Except he only analyzes facts and scientific studies and their BIAS !! It is intolerable to call the analysis of scientific truth a conspiracy !!
Apparently the vaccination campaign was launched without marketing authorization (Marketing Authorization) ... Something completely unthinkable in normal times and which is severely punishable !!
I copy you paste the conclusions of this page (I did not understand all the biological details ...): https://www.vidal.fr/actualites/26446-v ... cinal.html
(...)
The potential risks of these off-label uses
Beyond the uncertainties, in terms of efficacy, linked to these off-label uses, some scientists are warning about the individual and collective risks that this “vaccine creativity” could entail.
At the individual level, delaying the booster injection may interfere with the affinity maturation of neutralizing antibodies. However, this maturation, which usually takes place between the 2nd and the 3rd week of the immune response, makes it possible to select from among the plasma cells (B lymphocytes) those which produce the antibodies having the greatest affinity with the antigen (and to inhibit the plasma cells producing antibodies of lower affinity). Altered maturation exposes people to insufficiently specific immunity and could play a role in triggering a disease aggravated by vaccination (see our article on the subject), or even autoimmune disease. Expert opinions differ on this subject, with some sounding the alarm bells (e.g. Florian Krammer, immunologist at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York), others believing the risk to be low over 12 weeks (e.g. example, Akiko Iwasaki, immunologist at Yale University).
At the collective level, the existence of a population poorly immunized against COVID-19, against a background of age-related immunosuppression, in an explosive epidemic context such as the one currently prevailing in the United Kingdom, represents a significant risk for the selection of SARS-CoV-2 variants resistant to neutralizing antibodies resulting from vaccination. As a reminder, the exposure of viruses to suboptimal levels of neutralizing antibodies is, in vitro, the technique of choice for the selection of mutants resistant to these antibodies. Still at the collective level, some have expressed concern about the effect of these off-label uses on the acquisition of mucosal immunity (in the nasopharynx) and on the possible transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by people vaccinated in this way: these Could off-label uses increase the percentage of vaccinated people capable of transmitting the virus?
On a sociological level, various experts fear that “hacking” with the vaccination schedule will increase the general level of mistrust vis-à-vis these vaccines. In addition, some emphasize the fact that insufficient immunity associated with a false sense of protection can lead to a decrease in the systematic adoption of barrier gestures and an increase in risk-taking. Also, what effect will the spacing of injections have on adherence? Indirectly suggesting that the 1st injection protects enough may increase the number of people neglecting their 2nd injection.
Finally, as various observers have pointed out, given the logistical difficulties currently encountered in most countries, doubling the number of available doses does not guarantee doubling the number of people vaccinated each week!
In conclusion, if the off-label uses proposed today for mRNA vaccines (delay of the 2nd injection for the two vaccines, injection of half-doses for the Moderna vaccine) are based on data collected in clinical trials, the interpretation of these data is weakened by their post-hoc analysis (and by the absence of randomization for Moderna half-doses). This fragility is the basis of the reserved reactions of health agencies and manufacturers.
In addition, these off-label uses raise many questions in terms of risk, some of which could have serious collective consequences (selection of resistant mutants, aggravated mistrust, false sense of protection) or individual (insufficient immunity, or even long-term adverse effects of immune origin).
Over the past year, this pandemic has regularly battered the foundations of the scientific method and evidence-based medicine: questioning of the importance of randomized trials (hydroxychloroquine), MA granted without taking into account all the available data (remdesivir), extension of indication beyond data from clinical trials (vaccination of people over 75 years of age ) and, henceforth, non-compliance with the dosage aspects of the Marketing Authorization from the time of marketing.
O tempora! O mores!
So pedro what were you saying? Vaccination without problem?
I save as a screenshot as well ... because it is fundamental!
- Screenshot_2021-01-08 COVID19 vaccines wind of creativity on the vaccine calendar .png (183.69 KiB) Viewed 4683 times
