Try not to Laugh at
Moderna's "Omicron Vaccine"
Based on Extinct December 2021 Version of Ba.1
Moderna made a very upbeat announcement today.
A 50 µg booster dose of mRNA-1273.214 met all pre-specified endpoints
including superior neutralizing antibody response (geometric mean ratio) against
the Omicron variant one month after administration when compared to
the original mRNA-1273 vaccine.The booster dose of mRNA-1273.214 was generally
well-tolerated, with side effects comparable to a booster dose of mRNA-1273 at
the 50 µg dose level.
Great, I thought at first, perhaps I should give up on my vaccine
skepticism, sign up to receive the new “Omicron vaccine”, tweet a picture with
a Band-Aid on my arm, and be protected from Covid forever with the new
“effective” version. Somehow, though, I decided to dig a little deeper, did my
own research, and decided to remain a Covid vaccine skeptic.
Omicron Vaccine? Which Omicron?
The trial information discloses that the mRNA-1273.214 is based on Sars-Cov-2 variant B.1.1.529 (and the Wuhan virus spike RNA mixed in). B.1.1.529 is the
original “Omicron”, which was soon renamed to Omicron BA.1, as more Covid
variants appeared.
Moderna repeatedly talks about “response against the Omicron variant”.
However, there is not one “Omicron Variant”. Numerous “Omicron Variants”
appeared since Dec 2021: Ba1.1, Ba.2, Ba.2.12.*, Omicron XE, Ba.3, Ba.4, and
Ba.5, just to name a few.
The original variant B.1.1.529 (also known as Ba.1) was on the decline
since January and already disappeared two months ago:
Omicron Ba.1, which swept the world in December and January, was
followed by numerous other variants that are also called “Omicron”. Calling
them Omicron is somewhat of a misnomer. Ba.2, which followed Ba.1, is more
genetically distant from Ba.1 than the distance between Ba.1 and Delta or Beta,
@EthicalSkeptic shows:
Moderna is committing a sleight of hand, calling its new formulation an
“Omicron vaccine”. It
would be more proper to call it “Ba.1 based vaccine”. Implying protection from
such distantly related relatives of Ba.1, by calling them Omicron, deceives
consumers.
Moderna “Rebrands” Trial Midstream
Obviously, Moderna’s leaders are very bright and when they saw Ba.1
variant die off, they immediately thought along the same lines I did and decided
to rebrand their trial and remove overt references to B.1.1.529 from the name
of the trial.
It was originally called: A Study to Evaluate the Immunogenicity
and Safety of mRNA-1273.529 Vaccine for the COVID-19 Omicron Variant B.1.1.529.
They renamed it to A Study to Evaluate the Immunogenicity and Safety of
Omicron Variant Vaccines in Comparison With mRNA-1273 Booster Vaccine for
COVID-19
No doubt, this change was introduced to encourage second booster uptake
among the dwindling vaccine enthusiasts, who would be better persuaded by
“Omicron vaccine” as opposed to “B.1.1.529 vaccine”.
Strange Pivot to “Bivalent” Vaccine Using Wuhan
Variant
They also decided, instead of a pure Omicron Ba.1-based mRNA, to use a
“bivalent vaccine”, which is a mix of the Ba.1 vaccine and Wuhan-variant
vaccine.
Why, may I ask, add a two-years-ago extinct Wuhan variant? I would like
others to weigh in, but my own explanation is that the pure Ba.1 vaccine did
not work well at all due to Original Antigenic Sin, so they had to make a
change on April 11.
In other words, due to vaccinated people’s antigenic fixation on the
Wuhan variant, the vaccine needs to contain Wuhan variant spikes to elicit any
immune response at all. And that is why Wuhan spikes were added. Due to an
extreme lack of data, the above is speculation, that I would like to see
confirmed or disconfirmed.
So, to give a conclusion, this proposed vaccine is based on an
extinct variant that is extremely distant from currently existing variants and
specifically the up-and-coming Ba.5 and would be unlikely to even engage the
newer variants.
Antibody Titers: Garbage in, Garbage Out
Moderna’s release contains gleaming references to “antibody titers”.
mRNA-1273.214 met all primary endpoints in the Phase 2/3 trial including
neutralizing antibody response against Omicron when compared to a 50 µg booster
dose of mRNA-1273 in baseline seronegative participants.
Pre-specified criteria for superiority as measured by neutralizing geometric
mean titer ratio (GMR) with the lower bound of the confidence interval >1
was met. The GMR and corresponding 97.5% confidence interval was 1.75 (1.49,
2.04). A booster dose of mRNA-1273.214 increased neutralizing geometric mean
titers (GMT) against Omicron approximately 8-fold above baseline levels.
Primary endpoints of non-inferiority against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 were also
met, with GMR against ancestral SAR-COV-2 (D614G) of 1.22 (1.08-1.37).
I would like to remind everyone that these antibodies are only good for
counting: numerous people catch Covid soon after second boosters, despite high
antibody counts. Gavin Newsom is one example of thousands.
Also, the above paragraph suspiciously only talks about
seronegative participants - meaning those rare people who did not have Covid
yet, or the less-rare vaccinated people who had Covid and did not develop N
antibodies. What it means is that the results were worse for seropositive
people, right? Why else mention seronegative people?
Incidentally, Moderna collects information about Covid infections among
the trial participants, but will not have to disclose these outcomes for a
year. Whether this “Omicron vaccine” prevents Omicron, is a secondary — less
important — outcome, and will not need to be disclosed for a whole year.
Despite all that, this ridiculous variant vaccine will be soon approved
by the corrupt FDA.
Ba.1 the worst Long Term Antigen Candidate
This article actually researched Ba.1 based immunity (Hat tip Agus_Z) and concluded:
The continuous evolution of Omicron poses great challenges to SARS-CoV-2
herd immunity and suggests that BA.1-derived vaccine boosters may not be ideal
for achieving broad-spectrum protection.
Variant Whack-a-Mole Game is Very Profitable
Remember how you were a kid and your parents bought you a whack-a-mole
game? Now imagine you could get $22 for every whack, wouldn’t you want that? I bet you would be
excited!
This whack-a-mole game is now called Future Framework. FDA
recently decided to approve future Covid vaccines without clinical trials.
Since they already know that the mRNA vaccines are “safe and effective”, they
obviously do not need no stinking clinical trials. After all, remember, science
is on their side. The streamlined no-trial approach is to facilitate rapid
approval of new vaccines, based on endlessly appearing new variants.
This is not going to yield good results or prevent Covid. But imagine
the business opportunities! New variants appear — Moderna makes new vaccines —
more variants appear — more vaccines are needed! At $22 per dose, Moderna will
make plenty of money. And vaccine recipients will receive an endless
stream of variant-based mRNA injections and also endless series of Covid
reinfections.
As a pro-business person, I am very happy for Moderna. I am less happy
for people who will be reinjected and reinfected with the resulting cornucopia
of variants, but oh well. Who cares? Nobody at the FDA.
https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/try-not-to-laugh-at-modernas-omicron?utm_source=email&s=r
54 replies by Igor Chudov and
others
|
|
Leslie
Benjamini
Jun 9·edited Jun
9Liked by Igor Chudov
Hopefully Moderna will have to throw away all these doses because no
one will want them. They just threw away millions of doses. I would be very
happy to see them bankrupt themselves throwing past profits into the trash.
51ReplyCollapse
|
12 replies
323 more comments…
