https://bmcinfectdis.biomedical.com/articles/10.1186/s12879/025-11596-w
More and more fact streams are sloping through the releasing dams of $NAUKI vaccine consensus. This time the paper was published in the medical diary of the mainstream BMC Infectious Diseases.
Recently, we have heard quite a few urging vaccination against pneumococcals, which is the origin of pneumonia, especially dangerous to aged people. Vaccinations are expected to defend against illness and its complications. However, let us remember that the global marketplace for pneumococcal vaccines between 2024 and 2025 is estimated at $8–10 billion and is increasing rapidly. Pfizer is the leader, picking up almost the full marketplace for pneumonia vaccines (80%). It is so hard to anticipate reliable information from the company.
Fortunately, independent investigation occurs. Recently, this was done in Catalonia, a region with advanced autonomy, with its own language government and president and wellness care system. Researchers performing investigation work for the Catalan Institute of Health, 1 of the largest wellness care systems in Spain.
In order to measure this protection in the real world, researchers have analysed medical records of more than 2 million people over 50 years of age. They compared electronic vaccination records of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with subsequent infirmary admissions for pneumonia and death records. The hazard of getting sick varied depending on the variety of vaccine used. In utmost cases, it was concluded that vaccinated people had an 80% higher likelihood of hospitalisation due to pneumonia. On the another hand, There was no measurable improvement in the hazard of hospitalisation or death in any vaccine group.
https://bmcinfectdis.biomedical.com/articles/10.1186/s12879/025-11596-w
Therefore, each of us should ask ourselves about the credibility of doctors, medical associations and the media urging everyone to vaccinate against pneumococcals. Meanwhile, the only function they have in the real planet is to make a cabal for pharmaceutical companies and their footmen.
The consequence of this survey has a much wider scope than just investigating doubtful protection against pneumonia. No published survey to test the effectiveness of vaccines under real conditions was given as a motivation for the work. As the authors wrote, respective randomised controlled and observational studies showedimmunogenicityvaccines, However, the efficacy in preventing pneumonia in adults was unknown to date.
Immunogenicity is simply a word we encountered during vaccination for covid-1984. This means that the body will respond, including antibody production. For any time, antibodies were the key subject in the discussion of vaccinations, so we heard over and over again about investigating antibody levels as if it were the most crucial thing. However, the substance is at least ambiguous.
The actual efficacy of vaccination is long-term and cumbersome. It is much easier to show the appearance of antibodies to convince the public and wellness officials about the effectiveness of vaccination and to sale the product. Meanwhile, this is simply a large mistake, and for a long time many researchers have pointed to the inappropriateness of this approach. The presence of antibodies does not mean immunity, sometimes even exacerbate the disease.
If regulators were yet convinced to reject evidence based on the presence of antibodies without demonstrating clinical efficacy, this would completely change the rules of the game. However, the pharmaceutical manufacture has full departments and teams where regulators work. They most likely began working on responding to these results long before publication was published.
The survey noted that this year they are expected to new versions vaccines, which gives the company Pfizer an excuse to vaguely express regret for the low effectiveness in erstwhile years and then to further advance the latest generation of pneumonia vaccines. Of course, these latest vaccines will be devoid of defects of their predecessors, or at least so they will convince us.
Revolutionary is the very fact that a large medical centre of advanced reputation performs this kind of investigation and publishes results in a mainstream medical journal. possibly this is simply a sign of a breakthrough in healthcare.
We may inactive see the time erstwhile vaccinations will only be authorised on the basis of solid studies demonstrating their clinical efficacy and any replacement measures will be rejected. And besides that vaccine manufacturers will bear full work for their actions, and sold doctors and regulators will go to jail.
Thank you for reading Substack Jack! Subscribe for free to receive fresh posts and support my work.
And an interesting review on the function of antibodies. reflection material for all those who have been so excited late about investigating their level.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-024-01067-9
Mechanisms of antibody-dependent enhancement of infectious illness
(Mechanisms dependent on antibodies to the severity of infectious diseases)
Antibody-dependent reinforcement (ADE) of infectious diseases is simply a phenomenon where host antibodies increase the severity of infection. It is well documented for viral infections, but ADE besides plays an underrated function in bacterial, fungal and parasitic infections.
ADE may happen during both primary infections and reinfection with the same or related pathogen; therefore, knowing the underlying mechanisms of ADE is crucial to knowing pathogenicity and progression of many infectious diseases. This article discusses 4 distinct mechanisms through which antibodies increase the severity of the illness during infection. We are discussing the most well-established mechanical explanation of the ADE, in which cross-reactive, potentiating antibody illness associated with pathogens interact with Fc receptors, thus strengthening the penetration or replication of the pathogen, yet expanding the full number of pathogens. In addition, we are investigating how any pathogen antibodies can defend bacteria from complement-dependent killing, thereby expanding their survival. We analyse molecular mechanisms through which antibodies can enhance inflammation, leading to severe disease, even without increased replication of the pathogen. We are besides analysing fresh roles of autoantibodies in the strength of pathogenic pathogenosis. Finally, we are discussing how we can usage these observations to improve vaccine plan and future treatments for infectious diseases.
