FatCamera/Getty Images

Horowitz: Do the COVID shots erase natural immunity?

Why is it that years into this pandemic, the cases continue to proliferate and people seem to get the virus multiple times? A new study might shed light on this question, revealing a disturbing business model of the pharmaceutical companies to ensure that their product is always in demand because it serves as the arsonist while pretending to be the medical equivalent of a firefighter.

A new study published as a letter in the New England Journal of Medicine reveals that not only did the Pfizer shots turn negative after five months during the Omicron wave, making a vaccinated individual more likely to get the virus, but they actually erased the immunity provided by prior infection, thereby ensuring that injected people can get COVID again. In a one-of-a-kind observational study of over 273,000 children, the study divided the groups into four camps: unvaccinated children with prior infection, unvaccinated children with no prior infection, vaccinated children with prior infection, and vaccinated children with no prior infection. What were the results?

Shockingly, the authors conclude, “The rapid decline in protection against omicron infection that was conferred by vaccination and previous infection provides support for booster vaccination.”

Except their study should demonstrate the exact opposite conclusion. Take a look at these two figures side by side:

The figure on the left (C) shows the gradual waning of immunity among unvaccinated children with prior infection. The figure on the right shows a precipitous waning of immunity among children who got COVID but then got vaccinated. Among those infected in November 2021 in the vaccine group, their level of protection went down to zero within a half-year, even though they already had the virus!

The authors suggest this is reason to constantly get boosters, but that would only make sense if boosters offered temporary protection but retained the protection accorded from prior infection. Clearly, this data shows that it slides the protection from natural infection backward, as was previously hypothesized from other academic papers.

Then again, if you look at their first two figures (A and B), they appear to show negative efficacy after five months for those without prior infection and just a slightly slower decline into negative territory among the vaccinated children who already had prior infection. In other words, either way – previously infected or not – the vaccine makes the children worse off.

This study lends credence to the findings of an NIH paper from earlier this year showing that only 40% of people with a previous infection in the vaccinated group produced anti-nucleocapsid antibodies, compared to 93% in the placebo group. The possible inhibition of N-antibodies, which are more comprehensive than the S(spike)-antibodies, might be a possible culprit for this negative efficacy even after having already been infected with the virus.

Another explanation might be original antigenic sin, which is the priming of the body to respond to new variants with an antigen to the old strain. A study from Stanford published in Cell earlier this year might shed light on this phenomenon. Researchers observed a decreased immune response to new variants among those vaccinated for the original strain because the shots are teaching the body to respond improperly. “We find that prior vaccination with Wuhan-Hu-1-like antigens followed by infection with Alpha or Delta variants gives rise to plasma antibody responses with apparent Wuhan-Hu-1-specific imprinting manifesting as relatively decreased responses to the variant virus epitopes, compared with unvaccinated patients infected with those variant viruses,” observed the Stanford pathologists. They note that the extent to which this causes original antigenic sin “will be an important topic of ongoing study.”

Important indeed! Just as with Pfizer’s oral therapeutic, Paxlovid, the more you use it, the more you need to use it! Behold the beauty of negative efficacy, rebounding of the virus, erasing natural immunity, and the promise of endless doses to stanch the bleeding.

Imagine that these shots are still being foisted upon children. Even the U.K. government quietly suspended the COVID shots for 5- to 11-year-olds. Yet we still have some cities in America requiring them for school.

What is further astounding is that even if the shots did work to prevent COVID, the upper bounds of illness severity most children present with is no worse than even the minor symptoms from the vaccine. Even putting aside the risk of serious injury, such as heart inflammation, the CDC’s own research shows that a massive percentage of toddlers who got the shots suffered what can only be described as flu-like symptoms. An unfathomable 50%-60% of children 6 months to two years of age experienced systemic reactions to one or both doses of either Pfizer or Moderna. This means they experienced some sort of illness beyond just pain at the injection site.

Furthermore, more than 15% of children 3-5 experienced a “health impact” from the second dose of Moderna, and anywhere from 5%-18% of children couldn’t go to school the next day, depending on the type and dose of shot. About 2% required medical care. Remember, this is for children and for Omicron, at a time when most already got the virus, but now the shot will give them up front COVID-like symptoms, possibly erase their prior immunity, thereby making them get the virus again, and exposing a certain percentage to life-altering adverse effects.

Could anyone possibly have manufactured a more Orwellian counterproductive vaccine if they tried on purpose?

FDA to authorize new COVID booster shots for Omicron before trials on humans, will instead rely on testing on mice



The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is expected to authorize new COVID-19 booster shots this week. The booster shots will be released months before trials on humans are completed, according to a new report.

New COVID-19 booster shots that target the latest Omicron variant will be approved by the FDA this week, the Wall Street Journal reported. The new booster shot will be "bivalent" – which means it can target the original COVID-19 strain and the Omicron BA.5 subvariant.

The booster shot will likely be available to Americans despite not having been tested on humans. Instead, the FDA will rely on testing on mice, data from current COVID-19 vaccines, and earlier iterations of boosters.

The Wall Street Journal noted, "The Food and Drug Administration is expected to authorize new COVID-19 booster shots this week without a staple of its normal decision-making process: data from a study showing whether the shots were safe and worked in humans."

FDA Commissioner Robert Califf issued a statement on Twitter regarding how the government agency will likely make a decision in granting emergency use authorization (EUA) for booster shots from Moderna and Pfizer.

"FDA will rely on the totality of the available evidence in making a decision, including: Clinical trial data from other bivalent mRNA COVID-19 boosters RWE from current COVID-19 vaccines administered to millions of people, non-clinical data for the bivalent BA.4/5 vaccines, bivalent and multivalent vaccines are very common and modifying a vaccine to include different virus strains often does not require a change in other ingredients," Califf said on Twitter.

Califf compared approving the mRNA booster shots to authorization of the annual flu vaccine.

"Real world evidence from the current mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which have been administered to millions of individuals, show us that the vaccines are safe," Califf added. "As we know from prior experience, strain changes can be made without affecting safety."

Califf declared that the FDA will not hold a meeting about the newest subvariant-targeting vaccines because the "agency feels confident in the extensive discussion that was held in June."

He said that the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) "voted overwhelmingly to include an Omicron component in COVID-19 boosters," and that the FDA "has no new questions that warrant committee input."

In June, two health experts wrote an op-ed urging the FDA not to release the booster shots without proper research. The piece was written by John P. Moore – a virologist and professor of microbiology and immunology at Weill Cornell Medicine – and Paul A. Offit – a pediatrician, professor of pediatrics, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and a member of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.

Offit told the Wall Street Journal, "I'm uncomfortable that we would move forward — that we would give millions or tens of millions of doses to people — based on mouse data."

Moderna has already begun human trials on the booster shots, and Pfizer is expected to begin theirs this month. Experts believe that trials likely wouldn't be completed until the spring.

Earlier this month, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha expected the boosters to be available by "early to mid-September."

Jha also said that the Omicron BA.5 subvariant represents 85% to 90% of all U.S. cases of COVID.

CDC data shows that less than 50% of Americans received the first booster shot, and 33% of Americans over the age of 50 got the second dose.

Biden presser goes horribly wrong as he gets second COVID booster on stage



On a recent episode of “The Rubin Report,” BlazeTV host Dave Rubin shared a clip of an especially awkward White House press conference in which President Joe Biden got his fourth dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine on stage, one day after federal health officials approved a second “booster” shot for people age 50 and up.

"I'm not sure why I'm doing this on stage," the president admitted as he attempted to walk, talk, and remove his jacket simultaneously, an undertaking that seemingly proved too much for the 79-year-old who fell silent as reporters fired off a volley of questions that had nothing to do with the COVID vaccine.

"Can you comment on the declassified intelligence that [Putin] doesn't trust his military leadership?" asked a reporter.

"No," answered Biden, after a lengthy pause during which he seemed to be trying to catch his breath.

Biden ignored the next few questions, remaining studiously focused on rolling up his sleeve.

Eventually, Biden announced, "I’ve always thought that it discourages people getting the vaccination when they watch people get a needle in their arm. So, I apologize for discouraging. But it didn’t hurt a bit and I was able to roll my sleeve up!"

The whole inspiring spectacle took place shortly after the president announced the launch of a new website COVID.gov, aimed at helping people find COVID-19 tests, vaccines, and treatments.

"Because of the strategy we executed over the past year on vaccinations, testing, treatments, and more, we’re now in a new moment in this pandemic. It does not mean that COVID-19 is over. It means that COVID-19 no longer controls our lives," Biden said, recycling the same line he used during a speech in 2021 — just before the U.S. was hit with the Delta variant.

"I feel very confident of everything happening in this country when I listen to that man and I watch whatever that theater show was," Dave said sarcastically.

Watch the video clip below or find more episodes of "The Rubin Report" here. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.