# Corona Virus News & Info

#### GOLDBRIX

##### 'SUSH, MY NEW SAFE HOUSE"
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
to those blood donors...

how about stockpiling some of YOUR OWN BLOOD in case you need to go into surgery at a later date?
There is a "Shelf-Life" to blood for use post surgery use. I believe it is only 30 days. I may be wrong on the expiration date but not by much.
As I have said in previous posts, If I've only saved one life with my 17 gallons of donated blood, it has been well worth it.
I pray it has been many more.

#### Uglytruth

##### Super Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++

David Knowles·Senior Editor

Mon, May 10, 2021, 4:17 PM·6 min rea

Republican rage directed at Dr. Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser on the coronavirus pandemic to Presidents Trump and Biden, seemed to reach new heights over the weekend, with former Trump administration trade adviser Peter Navarro claiming the renowned physician and scientist has likely "killed millions of Americans."

"For whatever reasons, Fauci wanted to weaponize that virus and he is the father of it. He has killed millions of Americans if that thing came from the lab. Now it's 99.999 percent sure it did," Navarro told former Trump White House strategist Steve Bannon regarding an unproven theory that the coronavirus had originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, that had received funds from the National Institutes of Health, where Fauci is director.

For the better part of the past year, every time Fauci speaks on the pandemic, some Republicans take to social media to decry him. On Sunday, Fauci's appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" sparked just such a reaction. Asked if Americans might need to wear masks seasonally to prevent the continued spread of COVID-19, Fauci responded, "You know, that's quite possible."

news.yahoo.com/republican-anger-with-dr-fauci-reaches-new-heights-201740818.html

#### nowon

##### Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Evil doesn't fall far from the tree either

#### Unca Walt

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
"...Public health officials, in Orwellian fashion, keep repeating, “The vaccine is safe and effective.” A straightforward analysis of their own numbers completely contradicts their stance."

There are those who say, "It's only a few in many millions."

Here is an abrupt END to that bullschit road -- this is the actual official data in visible, non-fuckable truth:

"When the entire population on earth is being subjected to a vast experiment deploying a never-before-released RNA technology; when the shot in the arm is actually a genetic treatment; when the entire field of genetic research is riddled with pretense and lies and alarming miscalculations, leading to ripple effects in overall genetic structures; what else would you expect?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disaster. I feel so sorry for those who have been tricked into becoming LIFETIME CARRIERS where their immune systems will be bombarded continually. <-- For that is exactly what the "vaccine-which-is-NOT-a-vaccine" does.

I am not starting an argument, nor am I being selective. I am showing every soul that sees this post something they have NOT seen. And every person who sees that official chart above will see that the obscenity from China is a disaster for us.

LOOK at the chart and ask yourself: Is this a world-wide experiment to delete a significant portion of the human race as stated on video ten years ago by Bill Gates?

If you do not think so. Then I ask Why Not? What gives you confidence in this experimental RNA change for all humanity? Hm?

Orwellian.

#### TRYNEIN

##### Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++

#### Unca Walt

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++

#### MrLucky

##### Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Silver Miner
Sr Site Supporter
Much kudos to you Mr. That's an impressive amount. How many years have you been giving blood?
Since my 20's. But I wasn't consistent. In my crazy days, I used to time it so I could give every 8 weeks. But even with the best of scheduling, I was only able to fit in 5 a year. I would alternate arms to spread out the jabs.
I registered for bone marrow donation as a teen. Wasn't until about 25 years later I got a call as a match. Spent 15 minutes going through a list of questions and all was going good until I told them I had chemo treatments. Stopped it in it's tracks. What a let down.
I'm on the marrow donor list also, but I was never called. I've already aged out. So now it's just a footnote in my donation history.
Double Red Blood Cell Donation. Except you can only donate every 16 weeks doing Double Red.
I only gave a double red once. The donation center was really pissed the day I gave a double red. It seems the double red people pulled me over and set me up before the whole blood people knew what was happening. Apparently my donation was a targeted one and now they lost it. Tempers flared that day. I was "politely" told to never give a double red again unless the whole blood group ok'd it. Which of course they never did.

You can give platelets every 2 weeks. But afaik it's whole blood - 8 weeks, double red - 16 weeks

#### Unca Walt

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
MrLucky shames me... I useta be able to brag I have given 10 gallons of Unca Walt Juice.

He's gone and made me a piker.

#### Unca Walt

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
MrLucky shames me... I useta be able to brag I have given 10 gallons of Unca Walt Juice.

He's gone and made me a piker.
WAIT!!! WAIT!!! I just remembered -- I had store my own blood ahead of an operation, and the following happened (wrote it into a magazine article) --

A Cup Of Sweetness…

c Walt C. Snedeker

The Fabled PC, my long-suffering Scottish spouse likes to point out, I have the mind of a child. It’s true; I keep it in a jar under the bed.

My sense of humor, she says, sometimes ought to have its license revoked. This last pronouncement came as a result of some small misbehavior on my part that took place in the local hospital.

Seems that I needed to have knee surgery. Ouch. And the deal was that since this was a scheduled affair, I was to give my own blood for the future operation. Side Note: I have since discovered by talking with Scooter (my-son-the-doctor) that they don’t need this blood for these operations. They use it for the beautiful rose bushes outside on the hospital grounds. But this information is to remain strictly between us folks. Back to the story.

So I go on down to the hospital, and go through all the depositions, mortgages, interviews, and entrail divinings that hospital minions delight in inflicting upon us lowly civilians to prepare for this blood donation. Having been fingerprinted and DNA’d, retinal-scanned, and my genealogy confirmed for seven generations, they passed me to the Second Stage. That’s the one where they have ten chairs that were left over from a movie about Auschwitz and Dr. Mengele, all empty, with tubes and syringes and other scary things hanging from them. Of course, even though there is nobody else giving blood, there has to be a fifteen minute wait (to build up your blood pressure, I can only assume). Finally, in comes Dr. Quasimodo with a gasoline can and a razor to get some blood from my quivering alabaster bod.

A palsied gnome with thick, clumsy fingers began to probe various parts of my arm with a section of epoxied garden hose, eventually causing a serious serous flow to ensue. Kewl. Some minutes later, having donated my own gore, they gave me one of those apple juice containers with the foil lid.​

You know the kind: they hand them out in airplanes. No matter how carefully you attempt to peel back the foil, the pressurized juice is guaranteed to erupt, so that ALL the passengers can have the experience of dumping apple juice all over themselves.

I'm a fairly large and healthy guy, so I really don't need a sugar hit after giving a pint of blood... that’s why I decided to put the unopened container in my pocket, so I could open it later when I had my wetsuit on.

I got up to leave, when a particularly acerbic lady in a nurse’s outfit suddenly brayed at me: "Hey! You... if that's yer name! You ain't going nowhere."​

It wasn’t easy, Gentle Reader to withhold the entire series of comments that this straight line handed me, but I was noble.

I looked over at her. Her nametag identified her as Miss Demeanor. I was obviously something that annoyed her (I was a patient, albeit only temporary, and ambulatory at that – a double annoyance to her.

She sighed and snorted at the same instant – an accomplishment which I found impressive – and imperiously beckoned me to the foot of her throne.​

"Here, take this and go give me a sample."

“This” was one of those little plastic cups (you know the ones) and she pointed a peremptory finger at the potty door. Ever obedient as always. (Ah, an interruption – The Fabled PC is reading this as I relate it, and her comment on that “obedient” quote has just disproved the adage that two positives cannot make a negative: Regarding it, she says, “Yeah, right!”

Getting back to the story, I walked into the aforementioned thunderbox… and the Devil bit me right on the butt.

I took out the container of apple juice, ripped off the top, and poured the contents into the specimen cup. The empty container went into the convenient wastebasket thoughtfully provided by the hospital housekeeping folks.

When I came out of the potty proudly waving my brimming specimen cup, Miss Demeanor got her PMS in high gear.

"You are supposed to leave it in there on the shelf, not bring it out here!" This, with a rolling of the eyes and a sigh that Hillary Rodham would die for.

Sooo... I sez very politely: "Dang, Miss Demeanor, ma'am, I'm powerful sorry I didn't read your mind, and therefore have apparently made it so this here sample is contaminated. Tell you what: I’ll just recycle it for you!”

With a nice flourish, I upended the specimen cup and drank it down.​

Miss Demeanor went ballistic. Absolutely nuts.

She went echoing down the hallway, calling for Security, doctors, and probably the cotton-picking FBI.

A lot of folks immediately gathered round, so I quickly went into the potty, retrieved the empty apple juice container and showed it to them with my charming boyish smile. A couple of the doctors began laughing so hard they spotted.

When Miss Demeanor came back, EVERYBODY was laughing (and several were pointing at HER, with tears in their eyes).​

She was the only one what didn't see the humor of the situation.

#### MrLucky

##### Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Silver Miner
Sr Site Supporter
^^ You know, Unca Walt, I work with a guy name Joe. He's been walking this earth for some 80 years (he refuses to retire). When I read your stories, I sometimes think you're really him, as there can't be 2 of you in the world.

Blood wise, I haven't shamed you or anyone. the fact that you gave, however much you did, makes you un-shameable. <- is that a word?

#### GOLDBRIX

##### 'SUSH, MY NEW SAFE HOUSE"
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Especially when Blood Donors are are out numbered by those who won't or don't hundreds to one.
TO: All Blood Donors "THANK YOU".

#### Goldhedge

##### Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame

### THIS ISN'T ABOUT A VIRUS​

I keep hearing people exclaim in frustration that "none of this makes any sense!!" ... Well that depends on how you look at it. Let me explain.

#### Goldhedge

##### Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame

### VACCINE THE MOST IMPORTANT 17 MIN VIDEO YOU EVER WATCHED. PLEASE WATCH THIS COMPLETELY& SHARE​

When someone tell you who they are believe them. If you don't share this video more people will take the vaccine and then shedding happens, and we all be contaminated from it. Lets stop the madness and lets share this video with everyone to prevent this from happening. I am not looking for anything, money or fame, i don't make any money from all this. I just want to spread the truth and want to put my share in life and do the right thing.

#### Uglytruth

##### Super Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
New Report sheds light on Vaccine Doomsday Cult, by Mike Whitney - The Unz Review

https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/new-report-sheds-light-on-vaccine-doomsday-cult/

New Report Sheds Light on Vaccine Doomsday Cult

MIKE WHITNEY • MAY 3, 2021

“The risk-benefit calculus is therefore clear: the experimental vaccines are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Actors authorizing, coercing or administering experimental COVID-19 vaccination are exposing populations and patients to serious, unnecessary, and unjustified medical risks.” Doctors for Covid Ethics, April 29, 2021

An explosive new study by researchers at the prestigious Salk Institute casts doubt on the current crop of gene-based vaccines that may pose a grave risk to public health. The article, which is titled “The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, shows that SARS-CoV-2’s “distinctive ‘spike’ protein”..” damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease.” While the paper focuses strictly on Covid-related issues, it unavoidably raises questions about the new vaccines that contain billions of spike proteins that could greatly increase the chances of severe illness or death. Here’s an excerpt from the article dated April 30, 2021:

“In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus ” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls. (Note– “Vascular endothelial cells line the entire circulatory system, from the heart to the smallest capillaries.”)

The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented.

Previous studies have shown a similar effect when cells were exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but this is the first study to show that the damage occurs when cells are exposed to the spike protein on its own.” (“The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, Salk.edu)

The new research paper is the equivalent of a hydrogen bomb. It changes everything by confirming what vaccine critics have been theorizing for months but were unable to prove.

Now there is solid evidence that:

1. Covid-19 is primarily a disease of the vascular system (The vascular system, also called the circulatory system, is made up of the vessels that carry blood and lymph through the body.) and not the respiratory system.

2. The main culprit is the spike protein. (Spike protein–“a glycoprotein that protrudes from the envelope of some viruses” Merriam-Webster “Like a key in a lock, these spike proteins fuse to receptors on the surface of cells, allowing the virus’s genetic code to invade the host cell, take over its machinery and replicate.” Bruce Lieberman)

Simply put, if Covid-19 is primarily a vascular disease and if the main instrument of physical damage is the spike protein, then why are we injecting people with billions of spike proteins?

Here’s how architect and author, Robin Monotti Graziadei, summed up these developments on you tube:

“So, we have been told for the last year, that the only role the spike protein was supposed to play was to enter the human cells. (But) It’s clear, that that is not what they do, (since) they give you illness, vascular illness. Vascular illness can have many manifestations. They can include sinus vein thrombosis, blood clots, bruising, and longer-term conditions. Do you think it’s a good idea to bypass the first (defenses) of your immune system, …and inject… trillions of spike proteins in your cells given the information that has just been released by the Salk Institute? Think about it….

Salk Institute researchers have told us –without any ambiguity– that the spike protein is a fundamental part of the Covid-19 disease. Yes, it’s true that the spike protein with the N-protein, will not replicate. However, trillions (of these proteins) induced by the vaccine injection have the capacity to create damage in your vascular system. This is what the study says and what has been published by an extremely important center for biological studies. This is not a conspiracy theory. I think, at this stage, there is enough information to consider whether we will be told the truth in the coming days, because such information should be on the cover of every newspaper and the top story on every news channel. And what they should say is this: “The fundamental and technological basis –on which all of the vaccines that were distributed in the West– is flawed. We thought that the spike protein would only enter the cells to create antibodies so if you faced the wild virus, it would not latch onto your cells, however, we were wrong. We were wrong because the spike protein in itself, creates disease, and if you inject trillions of them into a human body, there will be manifestations of disease in many cases.” It is not safe to inject trillions of spike proteins into a muscle, because it bypasses layers of your immune system which could have potentially neutralized the virus… By crossing the threshold of the human body through the injection of these compounds, you are not giving your immune system the chance to mount a strong enough response to the spike protein in order to neutralize it. (The vaccine) will have this disease-creating spike protein in it if you agree (to take) any of these vaccines. ….It is now up to us to try to fix the mistake they have made.” (Robin Monotti Graziadei on the new Salk Institute research paper, You Tube, –See it before it is removed)

Perfectly stated and right on the money. Graziadei extrapolates the hidden meaning of the Salk report and clarifies its significance. How are the public health officials, the politicians, the media and the rest of the pro-Covid Vaxx camp going to respond to these revelations especially with the imprimatur of the Salk Institute affixed to the front of the report? Will they try to sweep it under the rug or will they try to divert the public’s attention to the ‘variant’ hobgoblin? Or will they try something else entirely, like claim that one class of spike proteins are good for you while others lead to protracted illness and death? What will they do?

Doctor Vladimir Zelenko, who has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his use of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, had this to say: “Do you understand what this means——we are are injecting viral genetic code for the spike protein into innocent people andiIt gets into almost every cell In the body.” (Nobel nominee, Zelenko has also been banned from Twitter.)

Indeed, that’s precisely what they’ve done. And, let’s not forget, the vaccine manufacturers have complete legal immunity for the injuries they produce. Legal immunity means moral impunity.

So what effect will these spike proteins have on the people that have gotten vaccinated?

Here’s what the Doctors for Covid Ethics have to say in their latest article that was published just this week:

“The vaccines are dangerous to both healthy individuals and those with pre-existing chronic disease, for reasons such as the following: risk of lethal and non-lethal disruptions of blood clotting including bleeding disorders, thrombosis in the brain, stroke and heart attack; autoimmune and allergic reactions; antibody-dependent enhancement of disease; and vaccine impurities due to rushed manufacturing and unregulated production standards….

...all gene-based vaccines can be expected to cause blood clotting and bleeding disorders…. The vaccines are not safe.” (“COVID Vaccines: Necessity, Efficacy and Safety”, Doctors for Covid Ethics)

There it is in black and white: “The vaccines are not safe”. Here’s more from an article at Children’s Health Defense about Professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, the Israeli clinical immunologist who is widely credited as the “father of autoimmunity.” Shoenfeld approaches the issue from an entirely different angle. Take a look:

“Shoenfeld’s primary concern boils down to what’s called molecular mimicry. There are a number of genetic sequences that are identical both in the human genome and that of SARS-CoV-2 …

The immunologists go on to draw particular attention to the identical sequences in a specific group of proteins found deep in the lungs (the site of ARDS/covid pneumonia)… This is a concern Shoenfeld …

It’s why Shoenfeld and colleagues have been banging on the drum during the vaccine development phase last year, arguing that peptide sequences used in the new vaccines should be unique and not be common to ones found in the body.

For a predisposed individual, an adverse reaction to the vaccine, Shoenfeld and colleagues argue, could be enough for them to be tipped over the edge — into autoimmune disease.
One of the most obvious signals for predisposition is to already have one of the over 100 autoimmune diseases that are charging through industrialized societies. Yet, with the father of autoimmunity sounding the warnings of autoimmune risks, there is scarcely a word of caution being uttered by governments rolling out the mass vaccination programs. Shame on them.” (“Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases?” Children’s Health Defense)

My limited understanding of “molecular mimicry”, is this: By injecting proteins into the body that are so similar to the Covid proteins that are wreaking havoc in the vascular system, we could trigger a situation in which the body’s immune system attacks its own organs or vascular system. Which is why the author asks: Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases?

In earlier articles, we presented the views of scientists and medical professionals who anticipated the issues that are now emerging in relation to the spike protein. For example, here is an excerpt from a piece about pediatric rheumatologist, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, who said the following in a letter to the FDA:

“I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs….

“Before any of these vaccines are approved for widespread use in humans, it is important to assess in vaccinated subjects the effects of vaccination on the heart. As important as it is to quickly arrest the spread of the virus by immunizing the population, it would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on these other organs.” (“Scientists Challenge Health Officials on Vaccinating People Who Already Had COVID”, Global Research)

We also pointed out that “gene-based vaccines release a spike protein that spreads throughout the body, gets trapped in the bloodstream and collects in the layer of cells (endothelial cells) that coat the blood vessels.” We think the new research by the Salk Institute supports this general theory.

Also, according to Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist, the cells “release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun has stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.”

This seems to suggest that the spike protein from the vaccine can have the same effect as the spike protein from the infection. Here’s more:

“Individuals with COVID-19 experience a vast number of neurological symptoms, such as headaches, ataxia, impaired consciousness, hallucinations, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage. But autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….

If not viral infection, what else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?

The most likely culprit that has been identified is the COVID-19 spike protein
released from the outer shell of the virus into circulation. Research cited below has documented that the viral spike protein is able to initiate a cascade of events that triggers damage to distant organs in COVID-19 patients.

Worryingly, several studies have found that the spike proteins alone have the capacity to cause widespread injury throughout the body, without any evidence of virus.

What makes this finding so disturbing is that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines manufactured by Moderna and Pfizer and currently being administered throughout the U.S. program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.” (“Could Spike Protein in Moderna, Pfizer Vaccines Cause Blood Clots, Brain Inflammation and Heart Attacks?” Global Research)

The above quote is key to grasping what Covid really is and why the new vaccines threaten to greatly exacerbate the problem. As Chun says:

“…autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….”

This observation is correct. The research does not indicate “viral invasion into patients’ brains”.

Why? Because–as the Salk report indicates– it is not the viral infection that is getting into the brain but the spike protein that has passed the blood-brain barrier via the vascular system.

Here’s Dr Chun again: “What else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?”

Once again, it is not the virus but the spike protein and the autoimmune response.

Finally, Chun acknowledges that the new vaccines “program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.”

The production and distribution of these potentially-lethal injections goes way beyond mere recklessness. This is an unprecedented global catastrophe that could result in the deaths of millions. How long will this insanity continue?

#### Uglytruth

##### Super Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-020-1254-y

### Abstract​

The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic is merely the most recent demonstration that our current approach to emerging zoonotic infectious disease is ineffective. SARS, MERS, Ebola, Nipah and an array of arenavirus infections sporadically spillover into human populations and are often contained only as a result of their poor transmission in human hosts, coupled with intense public health control efforts in the early stages of an emerging epidemic. It is now more apparent than ever that we need a better and more proactive approach. One possibility is to eliminate the threat of spillover before it occurs using vaccines capable of autonomously spreading through wild animal reservoirs. We are now poised to begin developing self-disseminating vaccines targeting a wide range of human pathogens, but important decisions remain about how they can be most effectively designed and used to target pathogens with a high risk of spillover and/or emergence. In this Perspective, we first review the basic epidemiological theory establishing the feasibility and utility of self-disseminating vaccines. We then outline a road map for overcoming remaining technical challenges: identifying high-risk pathogens before they emerge, optimizing vaccine design with an eye to evolution, behaviour and epidemiology, and minimizing the risk of unintended consequences.

### Main​

In the last few decades, viral zoonoses have become part of the global mindset: Ebola, H1N1 influenza, SARS, COVID-19, MERS and Nipah are all infectious diseases that developed into epidemics, sometimes contained and sometimes not. There are also many viral zoonoses that routinely or sporadically spillover into human or livestock populations but have so far not led to major self-propagating epidemics: rabies, rodent-borne arenaviruses (for example, Lassa, Junin, Machupo and Lujo), and hantaviruses (for example, Sin Nombre virus)1,2,3,4,5. For most of these pathogens, human and livestock vaccines do not yet exist. The result is a chronic and substantial burden on human health and well-being for those viruses that spillover regularly (for example, Lassa and rabies) and a reliance on contact tracing and quarantine when sustained transmission within humans becomes established (for example, Ebola and SARS-CoV-2). Although technological advances are continually reducing the time required for vaccine development6,7,8,9 and beginning to automate the process of contact tracing10, the failure to contain the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic illustrates that those methods remain inadequate with more than five million sickened and hundreds of thousands dead only five months after the virus was first detected in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019.

A promising approach for mitigating the public health burden of chronic spillover and reducing the threat of future pandemics is to shift our focus to target high-risk pathogens within their animal reservoirs before viral spillover and/or emergence can occur11. Precedent for this approach is long-standing, with wildlife vaccination programmes in Europe and North America substantially reducing the risk of rabies infection for the human population12. An additional advantage of proactively vaccinating the animal reservoir rather than the human population itself is that long-term risk reduction through pathogen elimination or eradication becomes possible. For other threats, however, the inaccessibility and rapid turnover of reservoir populations confounds standard vaccination practices to suppress viruses at the source. Advances in genetic engineering now raise the possibility of overcoming these challenges through the use of self-disseminating vaccines capable of transferring from one individual to the next13,14.

Self-disseminating vaccines have their roots in the Australian effort to create sterilizing vaccines for small mammal control15,16, and have also been developed and tested experimentally as a tool for vaccinating rabbits against myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic fever17,18,19. Their obvious advantage, of course, is that for each animal you vaccinate directly, additional animals are vaccinated for ‘free’ either through behavioural transmission of a conventional vaccine or through the contagious spread of a transmissible vaccine. There are two possible applications for self-disseminating vaccines, one that can be realized now and another that is more aspirational. The immediate application focuses on well-characterized pathogens such as rabies and Lassa virus that regularly spillover into the human population from known animal reservoirs. The aspirational application envisions the possibility of preventing future pandemics by eliminating high-risk zoonotic pathogens from their animal reservoirs before spillover into the human population occurs. Despite their promise, self-disseminating vaccines have not yet been used to reduce the risk of viral spillover into humans. In this Perspective, we begin by reviewing the basic epidemiological theory establishing the feasibility and utility of self-disseminating vaccines. We then outline a road map for addressing remaining technical challenges and design decisions: identifying high-risk pathogens before they emerge, optimizing vaccine design and minimizing the risk of unintended consequences.

### Not all self-dissemination is equal​

Mathematical and computational models demonstrate that self-disseminating vaccines reduce the effort required to eliminate human pathogens from their wildlife reservoirs20,21,22. The magnitude of the benefits provided by vaccine self-dissemination, however, depends on the type of self-disseminating vaccine and on elements of vaccine epidemiology, which in turn depend on how the vaccine is created and released. A major distinction among self-disseminating vaccines with considerable epidemiological consequences is whether the vaccine is ‘transmissible’ and capable of indefinite transmission or is ‘transferable’ and restricted to a single round of transmission (Fig. 1). In the next sections, we review the basic epidemiological theory quantifying the gains provided by each type of self-disseminating vaccine. These theoretical results use the classical epidemiological concept of a basic reproductive number, R0, that quantifies the number of secondary ‘vaccine infections’ created by the first vaccinated individual in the population.

Fig. 1: Schematic of transmissible and transferable vaccines.

Katy Riendeau

a, A transmissible vaccine is administered directly to one bat via injection. This bat (red outline) is then capable of vaccine transmission. In subsequent time steps (separated by dashed red lines), this initial bat encounters other animals and transmits the vaccine to them infectiously (red bursts). Infectiously vaccinated bats also go on to transmit the vaccine infectiously to others. b, A transferable vaccine is administered directly to a focal bat as a paste to its fur. In subsequent time steps, different bats groom the fur of the focal bat and become vaccinated. The vaccine is not contagious in the usual sense; the focal bat merely serves as a delivery vehicle to the others.

Full size image

‘Transmissible’ vaccines reduce vaccination effort
Transmissible vaccines capable of infectious spread through a reservoir population reduce the vaccination effort required to suppress a target pathogen. With high enough transmission, a transmissible vaccine allows for autonomous pathogen eradication20. These benefits of vaccine transmission can be easily quantified in simple models where the reservoir population is assumed to be homogeneous and well-mixed and the vaccine can be continuously introduced into the reservoir population at a rate σ. In this idealized scenario, the reduction in the vaccination effort required to eliminate the pathogen (relative to a non-transmissible vaccine) is given by the factor ρ:

&#x03C1;=R0,VR0,P" id="MathJax-Element-1-Frame">ρ=R0,VR0,Pρ=R0,VR0,P

(1)

where R0,V and R0,P measure the average number of new infections produced by an infectious individual introduced into an entirely susceptible population (for the vaccine and pathogen, respectively)20. This result establishes guiding principles for the engineering and use of transmissible vaccines that achieve a desired impact on the pathogen. If the sole concern is rapid pathogen extirpation, transmissible vaccines with greater R0,V values will always be preferable, and autonomous eradication will require a vaccine with an R0,V greater than that of the target pathogen. This requirement will be particularly important for pathogens with reservoir species that are difficult to vaccinate directly, or pathogens that circulate in regions lacking the resources and infrastructure to implement regular vaccine introduction. In contrast, if regular introduction of the vaccine into the reservoir population is feasible and concerns about vaccine safety predominate, pathogen eradication can be facilitated using a vaccine with an R0,V < 1 that will self-extinguish once introduction ceases. In both cases, vaccine self-dissemination facilitates pathogen control and/or elimination, although these benefits can obviously be magnified manifold for highly transmissible vaccines with R0,V values well above 1.

#### One-step, ‘transferable’ vaccines reduce vaccination effort despite being dead ends​

It might seem that a vaccine which transfers only a single step is at a strong disadvantage relative to one that transmits indefinitely. There is indeed a disadvantage of limited transmission, but not necessarily much23. For instance, in a homogeneous and well-mixed reservoir population, a transferable vaccine reduces the vaccination effort required to eradicate a target pathogen by a proportion ρ:

&#x03C1;=R0,V(R0,V+R0,P)" id="MathJax-Element-2-Frame">ρ=R0,V(R0,V+R0,P)ρ=R0,V(R0,V+R0,P)

(2)

Comparing this result (equation (2)) with our earlier result for a transmissible vaccine (equation (1)) shows that, all else being equal, a single-step transferable vaccine will always perform worse than a fully transmissible vaccine. However, comparing equations (1) and (2) and their respective panels in Fig. 2 shows that this difference is negligible for weakly self-disseminating vaccines. Biologically, this quasi-equivalence occurs because even fully transmissible vaccines with low R0,V produce only short chains of transmission, reducing their advantage over single-step transferable vaccines. As vaccine R0,V increases, however, the advantage of a transmissible vaccine becomes more appreciable. Most importantly, a transmissible vaccine will automatically displace the pathogen whenever the vaccine has the higher R0, whereas a transferable vaccine has no such possibility—it must be applied continually up to the point that the pathogen is extinguished.

Fig. 2: The reduction in vaccination effort (ρ) provided by vaccine self-dissemination for pathogens and vaccines with differing R0.

a, The reduction in effort provided by a transmissible vaccine. b, The reduction in effort afforded by a transferable vaccine. The grey area in a shows the region of parameter space in which a single introduction of the transmissible vaccine is sufficient to eliminate the pathogen (autonomous pathogen eradication).

Full size image

High-risk pathogens and their reservoirs
To design and use a self-disseminating vaccine effectively, we minimally require a modest understanding of pathogen epidemiology and the distribution and ecology of its zoonotic reservoir(s). For some important human pathogens, this is a relatively straightforward task because the reservoir species and pathogen are well known. For instance, rabies, Lassa and Sin Nombre viruses are well characterized and their reservoir species relatively well understood12,24,25,26,27. Rabies virus, in particular, makes a compelling target for development of a self-disseminating vaccine because effective wildlife vaccines already exist—the only remaining hurdle is achieving self-dissemination.

Still, even for a virus as well studied as rabies, challenges must be overcome. Perhaps the most important is the circulation of the virus within multiple wildlife reservoirs28, each of which contributes to the global persistence of rabies29. Fortunately, because rabies virus generally persists in species-specific transmission cycles, spillover risk from any particular reservoir can be reduced using a single self-disseminating vaccine. Global eradication of rabies would be more complex, of course, and require development of multiple self-disseminating vaccines, each targeting a different reservoir species. Lassa virus also makes an obvious target for development of self-disseminating vaccines because the virus itself is well characterized, and we have a relatively good understanding of the primary reservoir and its ecology24,30,31. Here too, however, multiple rodent species have been shown to harbour the virus25 and we do not yet know what fraction of spillover into the human population can be attributed to the primary reservoir, Mastomys natalensis, and what fraction to the remaining secondary reservoirs. Other human pathogens that make more challenging candidates for the application of self-disseminating vaccines include Marburg, Hendra and some well-studied coronaviruses4,32,33,34,35.

Beyond application to these relatively well-studied viruses, self-disseminating vaccines could also be used to pre-empt spillover and emergence of novel pathogens. The challenge, of course, is predicting which of the myriad viruses circulating within wild animal populations represents imminent threats of emergence into the human population. Developing this capacity will require investment and expansion of global surveillance efforts within wild animals11,36. For instance, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) PREDICT programme has identified more than 949 unique viruses, including the discovery of a novel Ebolavirus, and has improved our understanding of viral distributions and reservoir species34,35,37,38,39. Surveillance alone is not sufficient, however, and needs to be coupled with new methods that capitalize on advances in genomics, phylogenetics and machine learning to predict which novel viruses represent imminent threats of emergence, as well as their primary animal reservoirs40,41,42,43,44,45,46. Despite these advances in viral surveillance and risk forecasting, it remains unclear to what extent we will ever be able to reliably anticipate which novel pathogens are likely to emerge in the near future. Thus, at least for the near term, self-disseminating vaccines are likely to have the greatest impact on human and animal health when applied to well-known viruses with an established history of spillover and emergence into the human population.

Strategies for implementation
Advances in genetic engineering have enabled the development of self-disseminating vaccines, but success will also rest on optimizing implementation with an eye toward ecology, evolution and epidemiological constraints. In the following, we explain some of the more important considerations that are likely to affect the first generation of self-disseminating vaccines.

#### Tailoring to host biology​

For transferable (one-step) vaccines, the primary challenge is identifying behavioural patterns of reservoir species that can be used to disseminate the vaccine with a high one-step R0,V. The best studied of these deliveries is allogrooming in bats, where individuals within a colony groom each other and provide an opportunity for the widespread oral transmission of vaccines delivered to the bat’s fur. Using topical application to individual bats of rhodamine b, a biomarker that causes fluorescence in hair follicles after ingestion, Bakker et al.47 demonstrated that each direct application led to ingestion by between 1.45 and 2.11 additional bats. Another behaviour that might provide an effective avenue for single-step vaccine transfer is nursing in mammals, either through topical application or development of vaccine baits that can be excreted in milk and ingested by offspring or disseminated more broadly through allosuckling48. A secondary challenge in designing effective transferable vaccines is optimizing the vaccine itself so that it can be effectively passed to other individuals. Thus, issues of vaccine concentration, the matrix in which it is embedded and even the anatomical sites of delivery will need to be worked out49. There may also be strong seasonality in some systems that can be used to tune the timing of vaccine delivery to magnify impact on population-level immunity50.

Success of transmissible vaccines will also benefit from delivery to individuals with specific behaviours. Choice of who to directly vaccinate will be most important in planning the initial introduction of the vaccine and may also influence the rate and extent of spread through the reservoir population. For instance, timing the introduction of the transmissible vaccine to coincide with seasonal birth pulses in the reservoir species may increase the likelihood of vaccine establishment and spread50. Vaccine transmission may also differ among classes of individuals (for example, be higher from aggressive males or new mothers), so choice of which individuals to initially vaccinate may have a large influence on the success of vaccine introductions51. Spatial structure of the reservoir, too, is likely to influence the spread of a transmissible vaccine and to be an important consideration in planning the number and location of initial introductions21. In addition to these impacts on initial establishment, reservoir species biology may influence the long-term rate of vaccine spread through the population, creating challenges and opportunities for transmissible vaccine design, particularly the choice of viral vectors.

#### Attenuated versus recombinant vector vaccines​

Two types of live vaccine design potentially suitable for self-dissemination are attenuated and recombinant vector vaccines (Fig. 3). Attenuated vaccines are wild-type viruses modified to avoid pathogenesis, usually by reducing viral growth rate. Recombinant vector vaccines are developed by inserting immunogenic genes from the target pathogen into a competent but innocuous viral vector. For single-step transferable vaccines, the decision between these two types of vaccine designs may be of little importance because the ability to transmit infectiously from host to host does not need to be maintained. For transmissible vaccines, however, the choice between attenuated and recombinant designs may determine how well the vaccine is able to self-disseminate.

Fig. 3: Two methods for building transmissible vaccines.

Katy Riendeau

a, Attenuation is used to reduce the virulence of the wild-type pathogen. Attenuation is shown here as the gradual accumulation of point mutations (blue). b, Recombination is used to insert an immunogenic region of the pathogen genome (red) into the genome of an innocuous but transmissible viral vector (yellow).

Full size image

Effective transmissible vaccines developed using attenuation must maintain considerable levels of transmission while producing minimal disease. Yet, evolutionary theory and observations from many attenuated vaccines suggest that reduced disease (or virulence) and decreased rates of transmission can go hand in hand52. Thus, developing safe but highly transmissible attenuated vaccines may be challenging. An additional problem confronting attenuated transmissible vaccines is the possibility of evolution returning the vaccine to its wild-type and pathogenic state. For instance, we now know that oral polio vaccine (OPV) is transmissible and readily evolves back to wild-type virulence53. Although new methods of attenuation greatly limit evolutionary reversion54,55, an attenuated vaccine whose R0 exceeds 1 will always pose an ongoing threat of reversion if the wild-type pathogen has been extinguished, enabling the attenuated virus to persist indefinitely. For this reason, attenuated transmissible vaccines are unlikely to ever be suitable tools for eliminating human pathogens from their wildlife reservoirs. They may, however, be safe and effective tools for controlling pathogens that exclusively infect wild or agricultural animal populations and pose no risk of infection for humans, as long as the benefits gained from vaccination outweigh the costs of reversion to wild-type virulence at the population level20.
Recombinant vector vaccines avoid both problems of attenuated transmissible vaccines. Transmission should depend primarily on the vector, making it possible to develop transmissible vaccines with an R0 exceeding that of the target pathogen while maintaining the avirulent phenotype of the vector. It may also be possible to enhance vector R0 by selecting highly transmissible vector strains or even adapting the vector for rapid transmission using serial passages through captive reservoir populations. Consequently, recombinant vaccines are a priori the most promising approach for a transmissible vaccine. Furthermore, because selection favouring increased transmission is likely to favour mutations resulting in the loss or downregulation of the immunogenic insert, we expect the most likely outcome of evolution to be a return to the innocuous viral vector. Thus, evolution may reduce the effectiveness of recombinant vaccines, but is unlikely to result in increased virulence or pathogenicity56.

Spread of transferable and transmissible vaccines is impeded by pre-existing immunity to the vaccine: pre-existing immunity effectively reduces vaccine R0 and thus requires correspondingly greater effort (for example, equations (1) and (2)). For transmissible vaccines using a recombinant vector design, prevailing host immunity to either vector or pathogen will slow vaccine spread22. Host immunity may thus strongly influence choice of a vector: viruses in the genus Cytomegalovirus (CMV) and their relatives in the Betaherpesvirinae are considered promising candidates because they have a demonstrated propensity for superinfection and apparent lack of protective immunity14. Alternative approaches to reducing the burden of pre-existing immunity to the vector include using a foreign vector that does not naturally infect the reservoir species or using rare strains of an endemic vector for which only limited immunity exists9. Using a foreign vector does, however, carry substantial risks unlikely to be justifiable in most cases.

Proof of concept
Although our understanding of self-disseminating vaccines and their promise remains largely theoretical, empirical studies have demonstrated that both transmissible and transferable vaccines can be developed. The best-studied transmissible vaccine was created using a naturally attenuated myxoma virus that was engineered as a recombinant vector vaccine against rabbit haemorrhagic disease17,18,19. Field trials of this transmissible vaccine were conducted by releasing 76 directly vaccinated animals and 71 unvaccinated sentinel animals onto the small Isla del Aire, off the coast of Spain18. After 32 days, 25 sentinel animals were recaptured; 56% had seroconverted due to indirect vaccination. Back of the envelope calculations show that these values suggest an R0 for the vaccine of between 1.39 and 2.11, depending on what is assumed about the recovery rate from vaccine infection. This study demonstrates the feasibility of a transmissible vaccine and also illustrates additional possibilities for vaccine design that use attenuated viruses as the vector.

As noted above, the potential feasibility of a transferable vaccine was demonstrated for vampire bats using ingestible dyes placed on the fur of index bats47. Their results suggest that topical application of a rabies vaccine would yield a transferable vaccine with an effective R0 of 1.45–2.11. From our equation (2), this degree of self-dissemination would reduce the vaccination effort required for rabies elimination by up to 51.3%, assuming rabies has an R0 ≤ 2.0, as was suggested for this system. Combined with earlier work demonstrating the feasibility of developing a topically applied recombinant vector vaccine against rabies49, these results demonstrate that a transferable vaccine is within our immediate reach.

Minimizing deleterious and unintended consequences
Self-disseminating vaccines may well come with risks, some of which are already clear and others of which we may not yet be aware. For transferable vaccines, at least, the risks are well understood and no greater than those associated with current vaccination campaigns that rely on the widespread distribution of vaccine-laced baits. For transmissible vaccines, the risks may be greater because their sustained replication and transmission creates substantial opportunities for evolution. A case in point is the evolution and escape of the live polio vaccine, which now circulates and causes disease53,57. The risk can be reduced, however, by using recombinant vector vaccines and perhaps, if using attenuated vaccines, by using new methods to engineer attenuation54,55.

Although recombinant vaccine evolution is not expected to be harmful, an additional layer of safety may be achieved by engineering vaccines to self-extinguish, losing the antigenic insert on a schedule56. Even so, it would be naive to believe that recombinant vector vaccines are without risk. For instance, using a novel vector that is not circulating in the animal reservoir has the advantage of avoiding prevailing immunity but runs the risk of unknown evolution and virulence upon release. Further, there is at least some possibility that the immunogenic insert could be co-opted by the viral vector to expand its ecological niche by allowing access to new tissues or even hosts.

From this understanding, there are actions that can be taken to reduce unanticipated consequences of transmissible vaccines: (1) use recombinant vector rather than attenuated vaccines (or at least avoid attenuated vaccines derived from the pathogen); (2) use species-specific vectors; (3) engineer self-regulatory mechanisms; and (4) use transmissible vaccines whose R0 assures eventual loss from the population. It will often be impractical to adhere to all of these recommendations, and caution may give way to expedience if the consequences of pathogen spillover are great. Following these basic design principles as guidelines as closely as possible will, however, minimize the possibility of unanticipated consequences.

Finally, the safe and effective use of transmissible viral vaccines will require carefully staged development with effectiveness and risk evaluated at multiple checkpoints. For instance, once a candidate transmissible vaccine has been developed, its effectiveness, transmission and evolution should be studied using captive animal populations, also testing the potential for transmission into closely related reservoir species. Results from these initial studies with captive animals can be used to refine mathematical models predicting how well the vaccine is likely to work, in turn evaluating the potential gains for human and animal health. The obvious next step is to perform releases within carefully isolated populations in semi-natural enclosures or on small islands. Precedent for this approach was established during the first field trials of a transmissible vaccine targeting myxoma and rabbit haemorrhagic fever18. Here, too, effectiveness, transmission and evolution should be studied and used to further refine models predicting likely gains that could be realized by release into natural populations. Throughout development and testing, regulatory agencies and stakeholders should be involved so that concerns can be addressed during controlled experiments, evaluating the road to release within natural populations.

Conclusions
Self-disseminating vaccines represent an opportunity to completely change how we approach emerging infectious disease. Rather than responding to outbreaks or epidemics, self-disseminating vaccines make it possible to prevent them in the first place. However, there is much we do not yet know about the performance of self-disseminating vaccines under real-world conditions. A logical first step is to begin developing, testing and deploying single-step transferable vaccines. Their risks are minimal and their benefits demonstrable. On the downside, transferable vaccines are likely to only modestly transform our ability to eliminate viral spillover and may be restricted to a narrow range of systems with particular behaviours, such as allogrooming. Transmissible vaccines, in contrast, entail greater risk but also have a much greater scope for eliminating hard to reach pathogens from their animal reservoirs. Thus, the logical next step is to begin developing and testing transmissible vaccines for a handful of well-understood systems where risks can be well managed as we develop a better understanding of the evolutionary epidemiology of these new tools. Although the financial investment required to develop and test the first generation of transmissible vaccines is likely to be substantial, it is inconsequential when compared to the cost of viral spillover—more than US$3.6 billion for the response to the West African Ebola epidemic of 2014–2016, US$40 billion for the SARS outbreak of 2003, and US$8 billion per year for canine rabies alone58,59,60. References 1. 1. Redding, D. W., Moses, L. M., Cunningham, A. A., Wood, J. & Jones, K. E. Environmental-mechanistic modelling of the impact of global change on human zoonotic disease emergence: a case study of Lassa fever. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 646–655 (2016). Google Scholar 1. 2. McCormick, J. B. & Fisher-Hoch, S. P. in Arenaviruses I: The Epidemiology, Molecular and Cell Biology of Arenaviruses — Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology Vol. 262 (ed. Oldstone, M. B. A.) 75–109 (Springer, 2002). 1. 3. Jonsson, C. B., Figueiredo, L. T. M. & Vapalahti, O. A global perspective on hantavirus ecology, epidemiology, and disease. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 23, 412–441 (2010). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 4. Edson, D. et al. Routes of Hendra virus excretion in naturally-infected flying-foxes: implications for viral transmission and spillover risk. PLoS ONE 10, e0140670 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 5. Luby, S. P., Gurley, E. S. & Jahangir Hossain, M. Transmission of human infection with Nipah virus. Clin. Infect. Dis. 49, 1743–1748 (2009). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 6. Georgiou, G. et al. Display of heterologous proteins on the surface of microorganisms: from the screening of combinatorial libraries to live recombinant vaccines. Nat. Biotechnol. 15, 29–34 (1997). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 7. Leitner, W. W., Ying, H. & Restifo, N. P. DNA and RNA-based vaccines: principles, progress and prospects. Vaccine 18, 765–777 (1999). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 8. Pardi, N., Hogan, M. J., Porter, F. W. & Weissman, D. mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 17, 261–279 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 9. Rollier, C. S., Reyes-Sandoval, A., Cottingham, M. G., Ewer, K. & Hill, A. V. S. Viral vectors as vaccine platforms: deployment in sight. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 23, 377–382 (2011). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 10. Ferretti, L. et al. Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 transmission suggests epidemic control with digital contact tracing. Science 368, eabb6936 (2020). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 11. Morse, S. S. et al. Prediction and prevention of the next pandemic zoonosis. Lancet 380, 1956–1965 (2012). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 12. Rupprecht, C. E., Hanlon, C. A. & Slate, D. in Control of Infectious Animal Diseases by Vaccination — Developments in Biologicals Vol. 119 (eds Schudel, A. & Lombard, M.) 173–184 (Karger, 2004). 1. 13. Bull, J. J., Smithson, M. W. & Nuismer, S. L. Transmissible viral vaccines. Trends Microbiol. 26, 6–15 (2018). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 14. Murphy, A. A., Redwood, A. J. & Jarvis, M. A. Self-disseminating vaccines for emerging infectious diseases. Expert Rev. Vaccines 15, 31–39 (2016). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 15. Shellam, G. R. The potential of murine cytomegalovirus as a viral vector for immunocontraception. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 6, 401–409 (1994). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 16. Tyndale-Biscoe, C. H. Virus-vectored immunocontraception of feral mammals. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 6, 281–287 (1994). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 17. Barcena, J. et al. Horizontal transmissible protection against myxomatosis and rabbit hemorrhagic disease by using a recombinant myxoma virus. J. Virol. 74, 1114–1123 (2000). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 18. Torres, J. M. et al. First field trial of a transmissible recombinant vaccine against myxomatosis and rabbit hemorrhagic disease. Vaccine 19, 4536–4543 (2001). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 19. Angulo, E. & Barcena, J. Towards a unique and transmissible vaccine against myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic disease for rabbit populations. Wildl. Res. 34, 567–577 (2007). CAS Google Scholar 1. 20. Nuismer, S. L. et al. Eradicating infectious disease using weakly transmissible vaccines. Proc. R. Soc. B 283, 20161903 (2016). PubMed Google Scholar 1. 21. Basinski, A. J., Nuismer, S. L. & Remien, C. H. A little goes a long way: weak vaccine transmission facilitates oral vaccination campaigns against zoonotic pathogens. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 13, e0007251 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 22. Basinski, A. J. et al. Evaluating the promise of recombinant transmissible vaccines. Vaccine 36, 675–682 (2018). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 23. Smithson, M. W., Basinki, A. J., Nuismer, S. L. & Bull, J. J. Transmissible vaccines whose dissemination rates vary through time, with applications to wildlife. Vaccine 37, 1153–1159 (2019). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 24. Lecompte, E. et al. Mastomys natalensis and Lassa fever, West Africa. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 12, 1971–1974 (2006). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 25. Olayemi, A. et al. New hosts of the Lassa virus. Sci. Rep. 6, 25280 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 26. Douglass, R. J. et al. Longitudinal studies of Sin Nombre virus in deer mouse-dominated ecosystems of Montana. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 65, 33–41 (2001). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 27. Luis, A. D., Douglass, R. J., Mills, J. N. & Bjornstad, O. N. The effect of seasonality, density and climate on the population dynamics of Montana deer mice, important reservoir hosts for Sin Nombre hantavirus. J. Anim. Ecol. 79, 462–470 (2010). PubMed Google Scholar 1. 28. Viana, M. et al. Assembling evidence for identifying reservoirs of infection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29, 270–279 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 29. Fenton, A., Streicker, D. G., Petchey, O. L. & Pedersen, A. B. Are all hosts created equal? Partitioning host species contributions to parasite persistence in multihost communities. Am. Nat. 186, 610–622 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 30. Fichet-Calvet, E. et al. Fluctuation of abundance and Lassa virus prevalence in Mastomys natalensis in Guinea, West Africa. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 7, 119–128 (2007). PubMed Google Scholar 1. 31. Marien, J. et al. Evaluation of rodent control to fight Lassa fever based on field data and mathematical modelling. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 8, 640–649 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 32. Towner, J. S. et al. Marburg virus infection detected in a common african bat. PLoS ONE 2, e764 (2007). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 33. Nziza, J. et al. Coronaviruses detected in bats in close contact with humans in Rwanda. EcoHealth 17, 152–159 (2020). PubMed Google Scholar 1. 34. Anthony, S. J. et al. Further evidence for bats as the evolutionary source of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. Mbio 8, e00373–17 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 35. Ge, X.-Y. et al. Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor. Nature 503, 535–538 (2013). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 36. Bird, B. H. & Mazet, J. A. K. Detection of emerging zoonotic pathogens: an integrated one health approach. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 6, 121–139 (2018). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 37. Goldstein, T. et al. The discovery of Bombali virus adds further support for bats as hosts of ebolaviruses. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 1084–1089 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 38. Pernet, O. et al. Evidence for henipavirus spillover into human populations in Africa. Nat. Commun. 5, 5342 (2014). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 39. Grard, G. et al. A novel rhabdovirus associated with acute hemorrhagic fever in Central Africa. PLoS Pathog. 8, e1002924 (2012). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 40. Han, B. A. & Drake, J. M. Future directions in analytics for infectious disease intelligence. EMBO Rep. 17, 785–789 (2016). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 41. Han, B. A., Schmidt, J. P., Bowden, S. E. & Drake, J. M. Rodent reservoirs of future zoonotic diseases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 7039–7044 (2015). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 42. Han, B. A. et al. Undiscovered bat hosts of filoviruses. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 10, e0004815 (2016). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 43. Guth, S., Visher, E., Boots, M. & Brook, C. E. Host phylogenetic distance drives trends in virus virulence and transmissibility across the animal-human interface. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 374, 20190296 (2019). Google Scholar 1. 44. Olival, K. J. et al. Host and viral traits predict zoonotic spillover from mammals. Nature 546, 646–650 (2017). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 45. Pepin, K. M., Lass, S., Pulliam, J. R. C., Read, A. F. & Lloyd-Smith, J. O. Identifying genetic markers of adaptation for surveillance of viral host jumps. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 8, 802–813 (2010). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 46. Babayan, S. A., Orton, R. J. & Streicker, D. G. Predicting reservoir hosts and arthropod vectors from evolutionary signatures in RNA virus genomes. Science 362, 577–580 (2018). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 47. Bakker, K. M. et al. Fluorescent biomarkers demonstrate prospects for spreadable vaccines to control disease transmission in wild bats. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1697–1704 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 48. Garnier, R., Gandon, S., Chaval, Y., Charbonnel, N. & Boulinier, T. Evidence of cross-transfer of maternal antibodies through allosuckling in a mammal: potential importance for behavioral ecology. Mamm. Biol. 78, 361–364 (2013). Google Scholar 1. 49. Stading, B. et al. Protection of bats (Eptesicus fuscus) against rabies following topical or oronasal exposure to a recombinant raccoon poxvirus vaccine. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 11, e0005958 (2017). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 50. Schreiner, C. L., Nuismer, S. L. & Basinski, A. J. When to vaccinate a fluctuating wildlife population: is timing everything? J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 307–319 (2020). PubMed Google Scholar 1. 51. Varrelman, T. J., Basinski, A. J., Remien, C. H. & Nuismer, S. L. Transmissible vaccines in heterogeneous populations: implications for vaccine design. One Health 7, 100084 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 52. Alizon, S., Hurford, A., Mideo, N. & Van Baalen, M. Virulence evolution and the trade-off hypothesis: history, current state of affairs and the future. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 245–259 (2009). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 53. Kew, O. M., Sutter, R. W., de Gourville, E. M., Dowdle, W. R. & Pallansch, M. A. Vaccine-derived polioviruses and the endgame strategy for global polio eradication. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 59, 587–635 (2005). CAS PubMed Google Scholar 1. 54. Bull, J. J. Evolutionary reversion of live viral vaccines: can genetic engineering subdue it? Virus Evol. 1, vev005 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 55. Lauring, A. S., Jones, J. O. & Andino, R. Rationalizing the development of live attenuated virus vaccines. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 573–579 (2010). CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 56. Nuismer, S. L., Basinski, A. & Bull, J. J. Evolution and containment of transmissible recombinant vector vaccines. Evol. Appl. 12, 1595–1609 (2019). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 57. Kew, O. M. et al. Circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses: current state of knowledge. Bull. World Health Organ. 82, 16–23 (2004). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 58. Hampson, K. et al. Estimating the global burden of endemic canine rabies. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9, e0003709 (2015). PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar 1. 59. Cost of the Ebola Epidemic (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020); https://go.nature.com/38iF7cg 1. 60. Forum on Microbial Threats Learning from SARS: Preparing for the Next Disease Outbreak: Workshop Summary (National Academies Press, 2004). Download references Acknowledgements We thank K. Riendeau for developing Figs. 1 and 3. S.L.N. and J.J.B. were supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant no. R01GM122079. Author information #### Affiliations​ 1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA Scott L. Nuismer & James J. Bull 1. Department of Mathematics, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, USA Scott L. Nuismer #### Contributions​ S.L.N. and J.J.B. conceived of this Perspective and contributed to writing and revision. #### Corresponding author​ Correspondence to Scott L. Nuismer. Ethics declarations #### Competing interests​ The authors declare no competing interests. Additional information Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Reprints and Permissions About this article #### Cite this article​ Nuismer, S.L., Bull, J.J. Self-disseminating vaccines to suppress zoonoses. Nat Ecol Evol 4, 1168–1173 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1254-y Download citation #### Share this article​ Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative #### Subjects​ Further reading #### Safety and security concerns regarding transmissible vaccines​ • Jonas B. Sandbrink • , Matthew C. Watson • […] • & Kevin M. Esvelt Nature Ecology & Evolution (2021) #### Designing transmissible viral vaccines for evolutionary robustness and maximum efficiency​ • Nathan C Layman • , Beth M Tuschhoff • & Scott L Nuismer Virus Evolution (2021) #### Harnessing Clinical Trial Capacity to Mitigate Zoonotic Diseases: The Role of Expert Scientists in Ethiopia​ • Senait Belay • , Mirutse Giday • & Tsegahun Manyazewal Frontiers in Public Health (2021) Nature Ecology & Evolution ISSN 2397-334X (online) #### Goldhedge ##### Moderator Site Mgr Midas Member Midas Supporter ++ GIM Hall Of Fame ### SEN. CASSIDY: HERD IMMUNITY IS 70% IMMUNIZATION, AND 100% OF CONGRESS IS VACCINATED​ "The American people just lost patience with us, with you guys. You have got to be aware of their frustrations and get a little real-time into updating these [guidelines]," said Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) Tuesday, slamming the CDC for maintaining guidance that discourages people from getting back to work and encourages people to wear masks despite widespread vaccination. #### Goldhedge ##### Moderator Site Mgr Midas Member Midas Supporter ++ GIM Hall Of Fame THIS IS GOLD: Anthony Fauci has been exposed by Rand Paul for his hand in ‘gain of function’ research that lead to the weaponization of the Coronavirus. Fauci tried to use semantics to get out of it but failed. Investigate him now #### SongSungAU ##### Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter ++ THIS IS GOLD: Anthony Fauci has been exposed by Rand Paul for his hand in ‘gain of function’ research that lead to the weaponization of the Coronavirus. Fauci tried to use semantics to get out of it but failed. Investigate him now Much respect for Rand Paul. He has a backbone, unlike many senators. God bless him. #### chris_is_here ##### Gold Member Gold Chaser New Report sheds light on Vaccine Doomsday Cult, by Mike Whitney - The Unz Review https://www.unz.com/mwhitney/new-report-sheds-light-on-vaccine-doomsday-cult/ New Report Sheds Light on Vaccine Doomsday Cult MIKE WHITNEY • MAY 3, 2021 • 2,300 WORDS • 181 COMMENTSREPLY “The risk-benefit calculus is therefore clear: the experimental vaccines are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Actors authorizing, coercing or administering experimental COVID-19 vaccination are exposing populations and patients to serious, unnecessary, and unjustified medical risks.” Doctors for Covid Ethics, April 29, 2021 An explosive new study by researchers at the prestigious Salk Institute casts doubt on the current crop of gene-based vaccines that may pose a grave risk to public health. The article, which is titled “The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, shows that SARS-CoV-2’s “distinctive ‘spike’ protein”..” damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease.” While the paper focuses strictly on Covid-related issues, it unavoidably raises questions about the new vaccines that contain billions of spike proteins that could greatly increase the chances of severe illness or death. Here’s an excerpt from the article dated April 30, 2021: “In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus ” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls. (Note– “Vascular endothelial cells line the entire circulatory system, from the heart to the smallest capillaries.”) The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented. Previous studies have shown a similar effect when cells were exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but this is the first study to show that the damage occurs when cells are exposed to the spike protein on its own.” (“The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, Salk.edu) The new research paper is the equivalent of a hydrogen bomb. It changes everything by confirming what vaccine critics have been theorizing for months but were unable to prove. Now there is solid evidence that: 1. Covid-19 is primarily a disease of the vascular system (The vascular system, also called the circulatory system, is made up of the vessels that carry blood and lymph through the body.) and not the respiratory system. 2. The main culprit is the spike protein. (Spike protein–“a glycoprotein that protrudes from the envelope of some viruses” Merriam-Webster “Like a key in a lock, these spike proteins fuse to receptors on the surface of cells, allowing the virus’s genetic code to invade the host cell, take over its machinery and replicate.” Bruce Lieberman) Simply put, if Covid-19 is primarily a vascular disease and if the main instrument of physical damage is the spike protein, then why are we injecting people with billions of spike proteins? Here’s how architect and author, Robin Monotti Graziadei, summed up these developments on you tube: “So, we have been told for the last year, that the only role the spike protein was supposed to play was to enter the human cells. (But) It’s clear, that that is not what they do, (since) they give you illness, vascular illness. Vascular illness can have many manifestations. They can include sinus vein thrombosis, blood clots, bruising, and longer-term conditions. Do you think it’s a good idea to bypass the first (defenses) of your immune system, …and inject… trillions of spike proteins in your cells given the information that has just been released by the Salk Institute? Think about it…. Salk Institute researchers have told us –without any ambiguity– that the spike protein is a fundamental part of the Covid-19 disease. Yes, it’s true that the spike protein with the N-protein, will not replicate. However, trillions (of these proteins) induced by the vaccine injection have the capacity to create damage in your vascular system. This is what the study says and what has been published by an extremely important center for biological studies. This is not a conspiracy theory. I think, at this stage, there is enough information to consider whether we will be told the truth in the coming days, because such information should be on the cover of every newspaper and the top story on every news channel. And what they should say is this: “The fundamental and technological basis –on which all of the vaccines that were distributed in the West– is flawed. We thought that the spike protein would only enter the cells to create antibodies so if you faced the wild virus, it would not latch onto your cells, however, we were wrong. We were wrong because the spike protein in itself, creates disease, and if you inject trillions of them into a human body, there will be manifestations of disease in many cases.” It is not safe to inject trillions of spike proteins into a muscle, because it bypasses layers of your immune system which could have potentially neutralized the virus… By crossing the threshold of the human body through the injection of these compounds, you are not giving your immune system the chance to mount a strong enough response to the spike protein in order to neutralize it. (The vaccine) will have this disease-creating spike protein in it if you agree (to take) any of these vaccines. ….It is now up to us to try to fix the mistake they have made.” (Robin Monotti Graziadei on the new Salk Institute research paper, You Tube, –See it before it is removed) Perfectly stated and right on the money. Graziadei extrapolates the hidden meaning of the Salk report and clarifies its significance. How are the public health officials, the politicians, the media and the rest of the pro-Covid Vaxx camp going to respond to these revelations especially with the imprimatur of the Salk Institute affixed to the front of the report? Will they try to sweep it under the rug or will they try to divert the public’s attention to the ‘variant’ hobgoblin? Or will they try something else entirely, like claim that one class of spike proteins are good for you while others lead to protracted illness and death? What will they do? Doctor Vladimir Zelenko, who has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his use of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, had this to say: “Do you understand what this means——we are are injecting viral genetic code for the spike protein into innocent people andiIt gets into almost every cell In the body.” (Nobel nominee, Zelenko has also been banned from Twitter.) Indeed, that’s precisely what they’ve done. And, let’s not forget, the vaccine manufacturers have complete legal immunity for the injuries they produce. Legal immunity means moral impunity. So what effect will these spike proteins have on the people that have gotten vaccinated? Here’s what the Doctors for Covid Ethics have to say in their latest article that was published just this week: “The vaccines are dangerous to both healthy individuals and those with pre-existing chronic disease, for reasons such as the following: risk of lethal and non-lethal disruptions of blood clotting including bleeding disorders, thrombosis in the brain, stroke and heart attack; autoimmune and allergic reactions; antibody-dependent enhancement of disease; and vaccine impurities due to rushed manufacturing and unregulated production standards…. ...all gene-based vaccines can be expected to cause blood clotting and bleeding disorders…. The vaccines are not safe.” (“COVID Vaccines: Necessity, Efficacy and Safety”, Doctors for Covid Ethics) There it is in black and white: “The vaccines are not safe”. Here’s more from an article at Children’s Health Defense about Professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, the Israeli clinical immunologist who is widely credited as the “father of autoimmunity.” Shoenfeld approaches the issue from an entirely different angle. Take a look: “Shoenfeld’s primary concern boils down to what’s called molecular mimicry. There are a number of genetic sequences that are identical both in the human genome and that of SARS-CoV-2 … The immunologists go on to draw particular attention to the identical sequences in a specific group of proteins found deep in the lungs (the site of ARDS/covid pneumonia)… This is a concern Shoenfeld … It’s why Shoenfeld and colleagues have been banging on the drum during the vaccine development phase last year, arguing that peptide sequences used in the new vaccines should be unique and not be common to ones found in the body. For a predisposed individual, an adverse reaction to the vaccine, Shoenfeld and colleagues argue, could be enough for them to be tipped over the edge — into autoimmune disease. One of the most obvious signals for predisposition is to already have one of the over 100 autoimmune diseases that are charging through industrialized societies. Yet, with the father of autoimmunity sounding the warnings of autoimmune risks, there is scarcely a word of caution being uttered by governments rolling out the mass vaccination programs. Shame on them.” (“Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases?” Children’s Health Defense) My limited understanding of “molecular mimicry”, is this: By injecting proteins into the body that are so similar to the Covid proteins that are wreaking havoc in the vascular system, we could trigger a situation in which the body’s immune system attacks its own organs or vascular system. Which is why the author asks: Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases? In earlier articles, we presented the views of scientists and medical professionals who anticipated the issues that are now emerging in relation to the spike protein. For example, here is an excerpt from a piece about pediatric rheumatologist, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, who said the following in a letter to the FDA: “I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs…. “Before any of these vaccines are approved for widespread use in humans, it is important to assess in vaccinated subjects the effects of vaccination on the heart. As important as it is to quickly arrest the spread of the virus by immunizing the population, it would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on these other organs.” (“Scientists Challenge Health Officials on Vaccinating People Who Already Had COVID”, Global Research) We also pointed out that “gene-based vaccines release a spike protein that spreads throughout the body, gets trapped in the bloodstream and collects in the layer of cells (endothelial cells) that coat the blood vessels.” We think the new research by the Salk Institute supports this general theory. Also, according to Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist, the cells “release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun has stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.” This seems to suggest that the spike protein from the vaccine can have the same effect as the spike protein from the infection. Here’s more: “Individuals with COVID-19 experience a vast number of neurological symptoms, such as headaches, ataxia, impaired consciousness, hallucinations, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage. But autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms…. If not viral infection, what else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19? The most likely culprit that has been identified is the COVID-19 spike protein released from the outer shell of the virus into circulation. Research cited below has documented that the viral spike protein is able to initiate a cascade of events that triggers damage to distant organs in COVID-19 patients. Worryingly, several studies have found that the spike proteins alone have the capacity to cause widespread injury throughout the body, without any evidence of virus. What makes this finding so disturbing is that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines manufactured by Moderna and Pfizer and currently being administered throughout the U.S. program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.” (“Could Spike Protein in Moderna, Pfizer Vaccines Cause Blood Clots, Brain Inflammation and Heart Attacks?” Global Research) The above quote is key to grasping what Covid really is and why the new vaccines threaten to greatly exacerbate the problem. As Chun says: “…autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….” This observation is correct. The research does not indicate “viral invasion into patients’ brains”. Why? Because–as the Salk report indicates– it is not the viral infection that is getting into the brain but the spike protein that has passed the blood-brain barrier via the vascular system. Here’s Dr Chun again: “What else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?” Once again, it is not the virus but the spike protein and the autoimmune response. Finally, Chun acknowledges that the new vaccines “program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.” The production and distribution of these potentially-lethal injections goes way beyond mere recklessness. This is an unprecedented global catastrophe that could result in the deaths of millions. How long will this insanity continue? This is a very credible explanation for what is happening. In short, the spike protein, not the virus itself, is responsible for the disease. The protein blocks the action of a molecule that is needed by the mitochondria to produce energy for cells. So, cells become damaged and die. The resulting disease is a disease of the circulatory system, primarily caused by damaging epithelial cells in the pulmonary system. This would explain clotting, bruising, etc., any disease involving circulatory processes. Fortunately, the spike proteins do not replicate. Could this be the reason why the elites now want to pump us with these shots every year? To keep our natural immune systems under continual pressure? How can a study coming straight from the Salk Institute not get any traction? #### TRYNEIN ##### Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++ I'm trying to find the source of this one #### Densus ##### Silver Miner I'm trying to find the source of this one This should be it. #### Densus ##### Silver Miner #### Densus ##### Silver Miner #### Densus ##### Silver Miner I'm trying to find the source of this one #### the_shootist ##### Midas Member Midas Member Sr Midas Sup +++ Much respect for Rand Paul. He has a backbone, unlike many senators. God bless him. What frustrates me more than anything is all politicians do is talk. The Senate has powers that go far beyond just talk but, for some reason, invoking those powers seems to be a challenge they consistently fail to overcome....so they just continue talking and investigating but actually accomplishing nothing. See Trey Gowdy for more information #### Densus ##### Silver Miner #### Alton ##### Gold Member Gold Chaser THIRD Wave of COVID-19... ### STUDY: 'Third wave' of sickness and death will be dominated by those who have been fully vaccinated​ Leo Hohmann leohohmann.com Sun, 25 Apr 2021 00:00 UTC The next big wave of COVID infections, already hitting states such as Michigan, will be dominated by people who have been fully vaccinated. This was predicted by the authors of a scientific study published in a British medical journal. Between 60 and 70 percent of "third wave" COVID deaths and hospitalizations will be from people who were fully vaccinated, according to the study, Summary of Further Modeling of Easing Restrictions, published March 31 by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. This may at least partially explain why Detroit-area hospitals are filling up with COVID patients. But you won't read about this angle to the story from anyone in the mainstream media. They are reporting the story as simply a new wave of COVID hospitalizations and deaths caused by a UK-based variant of the virus that has nothing to do with the high rate of vaccinations. [See Detroit News, April 15, 2021, Beaumont nears COVID hospital capacity as experts warn of 'new pandemic.'] Mainstream news outlets have yet to express the tiniest bit of curiosity as to why the big spike in COVID is taking place even as large percentages of the public have been vaccinated [Michigan is one of the most-vaccinated states in the nation with nearly 30 percent of Michiganders receiving the jab]. In fact, health officials quoted in the above Detroit News article are blaming "vaccine hesitancy" for the new wave, a diabolical falsification of what's going on in Michigan meant to put more pressure on the people who refuse the unproven experimental injection. Apparently those health officials haven't read the new British study, which states: "The resurgence in both hospitalizations and deaths is dominated by those that have received two doses of the vaccine, comprising around 60% and 70% of the wave respectively. This can be attributed to the high levels of uptake in the most at-risk age groups, such that immunization failures account for more serious illness than unvaccinated individuals." [See page 10, summary point No. 32]. And what do the British scientists who authored the study say is the answer to this dilemma of the fully vaccinated coming down with COVID? Why, more vaccines and more lockdowns, of course! And Big Pharma is more than happy to comply. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla announced a "third dose" of its vaccine will be needed within 12 months of the second dose and likely another dose every year after that. As we predicted, the globalists planned all along to use COVID to scare people into getting annual injections. Nobody knows what's in these injections or how they will affect human health in the medium and long term. The scenario taking shape is beginning to look like the one Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche warned us about in early March. Based on his years of experience in the vaccine industry, Vanden Bossche called for a halt to the mass vaccination programs being conducted "in the middle of a pandemic." He said that if the jabs were not halted they would lead to the creation of stronger and stronger variants of the virus until a "super virus" takes hold and wipes out huge numbers of people. [See Top vaccine expert calls for global moratorium on COVID injections, LeoHohmann.com, March 17, 2021] Speaking to ChurchMilitant.com, academic and mental-health ethicist Niall McCrae noted that "the report's prediction that 70% of COVID-19 deaths will be of dual-vaccinated people is quite startling." "Clearly these pseudo-scientific modelers would like us to be locked down ad infinitum, but do they know something that governments and public health authorities aren't telling us?" Dr. McCrae asked. The academic slammed the study's "Alice-in-Wonderland logic, 'following the science' down a rabbit hole" since "the report states, 'this is because vaccine uptake has been so high in the oldest age groups,' and that 'this is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high.'" McCrae elaborated: "We already know that for two to three weeks after the injection, elderly and vulnerable people are at increased risk of serious respiratory infection, due to lowering of immunity. That's why there was a surge in deaths after vaccination rollout, with the evidence most stark in countries with the highest vaccination numbers; such as Hungary, Israel, Serbia, Gibraltar and the United Arab Emirates." Even more concerning is the report's warning of a longer-term risk to the vaccinated. Will they be more prone to COVID-19 variants or to other viruses, as Vanden Bossche suggested? McCrae answered as follows: "In the old joke when someone asks an Irishman for directions, and he says, 'I wouldn't start from here,' I fear for those who took the jab and thought that the road ahead would be safe and straightforward." #### Alton ##### Gold Member Gold Chaser Building on the psyop.... ### An army of Big Biotech companies is using psych tactics to 'create vaccine demand'​ Celeste McGovern Lifesite News Sat, 08 May 2021 02:00 UTC A new 'Vaccination Demand Observatory' is using surveillance, bots, and 'behavior change' mass marketing schemes to press reluctant people into getting the shots The U.S. is awash in a surplus of coronavirus vaccines as there has been a sudden in drop in demand for them; most Americans who want the shots have had them. Now an army of Big Biotech's agencies set up to address "vaccine hesitancy" are turning up their mass marketing to "create demand" using surveillance, rapid data analysis, media control, and host of behavior control strategies they've outlined in their playbooks. Demand plummets About 40% of the total adult population has been fully vaccinated, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Uptake plummeted 25% after a peak in mid-April, and 56.4% of adults have had at least one dose of a coronavirus vaccine. But five million people - about eight per cent of those who took a first dose of the shot - failed to show up for their second dose appointments, according to the CDC. As a result, excess vaccine stock has been piling up across the country. Chairs sat empty at a Philadelphia mass vaccination site where 4,000 unused doses of vaccines were due to expire. A million doses, representing one out of every four sent to Louisiana by the federal government, were sitting on shelves. One Wyoming county asked the state to stop shipping vaccines because it had a surplus of 20,000 shots; North Carolina closed its vaccination clinics for lack of demand. "For the first time ever, we've had appointments at many vaccination sites that have not been filled," said Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer during a news briefing last Thursday. "There [are] a lot of people around here who ... I don't think they want to take the vaccine," chuckled Ralph Merrill, an engineer who sits on an Alabama county board. Vaccine vs. virus fear Numerous mainstream media fretted about "vaccine hesitancy," blaming it on COVID-19 denialism, "conspiracy theories," and QAnon followers, Trump supporters, and minority mistrust of the government with its brutal history of racist eugenics. No one mentioned that some people just don't think the vaccine works. The mainstream media simply ignored Yale Professor of Epidemiology Harvey Risch, for example, who revealed that the majority of people now coming down with COVID-19 have been vaccinated against the virus. Nor did they mention the leading reason for vaccine refusal cited by 45% of those in a March poll conducted by the Delphi Group for Facebook researchers, which is fear of side-effects, however. With reported adverse events at 118,746 total in the U.S. alone, including 3,410 deaths and 1,595 permanent disabilities, it is a legitimate deterrent. So is the abrupt halt of AstraZeneca's vaccine for its high rate of blood clots, and the pause of Johnson & Johnson's vaccine. Many people simply fear the novel vaccine more than the novel virus which, according to the CDC, has an overall 99.4% survival rate for those aged 50-65 who get the infection. The odds go up as people get older but decrease if people are younger. For those under 18, the coronavirus fatality rate estimated by the CDC is 0.00002, which translates into a 99.98% COVID survival rate. In fact, for those under 18, the lifetime odds of being struck by lightning are higher than the odds of dying of the virus. Nevertheless, President Joe Biden said Tuesday that now that the bulk of the vaccinated are seniors - 85% of whom have gotten at least their first vaccine dose - he wants 70% of all Americans to get their first dose by July 4. He specifically pitched the jab to youths and announced his administration would be sending the vaccines to pediatricians to dole out over the coming weeks. "Getting vaccinated not only protects you but reduces risk of giving the virus to somebody else," Biden said, employing a classic line of "social marketing" script from a global industry of behavior change experts compelling people to take the shot. Vaccination Demand Observatory "[P]ublic health experts know that the last inch - getting the vaccine from vial to arm - can be the hardest," according to the Vaccination Demand Observatory Launched last week, the Observatory runs a "beta dashboard" of data and resources "intended for select global public health professionals." The Observatory was established by a group called the Public Good Projects (PGP) which "designs and implements large-scale behavior change programs for the public good," UNICEF - which has received$86.6 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation since 2020 - and the Gates-subsidized Yale Institute for Global Health. .

PGP was founded by Joe Smyser, a public health academic who trained at the CDC and has partnered with Google and Facebook. Its board members include executives from Merck pharmaceuticals, Pepsi, Levi-Strauss, the Advertising Council, Sesame Street, Campbell's, and TikTok.

PGP's website says that through "media monitoring and bots, grassroots social media organizing, or thought leadership, we deploy our considerable resources and connections to communication for change."

Bots - or internet robots, also known as crawlers - can scan content on webpages all over the internet and create automated conversations and comments.

"PGP is monitoring coronavirus-related media conversations 24/7 to provide organizations with real-time public health expertise and messaging guidance."

The group has promoted vaccines before. It developed the #StopFlu campaign, recruiting 120 "'micro' social media influencers" in the "African American and Latinx communities across eight states" and giving them prompts to sell their audiences the ideas that flu is a serious problem and that healthy people need flu shots.

PGP's Observatory says it aims to "mitigate...mistrust on all vaccines." Awash in Brave New World speak, the program's "three pillars" are "social listening analytics," a training program, and a "Vaccine Acceptance Interventions Lab" (VAIL) to "draw upon behavioral and social research and insights from social listening" and to develop "inoculation messages to vaccinate people against vaccine misinformation." These would be "rapid field tested for tone, format and behavior change impact before being implemented."

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) created a new public health field called "infodemiology" - the "science of managing infodemics." PGP and UNICEF are leading the "Field Infodemiologist Training Program (FITP)" based in UNICEF country offices, government offices, and offices of other "multilateral partners" to train "field infodemic managers" to conduct "public health surveillance for misinformation" and provide "community support in "misinformation outbreaks.

Big Biotech's global network

Among the huge network of organizations and programs involved in the vast mass marketing of vaccine demand - besides the WHO, CDC, UNICEF, PGP, and Yale - key orchestrators include:
• Stronger - a new national campaign formed by an "ever-growing number of public and private sector partners" including PGP, Google and BIO. "Whether it's vaccine misinformation or climate change denial, we're seeing a dangerous strain of anti-science rhetoric growing online," its website says. "Our aim is to cut through the noise and normalize the truth."
• BIO - Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), the world's largest biotech advocacy association representing member companies including vaccine manufacturers Pfizer Inc., Moderna Therapeutics Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Biotech, and GlaxoSmithKline as well as big agriculture companies like Monsanto along with academic institutions and "related organizations."
• Project RCAID - created by PGP for "Rapid Collection Analysis Interpretation and Dissemination" - provides "real-time media monitoring with daily analyses from public health experts."
• Zignal Labs - a "media intelligence platform" to "craft messages" and "take control of threatening narratives before they emerge."
• Family Health International or FHI 360 - an organization that uses "social psychology, anthropology, behavioral economics, social marketing, and other behavioral sciences" to effect behavior change. It has received tens of millions from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to "create demand for long-acting contraceptives" in poor countries. Its donors also include the CDC, the World Bank, and vaccine-maker Johnson & Johnson. It's now in the business of creating COVID-19 vaccine demand, too.
Playbook rules

In the world of "infodemic management," one will inevitably come across the name of Jeff French, Professor at Brighton University and author of Strategic Social Marketing: For Behaviour and Social Change, whose text is referenced in most of the guides to mass marketing vaccines. French published a paper in July 2020 with the pandemic just a few months underway and a vaccine reportedly still unavailable for years to come about "Pre-Emptive COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Promotion Strategy." His tips have evidently inspired much of the standard pandemic vaccine sell:
• "Effective campaigning against vaccine misinformation should focus on the dangers of the disease" and "draw on the powerful motivator of fear of loss along with the possibility of gain of positive health"
• "Appeal to emotions since data alone will not be enough."
• Do not put adverse events at the center of "demand creation efforts" but "be sure to contextualize them" and help audiences understand that "most will be rare and of limited duration."
• "Any media management and engagement strategy that is developed will need to include proactive, rolling media briefings, story generation, editorial feeds...and will also need to include 24/7 media monitoring and rebuttal/correction systems."
• Authorities should have "agreements in place" about "how and when misleading information and advocates of such information should be removed and flagged as being problematic on social media."
• Repeat "positive messaging that emphasizes the protective (individual, family, and community) benefits of the vaccine and the loss associated with not being vaccinated (death, poor health, loss of freedom and social solidarity, inability to travel" etc.)
• "Partner" with the pharmaceutical industry, other for-profits, and NGOs to promote vaccines.
• "Seek interventions" with key leaders in the anti-vaccination community and "seek to turn such informants into advocates for vaccination."
• "Continue to promote other protective behaviors such as handwashing and physical distancing."
• "Integrate financial and non-financial incentives... along with penalties for non-compliance by imposing restrictions on travel, education, or employment."
• "Governments will need to deliver and communicate what mix of incentives and penalty interventions will be used to promote demand."
Behavior modification and operant conditioning techniques are a frequent theme of French's writings; a 2014 paper he wrote for the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control on vaccine uptake said "behavioural interventions should seek to reward desired behaviours and when appropriate penalise inappropriate behaviour."

A range of playbooks for public health agencies and "stakeholders" on strategies to make people take the shot follow on French's instructions. The World Health Organization issued a "technical advisory" on the heels of French's guidelines called Behavioral Considerations for Acceptance and Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccinesin October, still two months before a shot was even available. Some of its advice is sounding very familiar now:
• "Leverage anticipated regret in communications." For example, by "asking people how they would feel if they do not get vaccinated and end up contracting COVID-19 or transmitting it to loved ones."
• "Emphasize the social benefits." Tell people that "vaccination not only benefits the individual" but builds "herd" or "population immunity"
• "Putting emphasis on the economic benefits, such as being able to stay in the workforce and provide for one's family, might also encourage vaccination"
• "Manage expectations." Since vaccine uptake may be "undermined by COVID-19 vaccines being not fully effective, meaning that people will have to continue to engage in preventive behaviour (e.g. maskwearing and physical distancing) even if and after they have been vaccinated."
• Emphasize danger of disease. "If people perceive that they are at low risk of contracting COVID-19, or that the consequences of becoming infected will not be severe, they will be less willing to get vaccinated."
• Downplay dangers of vaccination and adverse events. "Some people may try to compare the risk of getting infected with that of taking a new vaccine, and determine that between the two, the risk of COVID-19 is lower." Adverse events are "often inevitable when large numbers of people get vaccinated in a short period of time." Neutralize the blow by "communicating proactively about uncertainty" and risk of vaccine-associated disability and death.
'Field Guide'

UNICEF and PGP's Vaccine Misinformation Management Field Guide advises vaccine promoters to "consider putting vaccination in a 'gain frame'. Show happy, healthy, productive people in graphics, and if you must show the act of vaccination try to avoid needles and tears."

It's easy to find examples of French's operant psychology marketing methods being played out in the real world pandemic theatre.

One of its tactics is to badger people to accept vaccination as a "social norm." Explain that "the majority of people adopt certain behavior and that is what others expect you to do to achieve a common good."

FHI360 published its own "quickstart guide" on "Demand Creation and Advocacy for COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Uptake" advises governments to "establish a demand creation and advocacy task force" - something Biden did in March, setting aside \$1.5 for a media vaccine advertising blitz.

FHI 360 also advises breaking people into "audience segments" of "easy sells" who have "high trust in healthcare providers and do not question vaccines" to "vaccine hesitant" who have "high concerns about safety and "low trust in institutions promoting vaccine." Then, create "targeted messages," making "talking point reference sheets for cultural and religious leaders."

'Carrot and stick'

It's easy to find examples of French's operant psychology marketing methods being played out in the real world pandemic theatre.

The mainstream media have evidently taken the point about "incentives and penalty interventions" on board and "herd immunity" is the new Holy Grail which all who are not reckless criminals should seek. "We're struggling to get to herd immunity," CNN's Michael Smerconish said with the precise tone of fear and alarm that would elicit behavior modification. A full 26% of Americans said they would not take the vaccine, he said, but 44% of Republicans were resisting.

"Those folks jeopardize our ability to get to herd immunity faster," Smerconish claimed in disgust. "If we don't get vaccinated and periodically boosted we could prolong the pandemic and find ourselves continuing to fight this battle for years." He quoted law professor Shanin Specter, who said, "Without a bigger carrot or a bigger stick many Americans will not get vaccinated and we will suffer more death and dislocation."

The concept of "herd immunity" and how to get there is not settled science. The Great Barrington Declaration, signed by more than 43,000 medical practitioners and 14,000 public health scientists and doctors, proposes that allowing natural immunity to spread while shielding those most vulnerable to COVID infection would be less harmful than blanket lockdowns.

"As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all — including the vulnerable — falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity — i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable — and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity," the declaration says.

Following infodemic guidelines, YouTube's medical misinformation policy expressly forbids any discussion of natural immunity in herd immunity on its platform.

Real world exercise

Emphasizing fear is a strategy employed frequently by experienced public health personnel, too. "In those communities where the uptake is less it will take a lot longer for the epidemic to end," Eric Toner, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told Politico in an article about falling vaccine demand, for example. "There will be more sickness and more death in those communities."

Former CDC director Tom Frieden employed an offshoot of the "social norm" tactic along with "emphasizing disease danger" in a recent tweet which painted unvaccinated people as "infected" spreaders of supposedly deadly variants.

Research like a recent study from the Cleveland Clinic and Case Western Reserve University which found that new coronavirus variants are actually weaker than the original viral strain from Wuhan are to be ignored or treated as "misinformation."

Marketing schemes to recruit faith leaders have had success too, as vaccination drives have even moved inside mosques to convince skeptical Muslims to roll up their sleeves. And Pope Francis has enthusiastically embraced the infodemic behavior change mission and is hosting a global public health vaccine promotion conference this week.

#### the_shootist

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++

I'll take my chances with my immune system, my Ivermectin and my Zinc Tommy, but thanks for playing though

#### Goldhedge

##### Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame

### What is ethylene oxide?​

#### Goldhedge

##### Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame

#### GOLDBRIX

##### 'SUSH, MY NEW SAFE HOUSE"
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
THIS IS GOLD: Anthony Fauci has been exposed by Rand Paul for his hand in ‘gain of function’ research that lead to the weaponization of the Coronavirus. Fauci tried to use semantics to get out of it but failed. Investigate him now

Spank that ass Rand. Like Senator Paul's shots FAUCI is playing word games and "Gain of Function" for FAUCI is being absolutely specific. By being specific FAUCI hides from the facts of the WuFlu / COVID 19 origins.
FAUCI 4 PRISON

#### the_shootist

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
Spank that ass Rand. Like Senator Paul's shots FAUCI is playing word games and "Gain of Function" for FAUCI is being absolutely specific. By being specific FAUCI hides from the facts of the WuFlu / COVID 19 origins.
FAUCI 4 PRISON
Doesn't Fauci and others hold a patent on Covid as well as Covid vaccines? How can that be if this virus is naturally occurring in nature? How can you obtain a patent on a naturally occurring virus without it being subject to human scientific manipulation?

Last edited:

#### GOLDBRIX

##### 'SUSH, MY NEW SAFE HOUSE"
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Doesn't Fauci and others hold a patent on Covid as well as Covid vaccines? How can that be if this virus is naturally occurring in nature? How can you obtain a patent on a virus without human scientific manipulation?
I see you fixed it "....patent....'

#### GOLDBRIX

##### 'SUSH, MY NEW SAFE HOUSE"
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Doesn't Fauci and others hold a patent on Covid as well as Covid vaccines? How can that be if this virus is naturally occurring in nature? How can you obtain a patent on a virus without human scientific manipulation?
I see you fixed it "....patent....'

#### Voodoo

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++

Damn I love it when a plan comes together.

Ironically of course.

#### Voodoo

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Spank that ass Rand. Like Senator Paul's shots FAUCI is playing word games and "Gain of Function" for FAUCI is being absolutely specific. By being specific FAUCI hides from the facts of the WuFlu / COVID 19 origins.
FAUCI 4 PRISON

I really wish he had pressed him on his language. FaUci was clearly playing word games. Rand's follow up question should have been, well perhaps you don't want to call it "Gain of Function" so what language do you use for creating deadlier viruses?

#### the_shootist

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
I see you fixed it "....patent....'
I'm a little slow picking up my typos

#### the_shootist

##### Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Midas Sup +++
Damn I love it when a plan comes together.

Ironically of course.
just a coincidence.....don't make too much out of it. It's just a shower, really, thats not piss you're feeling on your leg

Last edited:

#### Uglytruth

##### Super Moderator
Site Mgr
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
What was that
I'm trying to find the source of this one

book the kenyan was carrying and it was made such a big stink????????????????