased prevalence of (turbo) cancers is highly associated with the (repeated) administration of C-19 vaccines.  This has now been demonstrated in several peer-reviewed journals. For more details on ‘immune refocusing’, please read chapter 1 of my book “The Inescapable Immune Escape Pandemic”.

Would these vaccines have been released in such a short time in any other situation?

The vast majority of the C-19 vaccines were mRNA-based vaccines. This technology was still poorly explored before the C-19 pandemic, especially in terms of vaccine safety, especially in children, pregnant woman and people with underlying diseases. These vaccines were, therefore, never intended to be pioneered for prophylactic purposes. The target population for mRNA-based and other genetic vaccines was within the therapeutic space, primarily in cancer treatment, and thus focused mainly on an older population. However, panic convinced regulatory and public health authorities to use mRNA technology for mass vaccination, as these vaccines can be manufactured and scaled up rapidly and quickly updated through a kind of ‘cut-and-paste’ process.

From today's perspective, was the so-called "lockdown" of both the economy and the schools justified?

No, it wasn’t justified as these measures prevented herd immunity from being established and hence, they allowed prolonged spread and evolution of the virus (even before the mass vaccination started). If we had let the virus spread (while applying ‘early treatment’ to elderly and otherwise vulnerable people contracting the disease), protective herd immunity would have been established and hence, viral transmission would have been halted.

PS:  To measure the level of herd immunity, experts and PH authorities solely measured the Ab response, thereby completely ignoring the protective role of the innate immune system. Hence, even the Swedish authorities concluded that the spread of natural infection did not suffice to establish herd immunity; they therefore erroneously eventually decided to vaccinate their population.