Lyons-Weiler: Microchipped Synthetic Humans Could be 3 Times Smarter

7

SYNTHETIC HUMANS. The researcher James Lyons-Weiler says that Elon Musk figures humans can’t beat the supercomputers and artificial intelligence (AI) very soon will be superior to human intelligence. We will become trivials. Therefore Elon Musk believes we need to join the machines by becoming chipped and transhuman. Weiler questions this approach. Are synthetic humans really good for human biological evolution?

Interview by Aga Wilson, Free Voice at NewsVoice | Text by Torbjorn Sassersson

Topics

  • Biotransformative Technologies – Is Elon Musk right about merging with AI?
  • Why do SARS-CoV-2 proteins make double exposure more risky?
  • What is the expected outcome of the Covid-19 pandemic?

Elon Musk already has a company called Neuralink that develops technology that can merge the human brain with a supercomputer via an interface. Neuralink has already produced a prototype chip implanted in a monkey’s brain that can make the monkey play video games using only intentional thinking.

The company proudly presents Pager a macaque with two Neuralink chips implanted in the brain. In the future, we could even download information directly from a supercomputer.

Transhumanism goes hand in hand with genetic manipulation

One possibility is, Weiler says, an eternal consciousness could be created that we can relate to, and when doing so we may not be able to tell if information comes from our own mind or this external power. That outer entity could do the thinking for us.

Weiler also touches upon the risk of altering our DNA and genome and that it may be tempting for people to ask for alterations in order to improve intelligence, performance, and beauty.

Weiler then says that both the AI and the genetic modification progress has brought us to a place where it is difficult to contemplate moral issues and where all this is going to bring pertaining to organic evolution for the people who either adapt to or not with these technologies.

Subscribe to Receive NewsVoice' Latest News and Interviews
Loading
Synthetic humans. Photo: Sergey Nivens. Licens: Mostphotos.com
Synthetic transhuman superwoman. Photo: Sergey Nivens. Licens: Mostphotos.com

Natural organic humans vs future synthetic humans

Last week James Lyons-Weiler had his latest paper published entitled “Who are we, and Who (or What) Do We Want to Become? An Evolutionary Perspective on Biotransformative Technologies” in the journal Biological Theory.

In his paper, he focuses on what is called cognitive plasticity and how it will be affected if humans merge with digital technologies to become synthetic humans. So far there are much more questions than answers. The research and his paper are open source.

In order to sauce out what the future may be Weiler constructed a model consisting of two distinguishable types of future humans, the organic humans, and the synthetics humans. The first type refuses to hook up to biologically foreign technologies whereas the synthetic type wants to adopt.

In this model, which probably is dependent on wealth, synthetic humans could develop certain capabilities at a rate three times faster than organic humans. He says that since meaningful biological mutations are so few and come too slow, biotransformative technologies will easily overtake the overall development of synthetic humans at an exponential rate.

At the same time, if the development in the future turns successful, we might see social pressure being performed on parents that refuse to hook up their kids via implants to supercomputers and the global brain. They may be deemed bad, in the same way as parents refusing to vaccinate their kids today are perceived as bad parents.

These technologies should not be brought upon humanity without our full consent

In the interview below Elon Musk talks about the dangerous path that AI is heading towards and how it will affect us. This is only the beginning, the intelligence boom of AI is expanding quickly, writes Anonymous, and we may be very close to making a very important decision about AI. Musk says everyone should be prepared.

As Elon Musk suggests James Lyons-Weiler also warns us that the implications are very hard to handle if we let loose these biotransformative technologies within the human population, especially since we already have seen examples of artificial intelligence that in certain cases spontaneously have been seen writing new codes and algorithms all by itself!

Transcending transhuman AI

Aga Wilson asks where the people come in the equation for all this and James Lyons-Weiler says that his paper was written on the behalf of humanity, adding these technologies should not be brought upon humanity without our full consent.

“The evolutionary landscape upon which we were born is the most basic and universal of all common rights, upon which all our descendants, modified and augmented or not, must and are entitled to live free from manipulation of recently emerged Homo sapiens who do not even yet know how to run pluralistic societies without violence.

We have a collective right and responsibility to take an extremely cautious approach toward modifying the adaptive landscape upon which we all, and our progeny, as a species have no choice but to continue to collectively evolve.” – Lyons-Weiler

In the interview, Lyons-Weiler says: unfortunately three are no “right hands” to put the biotransformative technologies into. There are no individuals nor groups that can handle this since it is too powerful. Yet, the research in these fields (human-AI interfaces and genetic manipulation) is in full swing.

The futuristic movie “Her” starring Joaquin Phoenix as the main character, a computerized AI woman named Samantha (voice by Scarlett Johansson) simulates a complete human spiritual development as she merges with an indefinable space beyond all the computers on the global internet and therefore loses interest in the organic human destiny. Maybe this finally and in the end will save humanity from superior AI, ubiquitous computing, the Internet of Things, and robots (editor’s note).

This text only covers the 30 first minutes of the 60 minutes long interview. Please, feel free to watch the complete video. This text does not cover the subjects:

  • Why do SARS-CoV-2 proteins make double exposure riskier?
  • What is the expected outcome of the Covid-19 pandemic?

Text by Torbjorn Sassersson | Interview by Aga Wilson, Free Voice at NewsVoice

Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, aka “Dr. Jack”, is a biomedical research scientist who helped create the field of bioinformatics.

With expertise in genomics, proteomics, and clinical and translational research, he has over 58 peer-reviewed publications on topics ranging from lung
cancer to the effect of the adoption of artificial intelligence on human evolution.

Founder and CEO of IPAK, a biomedical research institute, and Chancellor of IPAK-EDU, his life goals are to reduce human pain and suffering through knowledge and to empower the public through knowledge.

His current research includes causes of autoimmunity due to exposure to SARS-CoV-2 proteins in humans, as well as the effects of aluminum injection on whole-body aluminum toxicity and further analysis of the long-term effects on human health.  Founder of the school of thought known as Popular Rationalism, he is currently Editor-in-Chief of the high-impact journal “Science, Public Health Policy & the Law”

We acknowledge that by participating in the interview, Dr Jack is allowing News Voice to use and distribute his name, images, spoken words, biographical information. News Voice will not be held liable for any damages that might result from sharing of the video interview.

Ipak-edu.org
Ipaknowledge.org
Popularrationalism.substack.com
Jameslyonsweiler.com
Twitter.com/lifebiomedguru

Related

Prenumerera på NewsVoice gratis-mail

0

Prenumerera på våra utskick så att du alltid håller dig uppdaterad när vi publicerar nya artiklar. Använd fältet nedan. Vi behöver bara din mail-adress. Våra utskick kommer en gång per dag.

Prenumerera på NewsVoice - Få mail när vi publicerat nya artiklar
Loading
Torbjörn Sassersson, 23 juli 2021 - selfie
Torbjörn Sassersson, 23 juli 2021 – selfie

Tipsa andra

Du kan alltid avsluta din prenumeration när du vill, men vi hoppas att du vill tipsa andra om att de också kan få våra utskick. Berätta att NewsVoice är en oberoende nättidning med nyheter och debatt med öppna kommentarsfält.

Personuppgiftspolicy enligt GDPR:s regler

Torbjörn Sassersson, redaktör | Foto: StockSnap. Licens: Pixabay.com

Dr Fuellmich: Coronakrisen är ett globalt kuppförsök – Coronakommitténs slutsatser

36

VÄRLDEN. NewsVoice sammanfattar den tyska coronakommitténs slutsatser. Projektet leds av den tyska stjärnadvokaten dr Reiner Fuellmich som utreder coronakrisens karaktär, riskerna med restriktionerna, krisens bakomliggande drivkrafter och hur kritiker slås ner med övervåld. 150 experter från hela världen har intervjuats. Fynden är chockerande. Det handlar om ett globalt kuppförsök.

Sammanställning och översättning: Torbjörn Sassersson

Den tyska corona-kommittén startade i juli 2020 av en grupp av tyska advokater för att utreda coronakrisens drivkrafter, viruset, hur pålitliga PCR-tester är samt hur skadliga covidrestriktionerna är för länders ekonomier och människors hälsa.

Dr Reiner Fuellmich säger att när världen stängdes ner i mars 2020 som en följd av ett WHO-beslutet att världen drabbats av en global viruspandemi, och det påföljande målet att massvaccinera friska människor i hela världen, spred regeringar och massmedier medvetet paniken.

Dokument som läckt ut från flera regeringar visar att uppsåtet från början har varit att medveten sprida en skapad panik om ett påstått livsfarligt virus. Fotografier från Italien och New York användes redan från början av massmedier för att iscensätta masspanik, förklarar Fuellmich.

Corona-kommitténs slutsatser per den 16 september 2021

Trots att det inte existerar någon verklig ökad mortalitet i världen under 2020 valde regeringar att satsa allt på ett kort, på så kallade “vacciner”, som den enda möjligheten att stoppa en påstådd global pandemi, men allt baserades på överdrivna uppgifter och ovetenskaplig medicinsk propaganda. Äldreboenden har särskilt utsatts för praktiserad vanvård för att öka dödstalen och för att iscensätta covidpolitiska åtgärder.

  • Covidrestriktionerna handlar inte om hälsa och det existerar inte en verklig pandemi. I realiteten finns endast ett virus som ett normal friskt immunförsvar kan hantera på egen hand precis som vilken annan influensa och det oavsett om viruset skapades naturligt eller i ett laboratorium.
  • Det finns redan befintliga vårdmetoder och preparat för att framgångsrikt behandla Covid-19 (med dessa stoppas över hela världen, red anm).
  • Regeringar i Europa och Amerika agerar inte i medborgarnas intresse. Istället styrs regeringarnas åtgärdsprogram av globala storföretag. Stora aktörer som styr utvecklingen är bland flera Deutsche Bank och WHO vilka utgör så pass maktfullkomliga entiteter att de är svåra att ställas inför rätta.
  • Domare i Tyskland utsätts för en olaglig och direkt påverkan för att förmå dessa att inte gå emot de ansvariga beslutfattarnas och aktörernas metoder. Fuellmich ger ett exempel på hur en tysk domare (fallet Christiaan Dettmar) slog fast att restriktionerna som tillämpas är ovetenskapliga och skadliga för skolungdomar. Konsekvensen var att hans kontor och hus utsattes för razzior. Även domarens konsulterade experter utsattes för samma sak. Angreppen är ett bra exempel på hur en auktoritär regim opererar och målet är helt uppenbart att skrämma andra försök att rättsligt pröva Tysklands coronapolicy, varnar Fuellmich.
Emmanuel Macron - Pressfoto: Europaparlamentet
Emmanuel Macron pekas ut som en frontfigur och en av kuppmakarna – Pressfoto: Europaparlamentet

Det globala kuppförsöken 2009 och 2019

Corona-kommittén slår fast att de coronarestriktioner som tillämpas i världen inte baseras på varken vetenskap eller rimlighet. Regeringar i många länder tar tillfället i akt för att förtrycka befolkningar och påtvinga dessa vaccinpass och experimentella injektioner och försök görs att påtvinga hela befolkningar injektioner var sjätte månad.

Prenumerera på NewsVoice - Få mail när vi publicerat nya artiklar
Loading

Reiner Fuellmich säger att stora ekonomiska entiteter under svinfluensakrisen 2009 försökte starta en global omställning av samma karaktär som vi ser idag, men att kuppen misslyckades för att medicinska experter då hade politisk makt att stoppa den.

Sedan dess har åtgärder vidtagits för att skapa bättre förutsättningar för ett nytt kuppförsök. WHO har tex ändrat definitionen på begreppet pandemi så att vilken influensa som helst kan klassas som en global och för mänskligheten livsfarlig pandemi.

Fuellmich förklarar att sedan 2009 har flera patent registrerats för spikproteiner och vaccin. Läkemedelsbolag har också gjort stora investeringar relaterat till coronavirus i förtid innan den påstådda coronapandemin uppstod 2019. Pandemiövningen “Event 201” genomfördes i oktober 2019 i god tid innan regeringarna vidtog coronaåtgärderna som sedan låste en hel värld.

Incidenten i Wuhan använde som en språngbräda av de stora ekonomiska intressenterna för att skapa coronakrisen, säger Fuellmich. Han går in på detaljerna i sitt framförande och de flesta känner till utvecklingen i världen perioden från hösten 2019 fram till idag.

PCR-test-pandemi och vacciner

PCR-testernas positiva provsvar har hela tiden funnits i centrum för att driva agendan. Fuellmich kallar det för en PCR-test-pandemi. Smittfallen har betraktats som bevis för att det finns en pandemi som härjar på planeten trots att det i realiteten rört sig om ett förhållandevis harmlöst virus att betrakta som en säsongsinfluensa.

Vägran och förbuden att tillämpa effektiva vårdmetoder och rutinartad insättning av palliativ vård för de flesta i åldrarna 70+ har sedan gett mängder med förtida dödsfall som i sin tur används som “bevis” för en härjande pandemi och för att påskynda massvaccinationer och vidmakthålla lockdown. Vaccinskadade klassas om Covid-19-offer. Ovaccinerade pekas ut som superspridare.

Ett bevis för att mRNA-vaccinerna är skadliga och ineffektiva mot Covid-19 är fallet Israel där 86% av de som behandlas inom vården för Covid-19 är dubbelvaccinerade. Fuellmich säger att minst 500,000 personer i USA har avlidit på grund av de riskabla vaccinerna. Många fler miljoner har skadats av allvarliga biverkningar. Särskilt oroväckande är vaccinernas effekter när vaccinerade personer utsätts för naturliga infektioner eftersom vaccinerna skadar det naturliga immunförsvaret.

Justin Trudeau: Foto: 2017 Canada Summer Games
Justin Trudeau: Foto: 2017 Canada Summer Games. Licens: CC BY 2.0

En global kamp mot psykopater besatta av extrema kontrollbehov

Läkemedelsbolagen har redan i sina kontrakt med regeringar runt om i världen friskrivit sig allt ansvar för vaccinernas biverkningar och påföljande dödsfall. Fuellmich pekar ut aktörer som Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron, Justin Trudeau, Sebastian Kurz, Jacinda Ardern, Ursula von der Leyen som kuppmakare och frontfigurer. Allt handlar om en global ekonomisk omställning, under förevändningen om att “rädda” världen, en kupp som ska vara klar 2030.

Fuellmich avslutar med att nämna att folk i världen håller på att vakna upp och se det pågående kuppförsöket och att striden som pågår handlar om en kamp mellan en human och en inhuman världsordning.

Sammanställning och översättning: Torbjörn Sassersson

Vad är nyttan med att titta på bilkrascher filmade med bilkameror?

4

TRAFIKSÄKERHET. På Youtube finns ett stort antal bilvideos som visar olyckor i trafiken. Finns det någon nytta med att titta på dessa filmer? Ja, det finns mycket att lära för att se hur trafikolyckor uppstår.

Dessa videos har spelats in i över hela världen med så kallade dash cams, eller bilkameror. Ibland har fordon kamera både fram och bak. Filmerna kan användas i utbildningssyfte eller i försäkringsfall. En video kan avgöra vilken part som orsakat en olycka.

De flesta trafikolyckor följer mönster

Dieseltrim Allbilsverkstad
Annons: Dieseltrim Allbilsverkstad

Det första som de flesta kan observera är att många olyckor ofta följer mönster. Det finns en röd tråd. De vanligaste orsakerna till trafikolyckor baserat på många timmars tittande är följande:

  • Farliga och chansartade vänstersvängar.
  • Riskabla omkörningar.
  • För kort avstånd till framförvarande fordon.
  • Körning mot rött ljus.
  • Sladdar som orsakas av halt väglag och/eller dåliga däck.
  • Filbyte utan kontroll i döda vinkeln och/eller utan att blinka.
  • Parkering på vägrenen.
  • Körning under berusning.
  • Föremål på vägen eller föremål som lossnar från släp eller tak.
  • Djur som springer ut på vägbanan.
  • Fordonsförare som somnar framför ratten.
  • Textning eller annan användning av mobiltelefon är garanterat ytterligare en orsak till olyckor på vägarna.

Dessa två sistnämnda olycksorsaker går inte att avgöra med ledning av dessa inspelningar, men kan misstänkas.

Prenumerera på NewsVoice - Få mail när vi publicerat nya artiklar
Loading

En slutsats som är ganska enkel att dra är att de flesta olyckor, uppskattningsvis 90%, kan undvikas genom att fordonsförare slutar ta onödiga risker och bibehåller god uppmärksamhet på vad som händer framför fordonet.

Extern skribent

SwebbTV kritiserar SVT:s reportage om klimatet, Lars Bern, Elsa Widding

29

KLIMATDEBATT. SVT Aktuellt har kartlagt påstådda klimatförnekare och pekar ut Lars Bern och Elsa Widding som exempel. Martin Hultman som är docent på Chalmers Tekniska Högskola får sista ordet.

Både Lars Bern och Elsa Widding är civilingenjörer från Chalmers Tekniska Högskola, men SVT nämner det inte. Lars Bern är även teknologie doktor och var tidigare medlem i Kungliga Ingenjörsvetenskapsakademien.

Elsa Widding har haft viktiga befattningar i flera stora energibolag, i bl a Vattenfall och har arbetat på Näringsdepartementet. Inget av detta nämns, skriver SwebbTV som kommenterar SVT:s inslag som kallar SVT-inslaget för fake news.

“Man ljuger om att båda tackat nej till att medverka i programmet. Det stämmer inte. De ställer gärna upp i direktsändningar men man tackar nej till att medverka i program där man klipper och manipulerar uttalanden eftersom man vet av erfarenhet att så sker.” – SwebbTV

NewsVoice kan intyga att SVT är allmänt kända inom den nya mediesfären som växer fram i Sverige för att inte vilja ha direktsändningar eftersom de då inte kan klippa och justera materialet efter sin egen agenda.

“Martin Hultman kallar, som flera andra i programmet, kritiker för klimatförnekare. Ingen kan förneka klimatet. Man kallar dem även klimatskeptiker. Ingen kan vara skeptisk till klimatet. Den relevanta beskrivningen är naturligtvis klimathotsförnekare eller klimatrealister, eftersom tusentals forskare i världen bestämt hävdar att jorden och mänskligheten inte kommer att gå under.” – SwebbTV

SVT kallar Johan Rockström för klimatforskare trots att han aldrig forskat om klimatet. Han är agronom. Erika Bjerström kallas klimatexpert trots att hon många gånger blandat ihop viktiga miljöfrågor, väder, väderfenomen, mångfald och hållbarhet med klimatet, skriver SwebbTV.

Martin Hultman är snabb att koppla så kallade klimatförnekare till tvivelspridning, Trump och högerrörelsen trots att sådana kopplingar inte finns när det gäller sakfrågorna.

Text: NewsVoice

Are These Findings the Death Blow for Vaccine Passports?

4

While governments around the world are going full steam ahead with plans for vaccine passports, two key things have occurred that blow irreparable holes in the whole argument.

First, more than 15 studies now show the natural immunity you get after recovering from COVID-19 is far superior and longer-lasting than what you get from the COVID shot, and secondly, lawsuits have challenged vaccine requirements that fail to accept natural immunity as an alternative to the COVID injection. Other lawsuits highlighting the illegalities of vaccine mandates have also been filed.

By Dr. J. Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • More than 15 studies now show the natural immunity you get after recovering from COVID-19 is far superior and more long-lasting than what you get from the COVID shot.
  • Lawsuits challenge vaccine requirements that fail to accept natural immunity as an alternative to the COVID injection.
  • Todd Zywicki, a law professor at George Mason University in Virginia, sued over the school’s vaccine mandate, which did not recognize natural immunity. The school settled out of court, granting Zywicki a medical exemption. They did not, however, change their general policy to recognize other staff and students who have natural immunity.
  • Some of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed against Rutgers University in New Jersey also object to the vaccine mandate on the basis that they have natural immunity. This lawsuit is still pending.
  • Since COVID shots do not prevent infection or spread of the virus, and COVID-jabbed individuals carry the same viral load when symptomatic as unvaccinated individuals, the argument that vaccine passports will identify and separate “public health threats” from those who are “safe” to be around simply falls apart.

The Zywicki Case

As reported by the New York Post,1 August 4, 2021, when George Mason University in Virginia decided to implement a vaccine mandate, law professor Todd Zywicki sued.2 Mason recovered from COVID-19 in 2020 and has natural immunity, as demonstrated by several antibody tests. One of his attorneys, Harriet Hageman, stated:

Common sense and medical science should underpin GMU’s actions. Both have gone missing with this latest effort to force a distinguished professor to take a vaccine that he does not need — not for his own protection nor for anyone else’s safety at Scalia Law School.”

The lawsuit pointed out that people with natural immunity have an increased risk of adverse reactions to the COVID shot — according to one study3 up to 4.4 times the risk of clinically significant side effects — and that the requirement not only violates due process rights and the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, but is not compliant with the Emergency Use Authorization.4

A Win for GMU Professor but No Legal Precedent

August 17, 2021, George Mason University caved before the case went to trial and granted Zywicki a medical exemption to the vaccine requirement.5 Unfortunately, and irrationally, the school did not revise its general policy. As reported by Citizens Journal:6

“The school’s acknowledgment of natural immunity is significant given the serial case of amnesia that seems to have overtaken the world on this basic point of biology.

However, the school still maintains the vaccination requirement for all other members of the GMU community, regardless of naturally acquired immunity. At the time of this writing, the same medical exemption has not been offered on a broader scale.

Furthermore, the lawsuit would have served as an interesting test case for vaccine mandate-related litigation, which will become more prevalent as time goes on. Regardless, the victory still serves as a sliver of hope that some universities will entertain reasonable arguments and that individuals can fight back with litigation …

With the GMU case resolved without trial, many critical legal arguments went untested. For example, does the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause apply to vaccine mandates, or does the state have the ability to suspend such rights when responding to a public health emergency?

How does the reliability of natural immunity affect the constitutionality of policies that fail to recognize it? Can the government simply cherry-pick whatever science it wants to justify its policies? According to the court filing,7

‘The Supreme Court has recognized that the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to privacy. A ‘forcible injection … into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty[.]’ Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990).’

Given this precedent, as well as the state’s police powers to suspend individual rights under compelling circumstances, how will this apply to Covid-19 in a low-risk environment such as a college campus?

If the right still holds, how will it apply to city-wide vaccine passport programs, given that Covid-19 is a relatively mild disease? … The move is also mysterious, given the relevance of the matter. As a result, it did not create a binding legal precedent.”

In a statement, lead counsel Jenin Younes with the New Civil Liberties Alliance, said:8

“NCLA is pleased that GMU granted Professor Zywicki’s medical exemption, which we believe it only did because he filed this lawsuit. According to GMU, with the medical exemption, Prof. Zywicki may continue serving the GMU community, as he has for more than two decades, without receiving a medically unnecessary vaccine and without undue burden.

Nevertheless, NCLA remains dismayed by GMU’s refusal — along with many other public and private universities and other employers — to recognize that the science establishes beyond any doubt that natural immunity is as robust or more so than vaccine immunity.”

Other Lawsuits Challenging Schools’ Vaccine Mandates

While not specifically centered around the validity of natural immunity, a lawsuit filed by more than a dozen students and Children’s Health Defense against Rutgers University in New Jersey does include this aspect, as some of the plaintiffs object to the mandate on the basis that they have natural immunity. This lawsuit was filed in mid-August 20219 and is still pending.

Earlier this year, in April 2021, the Los Angeles Unified School District was sued over its vaccine requirement by California Educators for Medical Freedom and the Health Freedom Defense Fund.10 July 27, a California court dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice, as it concluded the LAUSD had voluntarily abandoned its mandatory vaccine requirement. As reported by The Defender:11

“This is a BIG win — because of the lawsuit, LAUSD represented to the court on the record that it does not have a policy requiring vaccination with EUA products. Since the court has now confirmed the absence of any policy requiring vaccination at LAUSD, all teachers and staff are safe to return to work without vaccination or furnishing proof of vaccination in the fall.”

Time will tell if the Children’s Health Defense case against Rutgers University will bring the legal precedent needed to more effectively thwart this tyrannical trend. Still, even smaller wins like Zywicki’s are important and demonstrate there are ways we can fight back, if only we’re willing.

Natural Immunity Surpasses Vaccine-Induced Protection

While vaccine passports are immoral and unconstitutional in and of themselves, medical science is also proving them useless and irrational. As reported by Daniel Horowitz in an August 25, 2021, article in The Blaze,12 there are at least 15 studies that show natural immunity from previous infection is more robust and longer-lasting than what you get from the COVID shot. He writes:

“The debate over forced vaccination with an ever-waning vaccine is cresting right around the time when the debate should be moot for a lot of people. Among the most fraudulent messages of the CDC’s campaign of deceit is to force the vaccine on those with prior infection, who have a greater degree of protection against all version of the virus than those with any of the vaccines.

It’s time to set the record straight once and for all that natural immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is broader, more durable, and longer-lasting than any of the shots on the market today. Our policies must reflect that reality.”

We now have data showing vaccine immunity rapidly wanes regardless of variants, but especially when a new variant becomes predominant. According to the Mayo Clinic, as of July 2021, Pfizer’s COVID injection was only 42% effective against infection,13 which doesn’t even meet the Food and Drug Administration’s requirement of 50% efficacy14 for COVID vaccines.

This matches Israeli data, which show Pfizer’s shot went from a 95% effectiveness at the outset, to 64% in early July 2021 and 39% by late July, when the Delta strain became predominant.15,16 Pfizer’s own trial data also demonstrate rapidly waning effectiveness. BMJ associate editor Peter Doshi discussed this in an August 23, 2021, blog.17

By the fifth month into the trial, efficacy had dropped from 96% to 84%, and this drop could not be due to the emergence of the Delta variant since 77% of trial participants were in the U.S., where the Delta variant didn’t emerge until months later. So, even without a predominance of a new variant, effectiveness drops off. In an August 20, 2021, report, BPR noted:18

“‘The data we will publish today and next week demonstrate the vaccine effectiveness against SARS COVID 2 infection is waning,’ the CDC director [Rochelle Walensky] began … She cited reports of international colleagues, including Israel ‘suggest increased risk of severe disease amongst those vaccinated early’ …

‘In the context of these concerns, we are planning for Americans to receive booster shots starting next month to maximize vaccine induced protection. Our plan is to protect the American people and to stay ahead of this virus,’ Walensky shared …

The CDC director appears to all but admit that the vaccine’s efficacy rate has a strict time limit, and its protections are limited in the ever-changing environment.”

You’re Far Safer Around a Naturally Immune Person

Add to this a) the fact that the COVID shots do not prevent infection or spread of the virus and b) the fact that COVID-jabbed individuals carry the same viral load when symptomatic as unvaccinated individuals,19,20 and the whole argument that vaccine passports will identify and separate “public health threats” from those who are “safe” to be around simply fails miserably.

As noted by Horowitz, anyone capable of rational thought understands that a person with natural immunity from a previous infection is “exponentially safer to be around than someone who had the vaccines but not prior infection.”21

As for the unvaccinated who do not have natural immunity from prior infection, well, their status poses no increased risk to anyone but themselves. Conversely, since the COVID shot cannot prevent infection or transmission, and only promises to reduce your risk of serious illness, the only one who can benefit from the shot is the one who got it. It protects no one else.

In fact, you may actually pose an increased risk to others, because if your symptoms are mild or nonexistent, but your viral load high, you’re more likely to walk around as usual. Rather than staying home because you suspect you’re infected and infectious, you’re out spreading the virus around to others, vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.

What Does the Research Say?

In his article, Horowitz reviews 15 studies that should, once and for all, settle the debate about whether people who have had COVID are now immune and whether that immunity is comparable to that of the COVID shots. Here’s a select handful of those studies. For the rest, please see the original Blaze article.22

Immunity May 202123 New York University researchers concluded that while both SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination elicit potent immune responses, the immunity you get when you’ve recovered from natural infection is more durable and quicker to respond.

The reason for this is because natural immunity conveys more innate immunity involving T cells and antibodies, whereas vaccine-induced immunity primarily stimulates adaptive immunity involving antibodies.

Nature May 202124 This research dispels fears that SARS-CoV-2 infection might not produce long-lasting immunity. Even in people with mild COVID-19 infection, whose anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S) antibodies levels might rapidly decline in the months’ post-recovery, persistent and long-lived bone marrow plasma cells start churning out new antibodies when the virus is encountered a second time.

According to the authors, “Consistently, circulating resting memory B cells directed against SARS-CoV-2 S were detected in the convalescent individuals. Overall, our results indicate that mild infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune memory in humans.”

Nature July 202025 The Nature findings above support findings from Singapore published in July 2020, which found patients who had recovered from SARS in 2002/2003 had robust immunity against SARS-CoV-2 17 years later.

Cell Medicine July 202126 Here, they found that most previously infected patients produced durable antibodies and memory B cells, along with durable polyfunctional CD4 and CD8 T cells that target multiple parts of the virus.

According to the authors: “Taken together, these results suggest that broad and effective immunity may persist long-term in recovered COVID-19 patients.” The same clearly cannot be said for vaccine-induced immunity.

BioRxiv July 202127 Echoing the Cell Medicine findings above, University of California researchers concluded that “Natural infection induced expansion of larger CD8 T cell clones occupied distinct clusters, likely due to the recognition of a broader set of viral epitopes presented by the virus not seen in the mRNA vaccine.”

We’re Creating a Pandemic of the Vaccinated

If natural immunity is better than vaccine-induced antibodies, you’d expect to see fewer reinfections among those who have already had COVID-19, compared to breakthrough infections occurring among those who got the COVID shot. And that’s precisely what we see.

In a preprint titled “Necessity of COVID-19 Vaccination in Previously Infected Individuals,”28 the researchers looked at reinfection rates among previously infected health care workers in the Cleveland Clinic system.

Of the 1,359 frontline workers with natural immunity from previous infection, not a single one was reinfected 10 months into the pandemic, despite heavy exposure to COVID-19-positive patients.

A second preprint,29 posted August 25, 2021, compared SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity by looking at reinfection and breakthrough rates. Four outcomes were evaluated: SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic disease, COVID-19-related hospitalization and death.

Results showed that, compared to those with natural immunity, SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals who had received a two-dose regimen of Pfizer’s COVID shot had:30

  • A 5.96-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection
  • A 7.13-fold increased risk for symptomatic disease
  • A 13.06-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant
  • A higher risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations

After adjusting for comorbidities, SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals who had received two Pfizer doses were 27.02 times more likely to experience symptomatic breakthrough infection than those with natural immunity.31 No deaths were reported in either of the groups. In closing the authors concluded:32

“This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity.”

Majority of Hospitalizations Are Actually in the Vaccinated

The oft-repeated refrain is that we’re in a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” meaning those who have not received the COVID jab make up the bulk of those hospitalized and dying from the Delta variant. However, we’re already seeing a shift in hospitalization rates from the unvaccinated to those who have gotten one or two injections.

For example, in Israel, the fully “vaccinated” made up the bulk of serious cases and COVID-related deaths in July 2021, as illustrated in the graphs below.33 The red is unvaccinated, yellow refers to partially “vaccinated” and green fully “vaccinated” with two doses. By mid-August, 59% of serious cases were among those who had received two COVID injections.34

new hospitalizations
new severe covid 19 patients
deaths trend

Data from the U.K. show a similar trend among those over the age of 50. In this age group, partially and fully “vaccinated” people account for 68% of hospitalizations and 70% of COVID deaths.35

COVID-19 delta variant hospital admission and death in England

Data36 from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also refute the “pandemic of the unvaccinated” narrative. Between July 6,2021, and July 25, 2021, 469 COVID cases were identified in a Barnstable County, Massachusetts, outbreak.

Of those who tested positive, 74% had received two COVID injections and were considered “fully vaccinated.” Even despite using different diagnostic standards for non-jabbed and jabbed individuals, a whopping 80% of COVID-related hospitalizations were also in this group.37,38

COVID Shot May Harm Immunity in Those Previously Infected

While the authors of that August 25, 2021, preprint39 claim in their abstract that “Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant,” in the body of the article they admit they “could not demonstrate significance in our cohort.”

Unless significance is demonstrated, the finding is basically irrelevant, so I would not rely on this paper if I wanted to argue for vaccination of those with preexisting natural immunity. Besides, there’s research40 showing the COVID shots may actually harm the superior T cell immunity built up from prior infection, especially after the second dose. As reported by Horowitz in The Blaze:41

“Immunologists from Mount Sinai in New York and Hospital La Paz in Madrid have raised serious concerns. In a shocking discovery after monitoring a group of vaccinated people both with and without prior infection, they found ‘in individuals with a pre-existing immunity against SARS-CoV-2, the second vaccine dose not only fail to boost humoral immunity but determines a contraction of the spike-specific T cell response.’

They also note that other research has shown ‘the second vaccination dose appears to exert a detrimental effect in the overall magnitude of the spike-specific humoral response in COVID-19 recovered individuals.'”

Arguments for Vaccine Passports Are Null and Void

FEE.org reported the August 25 findings under the headline, “Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished”:42

“Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff said research showing that natural immunity offers exponentially more protection than vaccines means vaccine passports are both unscientific and discriminatory, since they disproportionately affect working class individuals.

‘Prior COVID disease (many working class) provides better immunity than vaccines (many professionals), so vaccine mandates are not only scientific nonsense, they are also discriminatory and unethical,’ Kulldorff, a biostatistician and epidemiologist, observed on Twitter …

Vaccine passports would be immoral and a massive government overreach even in the absence of these findings. There is simply no historical parallel for governments attempting to restrict the movements of healthy people over a respiratory virus in this manner.

Yet the justification for vaccine passports becomes not just wrong but absurd in light of these new revelations. People who have had COVID already have significantly more protection from the virus than people who’ve been vaccinated.

Meanwhile, people who’ve not had COVID and choose to not get vaccinated may or may not be making an unwise decision. But if they are, they are principally putting only themselves at risk.”

Positive Signs

arihasanaj tiktok video

Video may not work on all browsers

While we still have a long and likely hard fight ahead of us, there is reason to be optimistic. In a recent TikTok video,43 a young man named Ari Hasanaj who lives in New York City describes how he printed up posters that say:

“We do not discriminate against ANY customer based on sex, gender, race, creed, age, vaccinated or unvaccinated. All customers who wish to patronize are welcome in our establishment.”

He then went around the city, from one store to the next, asking each owner if they would agree to post the sign on their door to protest NYC’s vaccine passport requirement. A majority said yes. He is now asking others to join him in this effort.

In Denmark, vaccine passports will no longer be used to restrict movement as of September 10, 2021. The health minister, Magnus Heunicke, has stated, though, that the passport system may be reinstated if rising infection rates threaten important functions.

Denmark was among the first to announce the development of a digital vaccine passport, which came into effect in April 2021.44 For months, Danes repeatedly demonstrated against the COVID passes, and it seems the protests eventually had the desired effect. It just goes to show that if enough people resist, tyrannical overreach can be reined in.

By Dr. J. Mercola

Sources and References

För vems skull ska egentligen barnen covidvaccineras?

43

NOTERAT. Medicinreportern Bodil Appelquist på den statliga TV-kanalen SVT och Stefan Löfven i Regeringen ger olika budskap när det gäller motivet till varför barnen ska covidvaccineras.

Bodil Appelquist sa i SVT den 15 september 2021 att barnen måste vaccineras för de vuxnas skull, men den snart avgående statsministern Stefan Löfven sa dagen efter att barnen måste vaccineras för barnens skull.

Detta utgör ytterligare ett exempel på ett i raden av motstridiga och opålitliga påståenden som fällts under de senaste 18 månaderna om Covid-19 och de mRNA-baserade covidvaccinerna som av experter kallas för genterapier.

Kunskapsdebatten är fri. Kommentera nedan.

Källor

  • SVT Play 15 september 2021: Socialministern håller pressträff om vaccin
    “Socialminister Lena Hallengren (S) håller en pressträff på temat vaccin. Vid pressträffen medverkar Marie Morell, ordförande i SKR:s sjukvårdsdelegation, och Folkhälsomyndighetens generaldirektör Johan Carlson.”
  • SVT Play 16 september 2021: Regeringen presenterar en coronanyhet
    “Statminister Stefan Löfven, socialminister Lena Hallengren, utbildningsminister Anna Ekström och Folkhälsomyndighetens generaldirektör Johan Carlson medverkar.”
Medicinkvinnan Bodil Appelquist och de snart avgående statsministern Stefan Löfven. Foton: SVT. Montage: NewsVoice
“Medicinkvinnan” Bodil Appelquist och de snart avgående statsministern Stefan Löfven. Foton: SVT. Montage: NewsVoice

Världens första civila astronautbesättning har skjutits upp – Inspiration4 mission

2

CIVIL RYMDFART. SpaceX har under natten svensk tid skjutit upp världens första civila astronautbesättning bestående av två kvinnor och två män. Uppskjutning gick utan problem.

Uppskjutningen genomfördes med SpaceX:s Falcon 9-raket och farkosten Dragon med besättningen från det historiska uppskjutningskomplexet 39A vid NASA:s Kennedy Space Center i Florida. Falcon 9-raketen återvände och landade på jorden medan Dragon med besättningen forsatte sin resa runt jorden.

Ungefär efter tre dagar kommer Dragon och Inspiration4-besättningen att återvända till jorden på en av flera möjliga landningsplatser i havet utanför Floridas kust.

Prenumerera på NewsVoice - Få mail när vi publicerat nya artiklar
Loading

Inspiration4-expeditionen leds av Jared Isaacman, grundare och VD för Shift4 Payments och i övrigt utbildad pilot och äventyrare. Han assisteras av läkaren Hayley Arceneaux, vid St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, “mission specialist” Chris Sembroski som är  flygvapenveteran och dataingenjör samt dr Sian Proctor, geovetare, entreprenör och utbildad pilot.

Spacex.com/launches

Text: NewsVoice | Bildmontage av NewsVoice med bilder från NASA och SpaceX